Wisconsin Senate Bill SB380

Wisconsin 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 7/28/25
• Refer: 7/28/25

Caption

Eliminating criminal defenses of adequate provocation, self-defense, or not guilty by reason of mental disease or defect if the claim is based on the victim’s gender identity or sexual orientation.

Impact

If enacted, SB380 would adjust current legal standards by prohibiting defenses that invoke adequate provocation or self-defense if the response was related to the victim's gender. The bill delineates specific circumstances under which this rule applies, particularly focusing on romantic or sexual advances made by the victim. This reflects a legislative effort to strengthen protections against hate crimes and ensure that victims of such crimes are afforded greater legal safeguards. This change would require legal practitioners and law enforcement to adapt their approaches in instances of violence motivated by discrimination, as well as influence how juries assess cases involving LGBTQ+ individuals.

Summary

Senate Bill 380 proposes significant changes to the legal frameworks surrounding criminal defenses in Wisconsin, specifically targeting claims of adequate provocation, self-defense, and insanity in cases where the victim's gender identity or sexual orientation is a factor. The bill stipulates that individuals cannot assert these defenses if the actions leading to the crime were initiated based on the victim's gender identity or sexual orientation, effectively removing these defenses from consideration during court proceedings. This change aims to address violent crimes potentially motivated by bias or discrimination against individuals based on their gender identity or sexual orientation.

Contention

The bill has sparked debate among legislators, advocacy groups, and legal experts. Proponents argue that SB380 is a necessary measure to combat discrimination and reduce justifications for violence against marginalized communities, particularly in a context where such defenses could encourage bias-motivated actions. Conversely, opponents raise concerns about the potential implications for individuals facing legal repercussions in situations where the lines of self-defense and provocation might become blurred. Critics worry that the bill could potentially infringe on the rights of defendants and alter the balance of justice in cases concerning claims of self-defense. As such, the bill presents a complex intersection of criminal law, human rights, and social justice.