4 ms·
> The DO said that no individuals had been discriminated against, and noted that the festival had not in practice enforced the ban on cisgender men Alrighty th
by jeklj 8y ago
> The DO said that no individuals had been discriminated against, and noted that the festival had not in practice enforced the ban on cisgender men
Alrighty then.
- MaxBarraclough 8y agoMeaning what? The law extends to public statements which clearly discourage, even if they aren't enforced by denial of entry on the day. Seems clear enough why this is the case: advertising with, say, No blacks allowed is prohibited, even if you don't enforce this policy on the day.
- jeklj 8y agoMeaning what you’ve pointed out is clear; the problem was the statement and not material discrimination. “No blacks allowed”, in America at least, was no idle threat.