A civil action is only as powerful as the government that enforces it, and if you believe the government and courts should act together to restrict the freedom of individual businesses to hire and fire as they choose, you are far more statist than I.
Since you have called me a statist and Trotskyite, could you please point out where I have ever advocated that the government control any aspect of a person's life?
In a republic, the assumption is that a government will honour the decisions of its various sovereign parts. A republic of the Several States, as the Constitution phrases it, the United States (theoretically) honours the decisions of the assorted courts of the Several States, except in matters wherein the Constitution grants to either the Regress or to Article III courts the ability to supersede state courts' rulings.
The United States, in case you've so obviously missed it, which you have, has long since (in the 14th Amendment, duly ratified) barred large numbers of previously common discriminatory methods in hiring and firing, and in numerous other areas, and in (the grossly misapplied term) ''civil rights'', generally.
Do you take the position that, for instance, -- and this is not mentioned or even implied by the 14th Amendment -- that an employer can arbitrarily dismiss an employee for, say, having been a felon of some description, previous to employment? A pedophile, let's say, for the purposes of this discussion, one who has duly served his sentence (which was probably too short to start, but that's another subject)? Now, mind you, this is not refusing to grant employment, but said employee having been hired, the employer KNOWING at the time he/she/it was a pedophile and subsequently dismissing the employee because of the prior condition.
Do you REALLY take that position? If so, you are effectively arguing that EVERY employee be completely guiltless prior to employment, because standards such as this never, ever do anything but expand. Today, the pedophile; tomorrow, the jaywalker. Or, the smoker (btw, I do not smoke either cigarettes or cigars. I have done on occasion, and they taste quite foul, afaic).
I will adjust one previous comment, and apologise for the very minor misapplication of a term. Insofar as we neither of us acknowledge the State as our supreme master, you are only Trotskyite in manner; from a policy standpoint, you are a Shavian.
The net bottom line here, all descriptive terms aside, is the same one that even today most children understand without any formal instruction: in a 'fair' game, or -- generalising -- a ''fair'' society, you do NOT change the rules after the game begins.