79–010 

Calendar No. 394 

115TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! SENATE 2d Session 115–325 

PROTECTING RELIGIOUSLY AFFILIATED INSTITUTIONS 

ACT OF 2018 

AUGUST 22, 2018.—Ordered to be printed 

Mr. GRASSLEY, from the Committee on the Judiciary, 

submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

[To accompany S. 994] 

[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office] 

The Committee on the Judiciary, to which was referred the bill 

(S. 994) to amend title 18, United States Code, to provide for the 

protection of community centers with religious affiliation, and for 

other purposes, having considered the same, reports favorably 

thereon with an amendment in the nature of a substitute and recommends that the bill, as amended, do pass. 

CONTENTS 

Page 

I. Background and Purpose of the Protecting Religiously Affiliated Institutions Act of 2018 ......................................................................................... 1 

II. History of the Bill and Committee Consideration ....................................... 3 

III. Section-by-Section Summary of the Bill ...................................................... 4 

IV. Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate ................................................ 5 

V. Regulatory Impact Evaluation ...................................................................... 6 

VI. Conclusion ...................................................................................................... 6 

VII. Changes to Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported ........................... 6 

I. BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE OF THE PROTECTING RELIGIOUSLY

AFFILIATED INSTITUTIONS ACT OF 2018 

A. BACKGROUND

In the past two years, numerous threats have been made against 

religious institutions, including against the Jewish and Muslim 

communities. There were 161 bomb threats made to Jewish Community Centers in 2017—an increase of 127 percent from the preVerDate Sep 11 2014 06:01 Aug 23, 2018 Jkt 079010 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR325.XXX SR325
2 

vious year, and the FBI reported that hate crimes against Muslims 

rose 67 percent from 2014 to 2015, the second-most reported 

amount of incidents ever. 

The House introduced H.R. 1730 on March 23, 2017. On December 11, 2017, the bill was reported by the Committee on the Judiciary and passed in the House by a roll call vote of 402–2. The bill 

was referred to the Senate Committee on the Judiciary the next 

day. 

B. PURPOSE

The amendments of Title 18 in S. 994 are intended to protect 

community centers with religious affiliation and those spaces 

leased by religious institutions and increases the criminal penalty 

where there is damage to religious real property. 

1. Revision of Section 247 

The amendments to Section 247 have three aims. First, to 

explicity address the threats made against religious real property, 

section 247(a)(2), as it is codified, punishes whomever ‘‘intentionally obstructs, by force or threat of force’’ any person’s free exercise of religious beliefs. The amendment to section 247(a)(2) 

would explicity include threats that intentionally obstruct persons 

from free exercising of their religious beliefs by means of threats 

against religious real property. 

Second, the amendment to section 247(a)(4) imposes a heightened criminal penalty on a perpetrator regardless of whether bodily 

injury or death occurs if the damage or destruction exceeds $5,000. 

As codified, section 247(d)(1)–(3) address punishments for death 

and bodily injury (with a more severe penalty if the bodily injury 

occurs by means of fire or an explosive). Section 247(d)(4) imposes 

a maximum prison sentence of one year. The amendment to Section 

247(a)(4) would increase the maximum prison sentence to three 

years if the damage or destruction exceeds $5,000. 

Third, the amendment to section 247(f) includes real property 

that is ‘‘owned or leased by a non-profit, religiously affiliated organization.’’ As codified, section 247(f) does not include religious community centers, which received the brunt of threats that spurred 

this legislation. This modest expansion would include facilities like 

Jewish Community Centers, and others. 

2. The bill does not expand the death penalty 

The changes adopted in the manager’s substitute amendment are 

intended to clarify that a ‘‘threat of force’’ under subparagraph 

(a)(2) includes ‘‘threats of force’’ made against religious real property. The authors of the substitute amendment do not intend, and 

the substitute amendment should not be read, to expand the permissible application of the death penalty provision found in subsection (d)(1). 

In any event, even if the manager’s substitute amendment were 

interpreted to expand the permissible application of the death penalty to threats made against religious real property, such a penalty 

would be extremely unlikely. This is because the Federal Death 

Penalty Act requires the government to prove beyond a reasonable 

doubt that a defendant ‘‘intentionally’’ killed a victim or committed 

offenses while contemplating that the life of a person be taken. See 

3 

18 U.S.C. § 3591 (providing for when sentence of death may be imposed). 

More specifically, in federal death penalty proceedings, 18 U.S.C. 

§§ 3591 and 3593 require that the government prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant: • intentionally killed the victim; • intentionally inflicted serious bodily injury that resulted in 

the death of the victim; • intentionally participated in an act, contemplating that the 

life of a person would be taken or intending that lethal force 

would be used in connection with a person, other than one of 

the participants in the offense, and the victim died as a direct 

result of the act; or • intentionally and specifically engaged in an act of violence, 

knowing that the act created a grave risk of death to a person, 

other than one of the participants in the offense, such that participation in the act constituted a reckless disregard for human 

life and the victim died as a direct result of the act. 

These additional elements mean that a threat against religious 

real property, as a standalone offense, would be extremely unlikely 

to result in a sentence of death. 

3. Threats of force 

While the legislation does not specifically define the term, 

‘‘threats of force,’’ the substitute amendment should not be read to 

encroach on protected speech. Courts have long distinguished ‘‘true 

threats’’ from protected speech by asking whether those who hear 

or read the threat reasonably consider it to be an ‘‘actual threat.’’ 

See, e.g., R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul, Minn., 505 U.S. 377, 388 (1992) 

(explaining that prohibiting true threats ‘‘protect[s] individuals 

from the fear of violence, from the disruption that fear engenders, 

and from the possibility that threatened violence will occur’’); 

United States v. Wheeler, 776 F.3d 736, 743 (10th Cir. 2015) 

(‘‘[T]rue threats [are] statements where the speaker means to communicate a serious expression of an intent to commit an act of unlawful violence to a particular individual.’’) (internal quotation 

marks omitted). 

II. HISTORY OF THE BILL AND COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

A. INTRODUCTION OF THE BILL

On May 1, 2017, Senator Hatch introduced S. 994, the Protecting 

Religiously Affiliated Institutions Act. Senator Feinstein was an 

original cosponsor. The bill was referred to the Committee on the 

Judiciary. 

On May 2, 2017, the Committee on the Judiciary held a hearing 

entitled, ‘‘Responses to the Increase in Religious Hate Crimes.’’ 

Testimony was received from Eric Treene, Special Counsel for Religious Discrimination, Civil Rights Division, U.S. Department of 

Justice; Jonathan A. Greenblatt, CEO and National Director of the 

Anti-Defamation Legaue; Dr. Prabhjot Singh, Chair of the Department of Health System Design & Global Health and Director of the 

Arnhold Institute for Global Health at the Mount Sinai Health System; Vanita Gupta, President & CEO of the Leadership Conference 

on Civil and Human Rights; and Chief Will D. Johnson, Chair of 

4 

the International Association of Chiefs of Police, Human and Civil 

Rights Committee. 

Mr. Treene noted that hate crimes, which make up 4 percent of 

the violent crimes in the United States, are meant to intimdate and 

terrorize communities. Religion-based hate crimes are the secondlargest category, after race-based; the FBI Uniform Crime Report 

showed a 67 and 9 percent increase in anti-Muslim and anti-Jewish hate crimes, respectively. In his written testimony, Mr. Treene 

explained that the Church Arson Prevention Act (CAPA) has been 

used to prosecute crimes that interfere with religious exercise, including against Dylann Roof, for the killing of nine African Americans at the African Methodist Episcopal Church in Charleston, SC, 

and Robert Doggart, who ‘‘solicited another man to help him launch 

an attack’’ in Islamberg, NY, which was founded by African-American Muslims. 

Mr. Greenblatt noted that the FBI’s crime data invariably underreported the instances of hate crimes and that it is ‘‘actually shocking’’ that 87 major U.S. population centers told the FBI that there 

were no hate crimes, or did not provide data on hate crimes at all. 

Mr. Greenblatt recommended strengthening federal hate crimes 

bills, including the criminalization of threats under CAPA. In his 

written testimony, Mr. Greenblatt explained that crimnalizing violent threats to religiously-affiliated organizations is important because ‘‘the First Amendment’s guarantee of religious freedom 

means little to those not safe in their house of worship.’’ 

Ms. Gupta in her written testimony recommended passing legislation that filled the gaps in current law, specifically CAPA, to include not only attempts, but ‘‘threats to religious property (emphasis original). Ms. Gupta also recommended passing the NO HATE 

Act to provide funding for reporting hate crimes. 

B. COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

The Committee considered S. 994 on April 19, 2018. Senator 

Hatch offered a manager’s substitute amendment which the Committee adopted without objection. The Committee then voted to report the Protecting Religiously Affiliated Institutions Act of 210, 

with an amendment, favorably to the Senate, by voice vote. 

III. SECTION-BY-SECTION SUMMARY OF THE BILL

Section 1. Short title 

This section provides that the legislation may be cited as the 

‘‘Protecting Religiously Affiliated Institutions Act of 2018.’’ 

Section 2. Protection of community centers with religious affiliation 

This section makes adjustments to U.S. criminal law in order to 

broaden the prohibited conduct towards religiously affiliated institutions. 

The section amends Section 247 of Title 18, United States Code, 

to broaden the scope of prohibited conduct by specifically addressing threats made against religious real property, including that 

which is owned or leased by a nonprofit, religiously affiliated organization. 

5 

The section inserts new language in section 247(a)(2) to include 

that the threat of force means that it is ‘‘including by threat of 

force against religious real property.’’ 

The section inserts in the matter precending paragraph (1) of 

subsection (d) that subsection (d) contains the punishment provisions for both (a) and (c), and deletes the ‘‘and’’ at the end of the 

paragraph 247(d)(3). 

New language in section 247(d)(4) specifies that if the the damage or destruction of the property exceeds $5,000, the imprisonment will be up to three years. 

The section redesignates 247(d)(4) as 247(d)(5). 

The section inserts new language in 247(f) to include real property owned or leased by a nonprofit, religiously affiliated organization. 

IV. CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE COST ESTIMATE

The Committee sets forth, with respect to the bill, S. 994, the following estimate and comparison prepared by the Director of the 

Congressional Budget Office under section 402 of the Congressional 

Budget Act of 1974: 

APRIL 25, 2018. 

Hon. CHUCK GRASSLEY, 

Chairman, Committee on the Judiciary, 

U.S. Senate, Washington, DC. 

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: The Congressional Budget Office has prepared the enclosed cost estimate for S. 994, the Protecting Religiously Affiliated Institutions Act of 2018. 

If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be pleased 

to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Mark Grabowicz. 

Sincerely, 

KEITH HALL. 

Enclosure. 

S. 994—Protecting Religiously Affiliated Institutions Act of 2018 

S. 994 would broaden the coverage of current laws against damaging religious property; that change would allow the government 

to pursue some cases that it otherwise may not be able to prosecute. CBO expects that the bill would apply to a relatively small 

number of offenders, however, so any increase in costs for law enforcement, court proceedings, or prison operations would not be significant. Any such spending would be subject to the availability of 

appropriated funds. 

Because people prosecuted and convicted under S. 994 could be 

subject to criminal fines, the federal government might collect additional fines under the bill. Criminal fines are recorded as revenues, 

deposited in the Crime Victims Fund, and later spent without further appropriation action. CBO expects that any additional revenues and associated direct spending would not be significant because the bill would probably affect a small number of cases. 

Pay-as-you-go procedures apply because enacting S. 994 would 

affect direct spending and revenues. However, CBO estimates that 

any such effects would be insignificant on an annual basis. 

6 

CBO estimates that enacting S. 994 would not increase net direct 

spending or on-budget deficits in any of the four consecutive 10- 

year periods beginning in 2029. 

S. 994 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates 

as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act. 

