Connecticut General Statutes

Conn. Gen. Stat. § 53a-181i (2026)

Intimidation based on bigotry or bias: Definitions

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CT-CGAcga.ct.gov (official) JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
For the purposes of sections 53a-181j to 53a-181l, inclusive:

(1) “Disability” means physical disability, mental disability or intellectual disability;

(2) “Gender identity or expression” means a person's gender-related identity, appearance or behavior, whether or not that gender-related identity, appearance or behavior is different from that traditionally associated with the person's assigned sex at birth;

(3) “Mental disability” means one or more mental disorders, as defined in the most recent edition of the American Psychiatric Association's “Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders”;

(4) “Intellectual disability” has the same meaning as provided in section 1-1g; and

(5) “Physical disability” means any chronic physical handicap, infirmity or impairment, whether congenital or resulting from bodily injury, organic processes or changes or from illness, including, but not limited to, blindness, epilepsy, deafness or being hard of hearing or reliance on a wheelchair or other remedial appliance or device.

(P.A. 04-135, S. 1; P.A. 11-129, S. 20; P.A. 17-202, S. 101.)

History: Pursuant to P.A. 11-129, “mental retardation” was changed editorially by the Revisors to “intellectual disability”; P.A. 17-202 amended Subdiv. (5) by replacing “hearing impairment” with “being hard of hearing” in definition of “physical disability”.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1 case, 2008–2008 · leading case: Kerrigan v. Comm'r of Pub. Health, 957 A.2d 407 (Conn. 2008).
Kerrigan v. Comm'r of Pub. Health, 957 A.2d 407 (Conn. 2008). · cites it 2× “” General Statutes § 53a-181i provides: “(a) A person is guilty of intimidation based on bigotry or bias in the third degree when such person, with specific intent to intimidate or harass another person or group of persons because of the actual or perceived race, religion,…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.