Newsom vetoes a proposed ban on caste discrimination in California
1–10 of 192 posts
Re: Newsom vetoes a proposed ban on caste discrimination in California
#2The large and vocal constituency activated against the bill is good evidence that in fact it is not already accounted for under existing civil rights law.
Re: Newsom vetoes a proposed ban on caste discrimination in California
#3If it’s already covered, what’s the harm in letting the bill go into effect?
Re: Newsom vetoes a proposed ban on caste discrimination in California
#4The large and vocal constituency activated against the bill is good evidence that in fact it is not already accounted for under existing civil rights law.
[deleted]
Re: Newsom vetoes a proposed ban on caste discrimination in California
#5> “not only target and racially profile South Asian Californians, but will put other California residents and businesses at risk and jeopardize our state’s innovative edge.”
How? Because south asians can't be caste-ist against others now?
Re: Newsom vetoes a proposed ban on caste discrimination in California
#6If it’s already covered, what’s the harm in letting the bill go into effect?
Exactly, what's wrong with having codified redundancy?
Re: Newsom vetoes a proposed ban on caste discrimination in California
#7How populated with Indian people is California if statewide legislation is being written for this?
Re: Newsom vetoes a proposed ban on caste discrimination in California
#8The large and vocal constituency activated against the bill is good evidence that in fact it is not already accounted for under existing civil rights law.
Precisely. I'm trying to understand the resistance in good faith, but the article didn't explain their position very clearly.
"It's already prohibited" - so why the fierce opposition?
"Passing a law against discrimination of X will stigmatize X" - Imagine someone was making this argument for an existing federally protected class.
Re: Newsom vetoes a proposed ban on caste discrimination in California
#9The large and vocal constituency activated against the bill is good evidence that in fact it is not already accounted for under existing civil rights law.
Whether or not it is already accounted for under existing law, this sort of reasoning is about as valid as "the large and vocal constituency against a bill requiring everyone to pledge allegiance to the US is evidence that people aren't loyal to the country"
Better evidence would be someone who would have been eligible to bring a case under the new law having been denied justice under the existing laws.
Re: Newsom vetoes a proposed ban on caste discrimination in California
#10How populated with Indian people is California if statewide legislation is being written for this?
Wikipedia says
"California is about 1.3% Indian, with many living in Orange County and Santa Clara County. Many live in Yuba City, about 15% Indian, which has a significant Sikh community."
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asian_Americans_in_Californi...