Why are hate crime cases so rarely prosecuted? Most states and the federal government have hate crime laws on their books, yet available data indicate few prosecutions in most jurisdictions. Drawing on case files and interviews with police and prosecutors in one jurisdiction, three institutional impediments to hate crime prosecution are identified: evidentiary inflation, by which law enforcement uses a higher burden of proof than what is required by statute; loose coupling between police departments and prosecutors' offices; and cultural distance between law enforcement and victims. Findings also reveal that advocacy groups and media can successfully increase the visibility of cases and draw the attention of prosecutors. The findings align with aspects of legal endogeneity theory and enhance our understanding of the role of organizations in constructing the meaning of law. The results also help explain why some laws are rarely enforced, even when they have support from key personnel in an organization.

中文翻译：

---

更高的标准：仇恨犯罪起诉的制度障碍

为什么仇恨犯罪案件很少被起诉？大多数州和联邦政府都有仇恨犯罪法，但现有数据表明大多数司法管辖区很少有起诉。根据案件卷宗以及对某一司法管辖区警察和检察官的访谈，确定了仇恨犯罪起诉的三个制度性障碍：证据膨胀，执法部门使用的举证责任高于法规要求；警察部门和检察官办公室之间的松散耦合；以及执法人员和受害者之间的文化距离。调查结果还表明，倡导团体和媒体可以成功提高案件的知名度并引起检察官的注意。这些发现与法律内生性理论的各个方面相一致，并增强了我们对组织在构建法律含义中的作用的理解。研究结果还有助于解释为什么有些法律很少得到执行，即使它们得到了组织中关键人员的支持。