The United States Supreme Court held that a Wisconsin statute, which, in increasing a defendant's sentence because the defendant chose his victim solely on the basis of the victim's race, ethnicity, religion or sexual orientation, takes into consideration a defendant's speech and beliefs that evidence prejudice based on race, ethnicity, religion and sexual orientation, was not overbroad and did not violate the defendant's First Amendment rights of free speech.
Wisconsin v. Mitchell, 113 S. Ct. 2194 (1993).
Alison T. Fenton,
Constitutional Law - First Amendment - Overbreadth Doctrine - Hate Crimes - Penalty Enhancement,
Duq. L. Rev.
Available at: https://dsc.duq.edu/dlr/vol32/iss4/13