Reply to Legal for businesses to exclude a race?

Forum Index » Off-Topic

Reply to "Legal for businesses to exclude a race?"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]This thread is so dumb.

The gay wedding cake case was specifically decided on the merits of freedom of speech, under a conservative supreme court. It is the current law of the land. You cannot discriminate against gay persons because they are a protected class, unless you can point to a compelling reason.  For instance, age is a (lower) protected class, and there are compelling reasons to discriminate against minors (minimum ages for voting, alcohol, guns).  The cake case was decided on different grounds altogether, and the baker's freedom of expression constitutional rights outweighed the customers' (limited) rights as a protected class.

Race, however, is a 'higher' protected class than gender/orientation.  You can't discriminate on race/ethnicity unless you have a crazy important reason to do so.  Having a safe crafting space is not one such reason.

That's why the cases are different.

So what does it mean in practice? A crafting space cannot offer a class that excludes a race.  Here, the advert language suggests the class is closed to persons not of that race. (class is "for" races xyz).  Of course, in practice i'm sure if you called and said i'm not race xyz and would like to attend, they wouldn't stop you, even though it's not what they contemplated when they designed the class. The question is whether the actual advert language has a chilling effect such that no one other than those races feels like they'd be welcome. Like, if the country club with "no blacks" sign had a black person apply and the club let them in, does that mean the country club is not being unconstitutional? I'd say no, that the sign alone is not acceptable because it's stating their policy, even if they back off in practice.

The advert would be better phrased to say "Who would benefit from this class? Persons of xyz race".  That's why people use that language all the time.

Ultimately, i think the class advert is unconstitutional and not okay, that the class really doesn't have much interest in persons not of that class attending, and the actual language of the advert will prevent any persons not of those races from attending. So the company gets what they intended.[/quote]

This is a very good analysis. [/quote]

No, it’s not a good analysis. The constitution’s equal protection provisions apply to government, not private businesses. Maybe a statute or ordinance would be relevant though. [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics