Posted on 04/25/2018 1:58:59 PM PDT by lowbridge
This judge just opened a very stupid door.
Nope, because then the discrimination laws apply and they are a “protected class”. Political affiliation is not a protected class.
“I can always choose another local bar, but I can’t invent another Wallmart.”
You can’t choose another bar if you live in the sticks and it’s the only bar in town.
Political discrimination is just fine?! Let the fun begin, wish I did own a business just so I could kick out a Hillary/Bernie/Obama type.
I get your point.
I was looking at it from a simple business owner point of view. From that point I cant legally be indentured to serve someone I don’t want to serve. If I had such a customer, which is not likely as it would run against the idea that all business is good for the business, then I would want to retain the right to refuse to serve and the patron could find service elsewhere.
The Walmart example might cross a line, particularly if its the only shopping store within 50 miles, because I might not have a choice, and also because Walmart is a publically traded corporation. But the main reason that Walmart would probably not do that is again the idea that it wants your business, and to drive you out is bad business.
There is no law against bad business, but bad business is usually replaced by good business after it goes out of business.
I’ve always thought that judges should be used for medical experiments. Think about it...they’re cheap, plentiful and nobody would miss them.
“Equal Protection Clause”
Justice is considered blind, not stupid.
I’m wondering why a Trump supporter would darken the door of a West Village bar in Manhattan in the first place.
I wouldn’t risk my life entering a beer joint in East St Louis while wearing a MAGA cap or just being white, but like the guy in the Monty Python movie who wanted to be called “Loretta,” and have babies, it should be every man’s right to do it if he wants.
No political discrimination? Alrighty then! Let’s open some Trump bars!,
I guess this means we can start throwing gays out of straight bars.
But if this same lawyer's client was a liberal wearing a Hillary t-shirt or a Hillary cap, she'd be arguing that her client had the right of freedom of speech and expression protection under the Constitution.
You beat me to it, that’s about what I was going to post if no one brought it up.
should’ah said he was a black tranny.
He would own the place
This ruling is correct. For instance, if you are a landlord you can ask what political party they are a member of, and who they voted for last in last election.... and refuse to rent to a person solely on that response.
So a cake baker can throw out gays?
Good luck. My Maga hat had raised eyebrows but no challenges. Bring it.
YOu can’t assume that... but you can ask. And if they say democrat, you can refuse to rent to them on that basis. Yes
This is only real solution; even if individuals / businesses are making decisions based on good faith metrics (credit risk, criminal record, poor academic record) the protected classes will sue claiming it is because of race. Since there is no way to disprove, and even trying is so costly, it creates a "privileged class" who can get away with a lot because of the threat and reality of litigation. And of course, the scope of all laws creep over time always, so there is no way to prevent this with any measure of confidence. Which brings us to where we are now.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.