Hate Crimes and Hate Bias - Definitions of Sexual Orientation and Hate Bias Incident
HB 513 revises Maryland’s hate crimes and hate-bias reporting laws in two main ways. First, it updates the statutory definition of “sexual orientation” used in the hate crime subtitle to mean an individual’s identity, or another person’s perception of that identity, in relation to the gender or genders to which the individual is sexually or emotionally attracted. The bill also clarifies that “sexual orientation” does not include gender identity.
Second, the bill creates a new definition of “hate bias incident” for purposes of the Department of State Police’s reporting duties. A hate bias incident is defined as an act of hostility or aggression directed at a person, group, or property, motivated in whole or substantially in part by actual or perceived protected-class status, but that does not rise to the level of a crime under state or federal law. The definition expressly includes slurs, name-calling, offensive displays or postings, online distribution of offensive material, and similar conduct targeting a protected class.
The bill amends the State Police reporting statute to require collection and analysis of information about both hate crimes and hate bias incidents apparently directed at individuals or groups because of race, color, religious beliefs, sexual orientation, gender, disability, national origin, or homelessness. Local law enforcement agencies and the State Fire Marshal would continue to provide this information to the Department, which must adopt collection procedures and submit quarterly reports to the Commission on Civil Rights.
The bill’s impact is primarily on criminal-law definitions and statewide hate-crime data collection, rather than on substantive criminal penalties. It broadens the reporting framework to capture non-criminal bias incidents and updates terminology around sexual orientation, which could affect how law enforcement classifies incidents and how the state tracks bias-related conduct over time. The effective date is October 1, 2026.
Because the available record shows only a hearing and no votes or transcripts, there is no documented committee sentiment in the provided materials. Based on the bill text, the measure appears aimed at improving reporting and clarity in hate-crime law, but it may also draw scrutiny over the scope of the new “hate bias incident” category and the distinction between protected speech, offensive conduct, and reportable incidents.
HB 513 amends Criminal Law § 10-301 and Public Safety § 2-307. It changes the statutory definition of “sexual orientation” for hate-crime purposes and adds a new definition of “hate bias incident” for State Police data collection. The bill expands the reporting obligations of local law enforcement agencies and the State Fire Marshal to include non-criminal bias incidents, while preserving the existing quarterly reporting to the Commission on Civil Rights. It does not create a new criminal offense or change penalties, but it would affect how incidents are categorized, recorded, and analyzed statewide.
The available record does not include committee testimony, vote totals, or recorded debate, so there is no direct evidence of support or opposition in the provided materials. On its face, the bill appears to be a technical and policy-oriented update intended to improve hate-crime and bias-incident tracking and to modernize terminology. The absence of recorded votes or transcripts limits any stronger conclusion about legislative sentiment.
The most likely points of contention are the new “hate bias incident” definition and its inclusion of conduct that is not criminal, such as slurs, offensive displays, online postings, and other expressive material. Supporters would likely view this as necessary for better data collection and a fuller picture of bias-motivated hostility, while critics may worry about overbreadth, First Amendment implications, or the administrative burden on law enforcement. Another possible point of discussion is the revised definition of “sexual orientation” and the explicit statement that it does not include gender identity, which may be viewed as clarifying by some and narrowing by others.