According to Russell:
The federal government should not be creating a special class of people, and that is just what they did when they passed and signed this bill. All crimes against another person have some level of hate in them, and people can be assured that our laws that protect people against crimes such as murder are sufficient to protect everyone.
I can't see how his argument is supported by the 10th Amendment, but then, I'm a thinking person.
It's really about extreme right-wing religious fundamentalism for him, though. Russell said "because the government has decided to intervene on issues of morality," he is "worried that religious leaders who speak out against any lifestyle could be imprisoned for their speech."
For Russell hate as the motivation for murder or vitriolic "Christian" hate-speech that emboldens terrorists to murder homosexuals is an issue of morality that needs protection. We are presented the sacred right-wing argument: "We are the real victims, not those homos we murder." Such is the logic of the so called "Christian" right wing.
There is a huge difference between speaking against any issue and venom filled speech that is intended to inflame the adherents to acts physical violence. I defend the former and abhor the latter as do the majority of Americans and certainly the majority of those who claim the name of Christian.
As illogical as the above argument is, Russell reveals his utter stupidity:
The law is very vague to begin with. Sexual orientation is a very vague word that could be extended to extremes like necrophilia.
You really need to read the article.