In a recent development, New Hampshire found itself on the cusp of becoming the sixteenth state to outlaw the controversial “gay panic” defense, only to witness its legislation put on hold at the eleventh hour. The “gay panic” defense has long been criticized for allowing defendants to invoke the victim’s sexual orientation or gender identity as justification for violent reactions, such as murder or assault. However, concerns over technicalities raised by Republican lawmakers in the state House of Representatives caused a delay in the implementation of the ban.
According to the American Bar Association, the “gay panic” defense has been used to partially or completely excuse crimes, attributing the defendant’s violent response to the victim’s sexual orientation or gender identity. While fifteen states and Washington D.C. have already prohibited this defense strategy, New Hampshire was poised to join their ranks. Nonetheless, the Republican lawmakers in the state House of Representatives expressed reservations about certain aspects of the legislation, fearing potential implications in court proceedings.
State Rep. Robert Lynn, a Republican and former state Supreme Court chief justice, objected to the law’s provisions that allowed defendants to request the mitigation of charges or sentences in cases involving violent crimes based on provocation. Although he clarified that he was not against banning the “gay panic” defense itself, he voiced concerns about the potential unintended consequences, stating that it could disrupt centuries of legal precedent.
The bill’s proponents argued that similar bans in other states had been successfully enacted without encountering such hurdles. State Rep. Shaun Filiault, an Independent, highlighted that identical bills banning the “gay panic” defense had faced no such arguments during their respective legislations. Following the concerns raised by Republican lawmakers, the New Hampshire legislature unanimously decided to collaborate with the state Senate to revise the language of the legislation, aiming to address the apprehensions. Despite this course of action, some lawmakers expressed disappointment, viewing the Republican concerns as baseless and hindrances to long-overdue progress in LGBTQ rights.
Alissandra Murray, a Democrat, voiced her frustration, particularly given the timing of the delay during Pride Month, stating, “It is frustrating, to say the least, that in Pride Month, we were finally seeing some hope in banning something that should have been banned a long time ago, that we’re still fighting this fight.”
By reevaluating and revising the legislation, New Hampshire aims to overcome the obstacles presented by concerned lawmakers and eventually achieve a comprehensive ban on the “gay panic” defense, solidifying the state’s commitment to equal rights and justice for the LGBTQ community.