less than 1 minute read

Wisconsin v. Mitchell

Significance, Further Readings


State of Wisconsin


Todd Mitchell

Petitioner's Claim

That the Wisconsin statute allowing penalty enhancements for crimes motivated by the "race, religion, color, disability, sexual orientation, national origin or ancestry" of the victim was constitutional, and that respondent's enhanced sentence should stand.

Chief Lawyer for Petitioner

James E. Doyle, Attorney General of Wisconsin

Chief Lawyer for Respondent

Lynn S. Adelman

Justices for the Court

Harry A. Blackmun, Anthony M. Kennedy, Sandra Day O'Connor, William H. Rehnquist (writing for the Court), Antonin Scalia, David H. Souter, John Paul Stevens, Clarence Thomas, Byron R. White

Justices Dissenting



Washington, D.C.

Date of Decision

11 June 1993


The Court decided that the Wisconsin statute did not violate the protections guaranteed by the First Amendment, and allowed the original sentence to stand.

Related Cases

  • United States v. O'Brien, 391 U.S. 367 (1968).
  • National Association for the Advancement of Colored People v. Claiborne Hardware Co., 458 U.S. 886 (1982).
  • Barclay v. Florida, 463 U.S. 939 (1983).
  • R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul, 505 U.S. 377 (1992).

Additional topics

Law Library - American Law and Legal InformationNotable Trials and Court Cases - 1989 to 1994