4 ms·
Age, nationality, religion, marital status etc. all fall into the same category and I haven't really heard anything about religious hiring quotas. So it's stil
by wwtrv 3y ago
Age, nationality, religion, marital status etc. all fall into the same category and I haven't really heard anything about religious hiring quotas. So it's still a significant leap and I'm still not sure how would this affect most Americans.
> implications in the US that came from US history
Some categories do, some don't, most are generally universally applicable, so yeah the law should primarily focus on 'ancestry' with 'caste' just being a subset of that. Which is exactly what this law is doing if I understand it correctly.
- onetimeusename 3y agoI wrote this is another post but it's not clear to me why caste discrimination isn't considered religious discrimination which is already protected so what exactly would adding a new protected class achieve? There are more categories than just the ones you mentioned for a protected class. They also include race, gender identity, and ethnicity. I don't believe caste should be a protected group in the US. It opens the door to suing people, who are not even Hindu, arbitrarily for caste discrimination under legal concepts like disparate impact. It also opens the door to arguing that caste should be included in DEI efforts. I don't think it's a significant leap between these two things, it's inevitable even.