Hate Image Invoice Passes In State Senate | Information, Sports activities, Jobs

State Senator George Borrello, R-Sunset Bay, is in discussion with Senator Michael Gianaris, D-Astoria and the Senate Majority Leader about laws prohibiting the sale or display of hate symbols by municipalities, volunteer fire-fighting companies, police stations and schools.

Senator George Borrello has concerns about legislation banning the sale or display of hate symbols by municipalities, volunteer fire-fighting companies, law enforcement agencies and schools.

S.4615, sponsored by Senator Anna Kaplan, D-Carle Place, passed the Senate on Tuesday with a 56-7 vote, with Borrello voting against the bill. The Sunset Bay Republican said his concerns had less to do with generally accepted symbols of hatred and more to do with the bill’s vague definition of symbols of hatred that could lead local government agencies to defend themselves in court.

“I certainly understand the intent of this law, but I would like to draw your attention to some of the amendments here, particularly line 10, which says that symbols of hatred should include, but are not limited to, symbols of white supremacy and so on on and so on “ Said Borrello. “My question is, but not limited to.” Who then determines what is designated as a symbol of hatred? “

The text of the law states that symbols of hatred cannot be displayed or sold. Forbidden images include symbols of white supremacy, neo-Nazi ideology, or the Confederation’s battle flag. Senator Michael Gianaris, D-Astoria and deputy Senate majority leader, said he would expect the decision to be made by either the attorney general or a court, with the court then deciding whether or not the complaint is hateful.

Gianaris then noted that the bill was similar to the 2020 bill that Borrello voted for, which banned the sale and display of hate symbols on state property, namely the New York State Fair. Kaplan’s bill was proposed in February 2021 after a fire station on Long Island displayed a Confederate flag and later a Trump flag, according to Newsday.

“First of all, I would like to encourage the good Senator to read the bills on which he is voting more carefully, as the language corresponds exactly to the bill on which he voted yes.” Said Gianaris. “It gave the same precise definition of what a symbol of hatred is, including the definition of” but not limited to “that you seem to be concerned about.”

Borrello responded that he voted for the 2020 legislation because the bill deals with state buildings and events, not the way local governments work. Borrello and Gianaris discussed the possibility of ads that could cause problems, including a school district asking a student to remove a “Thin blue line” Hat worn in memory of fallen police officers, “Thin red line” Displays in support of firefighters who have died on duty and “Thin Green Line” Displays in support of soldiers who die on duty.

Gianaris said the examples given by Borrello would not fall under the proposed law as the school itself had decided that the student’s hat should be removed. S.4615 would only come into play when a complaint is made, he said.

The “Thin blue line” The flag resulted in graffiti being sprayed on the sidewalk and street of a homeowner in Jamestown outside the house last August.

“I think I’m still unclear because we’ve seen people see the United States flag as a symbol of hatred, and I don’t see anywhere on this bill where we’ve restricted this.” Said Borrello. “If this bill had been limited to white supremacy, neo-Nazi ideology, and the Confederation’s flag of battle, that would be one thing. But it’s very broad and we still don’t know exactly what the governing body should determine. If this bill says we’re going to set up a commission to draft or be some kind of decision-making body on what is a symbol of hatred, it could be different. But that is very vague. In my opinion it is a poorly drafted law. “

Get the latest news and more in your inbox

Comments are closed.