5 ms·
But I don't think people with a brother named Mike are a protected class according to the Unruh Civil Rights Act. Those are sex, race, color, religion, ancestry
by CalChris 5y ago
But I don't think people with a brother named Mike are a protected class according to the Unruh Civil Rights Act. Those are sex, race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, disability, medical condition, genetic information, marital status, sexual orientation, citizenship, primary language, or immigration status.
- henryfjordan 5y agoThe text of the law reads: > All persons within the jurisdiction of this state are free and equal, and no matter what their sex, race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, disability, medical condition, genetic information, marital status, sexual orientation, citizenship, primary language, or immigration status are entitled to the full and equal accommodations, advantages, facilities, privileges, or services in all business establishments of every kind whatsoever. The important part is "All persons ... are free and equal ... and are entitled to ... equal accommodations". When you read it this way (which is how the courts read the law), the list is just illustrating some classes that might be discriminated against. It does not limit the classes merely to those listed.
- junon 5y agoThat's not how you read legal text. You can't just omit parts of the law to fit what you want.
- henryfjordan 5y agoThe alternative to my interpretation is "because there is a list, nothing not on that list is a protected class". That interpretation omits the parts of the sentence I highlighted as much as I omitted the list. As you can see from links/quotes elsewhere in this thread, the caselaw agrees with me.