so much for ADA as far as it pertains to veterans. However there is an older law, the Soldiers and Sailors relief act, which might apply here, and I am quite certain it would. Sue Hilton under that law. Liability be damned, obligation legally to serve these vets is what the law requires, and they may not refuse to. And in addition, all of us should take any opportunity available to tell Hilton to go to hell until they treat veterans fairly and equitably. After all, what did any Hilton ever do in a war but squat and shiver on the sidelines.
Well, at the risk of playing Scrooge, there is no "law" that requires free dinners for vets or anybody else.
It would seem that some other establishment could step into the breach here and provide this service, in conjunction with O'Brien and Koster. The public relations affect would be tremendous, to say nothing of the gratitude from these soldiers.
Forget Hilton. Put them in your rear view mirror and move on.
Hilton is a business, acting like a business.
Your gripe should be with the tort system in this country that exposes business owners to damages for violations of the ADA or, should some veteran choose, to a lawsuit should one of these veterans be injured.
This is just a sad situation all the way around.
Do you really think Hilton should be forced to allow a restaurant to remain, even if they believe they are likely to lose money? You think the government should force private companies to subsidize people because of their status as veterans or their handicaps?
You might have a case if the government passed laws protecting businesses from being sued if people are injured on their premises because of a handicap, but as it is Hilton is doing what it needs to to lower its potential liability.