Anti-Semitism in the United States:
FBI Hate Crime Statistics 2010

Anti-Semitism in the U.S.: Table of Contents | 2012 Audit | FBI Statistics

- Background
- Participation
- Incidents & Offenses
- Definitions & Charts

Background

Congress mandates the collection of hate crime data

On April 23, 1990, Congress passed the Hate Crime Statistics Act, which required the Attorney General to collect data “about crimes that manifest evidence of prejudice based on race, religion, sexual orientation, or ethnicity.”  The Attorney General delegated the responsibilities of developing the procedures for implementing, collecting, and managing hate crime data to the Director of the FBI, who in turn, assigned the tasks to the Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program.  Under the direction of the Attorney General and with the cooperation and assistance of many local and state law enforcement agencies, the UCR Program created a hate crime data collection to comply with the congressional mandate. 

The first hate crime publications

The UCR Program’s first publication on the subject was Hate Crime Statistics, 1990:  A Resource Book, which was a compilation of hate crime data reported by 11 states that had collected the information under state authority in 1990 and were willing to offer their data as a prototype.  The UCR Program continued to work with agencies familiar with investigating hate crimes and collecting related information so that it could develop and implement a more uniform method of data collection on a nationwide scale.  Hate Crime Statistics, 1992, presented the first published data reported by law enforcement agencies across the country that participated in the UCR Hate Crime Statistics Program.

Subsequent changes to hate crime data collection

  • In September 1994, lawmakers amended the Hate Crime Statistics Act to include bias against persons with disabilities by passing the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994. The FBI started gathering data for the additional bias type on January 1, 1997.
  • The Church Arson Prevention Act, which was signed into law in July 1996, removed the sunset clause from the original statute and mandated that the collection of hate crime data become a permanent part of the UCR Program.
  • In 2009, Congress further amended the Hate Crime Statistics Act by passing the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crime Prevention Act.  The amendment includes the collection of data for crimes motivated by bias against a particular gender and gender identity, as well as for crimes committed by, and crimes directed against, juveniles.  The FBI is currently implementing changes to collect these data in the future.

Collection design

The designers of the Hate Crime Statistics Program sought to capture information about the types of bias that motivate crimes, the nature of the offenses, and some information about the victims and offenders.  In creating the program, the designers recognized that hate crimes are not separate, distinct crimes; instead, they are traditional offenses motivated by the offender’s bias (for example, an offender assaults a victim because of a bias against the victim’s race).  After much consideration, the developers agreed that hate crime data could be derived by capturing the additional element of bias in those offenses already being reported to the UCR Program.  Attaching the collection of hate crime statistics to the established UCR data collection procedures, they concluded, would fulfill the directives of the Hate Crime Statistics Act without placing an undue additional reporting burden on law enforcement and, in time, would develop a substantial body of data about the nature and frequency of bias crimes occurring throughout the Nation.

Data provided

The hate crime data in this Web publication comprise a subset of information that law enforcement agencies submit to the UCR Program.  The types of hate crimes reported to the program (i.e., the biases that motivated the crimes) are further broken down into more specific categories.  As collected for each hate crime incident, the aggregate data in this report include the following:  offense type, location, bias motivation, victim type, number of individual victims, number of offenders, and the race of the offenders.

    • Incidents and offenses—Crimes reported to the FBI involve those motivated by biases based on race, religion, sexual orientation, ethnicity/national origin, and disability.  Forthcoming system changes will also allow the reporting of crimes motivated by biases based on gender and gender identity, as well as crimes committed by, and crimes directed against, juveniles.
    • Victims—The victim of a hate crime may be an individual, a business, an institution, or society as a whole.
    • Offenders—Law enforcement specifies the number of offenders and, when possible, the race of the offender or offenders as a group.
    • Location type—With the addition of 5 new location designations in 2010, law enforcement may specify one of 30 location designations, e.g., residence/home, school/college, and parking lot/garage.  The 5 new location designations are camp/campground, gambling facility/casino/race track, industrial site, park/playground, and shopping mall.
    • Hate crime by jurisdiction—Includes data about hate crimes by state and agency.

Participation

Law enforcement’s support

Law enforcement’s support and participation have been the most vital factors in moving the hate crime data collection effort from concept to reality.  The International Association of Chiefs of Police, the National Sheriffs’ Association, the former UCR Data Providers’ Advisory Policy Board (which is now part of the Criminal Justice Information Services Advisory Policy Board), the International Association of Directors of Law Enforcement Standards and Training, and the Association of State UCR Programs all have endorsed the UCR Program’s Hate Crime Statistics Program.  In addition to this support, thousands of law enforcement agencies nationwide make crucial contributions to the program’s success as the officers within these agencies investigate offenses and report as known hate crimes those they determine were motivated by biases.

Agencies contributing data

Agencies that participated in the Hate Crime Statistics Program in 2010 represented over 285 million inhabitants, or 92.3 percent of the Nation’s population, and their jurisdictions covered 49 states and the District of Columbia.  The following table presents the number of agencies that participated in hate crime reporting in 2010 by population group and the population covered collectively by those agencies within each group.

Incidents & Offenses

The Uniform Crime Reporting Program collects data about both single-bias and multiple-bias hate crimes.  For each offense type reported, law enforcement must indicate at least one bias motivation.  A single-bias incident is defined as an incident in which one or more offense types are motivated by the same bias.  A multiple-bias incident is defined as an incident in which more than one offense type occurs and at least two offense types are motivated by different biases.

    • In 2010, 1,949 law enforcement agencies reported 6,628 hate crime incidents involving 7,699 offenses.
    • There were 6,624 single-bias incidents that involved 7,690 offenses, 8,199 victims, and 6,001 offenders.
    • The 4 multiple-bias incidents reported in 2010 involved 9 offenses, 9 victims, and 7 offenders.

Single-bias incidents

An analysis of the 6,624 single-bias incidents reported in 2010 revealed the following:

    • 47.3 percent were racially motivated.
    • 20.0 percent were motivated by religious bias.
    • 19.3 percent resulted from sexual-orientation bias.
    • 12.8 percent stemmed from ethnicity/national origin bias.
    • 0.6 percent were prompted by disability bias. 

Offenses by bias motivation within incidents

Of the 7,690 single-bias hate crime offenses reported in the above incidents:

    • 48.4 percent stemmed from racial bias.
    • 19.1 percent were motivated by sexual-orientation bias.
    • 18.3 percent resulted from religious bias.
    • 13.5 percent were prompted by ethnicity/national origin bias.
    • 0.6 percent resulted from biases against disabilities. 

Racial bias

In 2010, law enforcement agencies reported that 3,725 single-bias hate crime offenses were racially motivated. 
Of these offenses:

    • 69.8 percent were motivated by anti-black bias.
    • 18.2 percent stemmed from anti-white bias.
    • 5.7 percent were a result of bias against groups of individuals consisting of more than one race (anti-multiple races, group).
    • 5.1 percent resulted from anti-Asian/Pacific Islander bias.
    • 1.2 percent were motivated by anti-American Indian/Alaskan Native bias. 

Religious bias

Hate crimes motivated by religious bias accounted for 1,409 offenses reported by law enforcement. 
A breakdown of the bias motivation of religious-bias offenses showed:

    • 65.4 percent were anti-Jewish.
    • 13.2 percent were anti-Islamic.
    • 9.5 percent were anti-other religion, i.e., those not specified.
    • 4.3 percent were anti-Catholic.
    • 3.8 percent were anti-multiple religions, group.
    • 3.3 percent were anti-Protestant. 
    • 0.5 percent were anti-Atheism/Agnosticism/etc. 

Sexual-orientation bias

In 2010, law enforcement agencies reported 1,470 hate crime offenses based on sexual-orientation bias. 
Of these offenses:

    • 57.9 percent were classified as anti-male homosexual bias.
    • 27.4 percent were reported as anti-homosexual bias.
    • 11.4 percent were prompted by an anti-female homosexual bias.
    • 1.4 percent were the result of an anti-heterosexual bias.
    • 1.9 percent were classified as anti-bisexual bias. 

Ethnicity/national origin bias

Of the single-bias incidents, 1,040 offenses were committed based on the perceived ethnicity or national origin of the victim. 
Of these offenses:

    • 65.5 percent were anti-Hispanic bias.
    • 34.5 percent were anti-other ethnicity/national origin bias. 

Disability bias

There were 46 reported hate crime offenses committed based on disability bias. 
Of these:

    • 24 offenses were classified as anti-mental disability.
    • 22 offenses were reported as anti-physical disability. 

By offense type

Of the 7,699 reported hate crime offenses in 2010:

    • 30.1 percent were destruction/damage/vandalism.
    • 29.0 percent were intimidation.
    • 21.8 percent were simple assault.
    • 11.5 percent were aggravated assault.
    • 7.5 percent were comprised of additional crimes against persons, property, and society.

Offenses by crime category

Among the 7,699 hate crime offenses reported:

    • 62.7 percent were crimes against persons.
    • 37.2 percent were crimes against property.
    • The remainder were crimes against society. 

Crimes against persons

Law enforcement reported 4,824 hate crime offenses as crimes against persons. 
By offense type:

    • 46.2 percent were intimidation.
    • 34.8 percent were simple assault.
    • 18.4 percent were aggravated assault.
    • 0.2 percent consisted of 7 murder and nonnegligent manslaughters and 4 forcible rapes.
    • 0.3 percent involved the offense category other, which is collected only in the National Incident-Based Reporting System. 

Crimes against property

    • The majority of the 2,861 hate crime offenses that were crimes against property—81.1 percent—were acts of destruction/damage/vandalism.
    • The remaining 18.9 percent of crimes against property consisted of robbery, burglary, larceny-theft, motor vehicle theft, arson, and other crimes. 

