--- - |2 Abstract Little empirical work exists examining predictors of support or opposition of hate crime penalty enhancement laws despite such laws remaining a socially and politically contentious issue. Grounded in legal and philosophical arguments concerning hate crime laws, we tested political identity, victim minority status, and hate crime‐related beliefs as predictors of perceptions concerning penalty enhancement laws for bias‐motivated crime. Jury‐eligible Texas community members (n = 382) participating in a community survey of social and legal attitudes took part in the present study. Participants read a vignette of a hate‐motivated homicide that varied victim type (African American, gay, transgender) and answered questions regarding demographics, political identity, and hate crime penalty enhancement support. Qualitatively coded hate crime‐related beliefs yielded the following categories: legal arguments, moral statements, victim‐related beliefs, offender‐related beliefs, and an “other” category. Political identity, legal arguments, victim‐related and offender‐related beliefs all predicted views of penalty enhancement laws in logistic regression analyses. Exploratory mediation tests identified two pathways: (1) political conservatism–legal arguments–penalty enhancement opposition, and (2) political liberalism–offender beliefs–penalty enhancement support. Implications concerning social justice, public policy, trial consultation practice, and future research are discussed. - Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, Volume 17, Issue 1, Page 262-285, December 2017.