A claim that hate crimes in New York City increased by 152% over one year has circulated in political discussions, particularly in debates over public safety and protections around places of worship. The figure originates from a statement by New York State Sen. Sam Sutton, who said that hate crimes rose sharply between January 2025 and January 2026.
According to reporting by PolitiFact, the statistic is based on official data from the New York Police Department (NYPD). The department’s figures show that reported hate crimes did increase by 152% during that specific month-to-month comparison, meaning the claim is grounded in real data.
However, experts caution that the figure can be misleading if taken out of context. Hate crime data is often volatile and can fluctuate significantly from month to month, especially when influenced by specific events or conflicts.
One key issue is that January 2025 had an unusually low number of reported hate crimes, which makes the percentage increase in January 2026 appear more dramatic than broader trends would suggest. Analysts note that comparing a single month across years does not always provide an accurate picture of long-term patterns.
Looking at wider timeframes, the increase is far less extreme. For example, hate crimes in the first quarter of 2026 were about 11.7% higher than the same period in 2025—still an increase, but significantly smaller than 152%.
Additional NYPD data also shows mixed trends. Hate crime reports declined in some subsequent monthly comparisons, including between February 2025 and February 2026, and between March 2025 and March 2026.
Experts further emphasize that reported hate crime numbers can be influenced by factors such as increased reporting by victims or changes in how police classify incidents, not just actual changes in underlying criminal activity.
PolitiFact concluded that while the 152% figure is technically accurate for a specific timeframe, it lacks important context about data variability and broader trends, which can lead to a misleading interpretation if presented alone.
Final Verdict: Mostly True