Crimes against society

There were 14 offenses defined as crimes against society (e.g., drug or narcotic offenses or prostitution).

By victim type

When considering hate crime offenses by the type of victims reported:

    • 81.6 percent of reported offenses were directed at individuals.
    • 4.5 percent were against businesses or financial institutions.
    • 3.5 percent were against government.
    • 2.6 percent were against religious organizations.
    • 0.2 percent were against society.
    • The remaining 7.6 percent were directed at other, multiple, or unknown victim types.

Definitions & Charts

Victims

In the Uniform Crime Reporting Program, the victim of a hate crime may be an individual, a business, an institution, or society as a whole.  In 2010, the Nation’s law enforcement agencies reported that there were 8,208 victims of hate crimes.  Of these victims, 9 were victimized in 4 separate multiple-bias incidents.

Offenders

Law enforcement agencies reporting hate crime data to the Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program identified 6,008 known offenders in 6,628 bias-motivated incidents in 2010.  In the UCR Program, the term known offender does not imply that the suspect’s identity is known; rather, the term indicates that some aspect of the suspect was identified, thus distinguishing the suspect from an unknown offender.  Law enforcement agencies specify the number of offenders and, when possible, the race of the offender or offenders as a group.

Incidents, Offenses, Victims, and Known Offenders by Bias Motivation, 2010

Bias motivation

Incidents

Offenses

Victims1

Known offenders2
Single-Bias Incidents
6,624
7,690
8,199
6,001
Race:
3,135
3,725
,3949
2,934
  Anti-White
575
679
697
649
  Anti-Black
2,201
2,600
2,765
1,974
  Anti-American Indian/Alaskan Native
44
45
47
43
  Anti-Asian/Pacific Islander
150
190
203
156
  Anti-Multiple Races, Group
165
211
237
112
Religion:
1,322
1,409
1,552
606
  Anti-Jewish
887
922
1,040
346
  Anti-Catholic
58
61
65
22
  Anti-Protestant
41
46
47
6
  Anti-Islamic
160
186
197
125
  Anti-Other Religion
123
134
141
72
  Anti-Multiple Religions, Group
48
53
55
30
  Anti-Atheism/Agnosticism/etc.
5
7
7
5
Sexual Orientation:
1,277
1,470
1,528
1,516
  Anti-Male Homosexual
739
851
876
904
  Anti-Female Homosexual
144
167
181
152
  Anti-Homosexual
347
403
420
412
  Anti-Heterosexual
21
21
22
21
  Anti-Bisexual
26
28
29
27
Ethnicity/National Origin:
847
1,040
1,122
887
  Anti-Hispanic
534
681
747
593
  Anti-Other Ethnicity/National Origin
313
359
375
294
Disability:
43
46
48
58
  Anti-Physical
19
22
24
28
  Anti-Mental
24
24
24
30
Multiple-Bias Incidents3
4
9
9
7

Total

6,628

7,699

8,208

6,008

1: The term victim may refer to a person, business, institution, or society as a whole.
2: The term known offender does not imply that the identity of the suspect is known, but only that an attribute of the suspect has been identified, which distinguishes him/her from an unknown offender.
3: In a multiple-bias incident, two conditions must be met: (a) more than one offense type must occur in the incident and (b) at least two offense types must be motivated by different biases

Incidents, Offenses, Victims, and Known Offenders by Offense Type, 2010

Offense type

Incidents1

Offenses

Victims2

Known offenders3
Crimes against persons:
3,978
4,824
4,824
4,873
  Murder and nonnegligent manslaughter
6
7
7
9
  Forcible rape
4
4
4
7
  Aggravated assault
695
888
888
1,144
  Simple assault
1,472
1,681
1,681
1,972
  Intimidation
1,790
2,231
2,231
1,726
  Other4
11
13
13
15
Crimes against property:
2,861
2,861
3,370
1,419
  Robbery
146
146
168
290
  Burglary
125
125
163
88
  Larceny-theft
175
175
196
141
  Motor vehicle theft
16
16
16
8
  Arson
43
43
45
30
  Destruction/damage/vandalism
2,321
2,321
2,747
831
  Other4
35
35
36
31
Crimes against society4
14
14
14
18

Total

6,628

7,699

8,208

6,008

1 The actual number of incidents is 6,628. However, the column figures will not add to the total because incidents may include more than one offense type, and these are counted in each appropriate offense type category.
2 The term victim may refer to a person, business, institution, or society as a whole.
3 The term known offender does not imply that the identity of the suspect is known, but only that an attribute of the suspect has been identified, which distinguishes him/her from an unknown offender. The actual number of known offenders is 6,008. However, the column figures will not add to the total because some offenders are responsible for more than one offense type; and they are, therefore, counted more than once in this table.
4 Includes additional offenses collected in the National Incident-Based Reporting Systems

Source: Federal Bureau of Investigation

Back to Top