On November 20, 2017, CBO transmitted a cost estimate for H.R. 

1730, the Protecting Religiously Affiliated Institutions Act of 2017, 

as ordered reported by the House Committee on the Judiciary on 

November 2, 2017. CBO’s estimates of the budgetary effects of the 

two pieces of legislation are identical. 

The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Mark Grabowicz. The 

estimate was reviewed by H. Samuel Papenfuss, Deputy Assistant 

Director for Budget Analysis. 

V. REGULATORY IMPACT EVALUATION

In compliance with rule XXVI of the Standing Rules of the Senate, the Committee finds that no significant regulatory impact will 

result from the enactment of S. 994. 

VI. CONCLUSION

The Protecting Religiously Affiliated Institutions Act of 2018, S. 

994, will further protect religiously affiliated institutions by broadening the scope of prohibited conduct with regards to threats 

against religious real property. 

VII. CHANGES TO EXISTING LAW MADE BY THE BILL, AS REPORTED

In compliance with paragraph 12 of rule XXVI of the Standing 

Rules of the Senate, changes in existing law made by S. 994, as reported, are shown as follows (existing law proposed to be omitted 

is enclosed in black brackets, new matter is printed in italic, and 

existing law in which no change is proposed is shown in roman): 

UNITED STATES CODE 

TITLE 18—CRIMES 

* * * * * * * 

CHAPTER 13—CIVIL RIGHTS 

* * * * * * * 

§ 247. Damage to religious property; obstruction of persons 

in the free exercise of religious beliefs 

(a) Whoever, in any of the circumstances referred to in subsection (b) of this section— 

(1) intentionally defaces, damages, or destroys any religious 

real property, because of the religious character of that property, or attempts to do so; or 

(2) intentionally obstructs, by force or threat of force, including by threat of force against religious real property, any person 

in the enjoyment of that person’s free exercise of religious beliefs, or attempts to do so; 

7 

shall be punished as provided in subsection (d). 

(b) The circumstances referred to in subsection (a) are that the 

offense is in or affects interstate or foreign commerce. 

(c) Whoever intentionally defaces, damages, or destroys any religious real property because of the race, color, or ethnic characteristics of any individual associated with that religious property, or attempts to do so, shall be punished as provided in subsection (d). 

(d) The punishment for a violation of subsection (a) or (c) of this 

section shall be— 

(1) if death results from acts committed in violation of this 

section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, a fine in accordance 

with this title and imprisonment for any term of years or for 

life, or both, or may be sentenced to death; 

(2) if bodily injury results to any person, including any public 

safety officer performing duties as a direct or proximate result 

of conduct prohibited by this section, and the violation is by 

means of fire or an explosive, a fine under this title or imprisonment for not more that 40 years, or both; 

(3) if bodily injury to any person, including any public safety 

officer performing duties as a direct or proximate result of conduct prohibited by this section, results from the acts committed 

in violation of this section or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire, a fine in accordance with this title and imprisonment for not more than 20 years, or both; øand¿ 

(4) if damage to or destruction of property results from the 

acts committed in violation of this section, which damage to or 

destruction of such property is in an amount that exceeds 

$5,000, a fine in accordance with this title, imprisonment for 

not more than 3 years, or both; and 

ø(4)¿ (5) in any other case, a fine in accordance with this title 

and imprisonment for not more than one year, or both. 

(e) No prosecution of any offense described in this section shall 

be undertaken by the United States except upon the certification 

in writing of the Attorney General or his designee that in his judgment a prosecution by the United States is in the public interest 

and necessary to secure substantial justice. 

(f) As used in this section, the term ‘religious real property’ 

means any church, synagogue, mosque, religious cemetery, or other 

religious real property, including fixtures or religious objects contained within a place of religious worship, or real property owned 

or leased by a nonprofit, religiously affiliated organization. 

(g) No person shall be prosecuted, tried, or punished for any noncapital offense under this section unless the indictment is found or 

the information is instituted not later than 7 years after the date 

on which the offense was committed. 

* * * * * * * 

Æ