3 ms·

I agree with you, the question I was wondering about principally was the constitutionality. Regarding your example, something very similar that's actually happe

I agree with you, the question I was wondering about principally was the constitutionality. Regarding your example, something very similar that's actually happening is the requirement for people applying to university faculty positions to submit a "diversity and inclusion statement" which obviously must be very clearly aligned with a particular ideology, in order to be considered. Should this be illegal? It's certainly stupid, it violates all kinds or political freedom, but then you dont have to work at a university either.

mustache_kimono 4y ago
> Should this be illegal? It's certainly stupid, it violates all kinds or political freedom, but then you don't have to work at a university either. This is a tough question because I could imagine a DEI statement that wasn't plainly stupid, and which had a strong purpose, just as easily as I could imagine one that was plainly idiotic. And university education sounds like it would be a special case as well (that is -- have all sorts of factors not present in other cases). A non-crazy DEI for a low level state prison guard? Probably nuts. For a hiring manager? Maybe less so. > I agree with you, the question I was wondering about principally was the constitutionality. Appreciate your inquiry, and I'm not an expert in this area of the law, but as an observer, the reach of the 1st amendment can seem sometimes crazy expansive, but I think I'm mostly glad it is? For instance, my town had an ordinance that made panhandling at busy intersections illegal (one new way to outlaw being poor but which had a facially valid purpose -- safety). ACLU sued and said this was a limitation on the 1st amendment rights of the panhandlers and won. Took away millions in attorneys fees. This seems like unsettled law? Hopefully a person of conscience will sue.

mustache_kimono 4y ago

> Should this be illegal? It's certainly stupid, it violates all kinds or political freedom, but then you don't have to work at a university either. This is a tough question because I could imagine a DEI statement that wasn't plainly stupid, and which had a strong purpose, just as easily as I could imagine one that was plainly idiotic. And university education sounds like it would be a special case as well (that is -- have all sorts of factors not present in other cases). A non-crazy DEI for a low level state prison guard? Probably nuts. For a hiring manager? Maybe less so. > I agree with you, the question I was wondering about principally was the constitutionality. Appreciate your inquiry, and I'm not an expert in this area of the law, but as an observer, the reach of the 1st amendment can seem sometimes crazy expansive, but I think I'm mostly glad it is? For instance, my town had an ordinance that made panhandling at busy intersections illegal (one new way to outlaw being poor but which had a facially valid purpose -- safety). ACLU sued and said this was a limitation on the 1st amendment rights of the panhandlers and won. Took away millions in attorneys fees. This seems like unsettled law? Hopefully a person of conscience will sue.