Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

The current US law regarding restaurants is in fact that an commercial establishment have very little freedom to refuse to save people based on who they are.

The problem with social media is that the big platforms, like the post office or your ISP often ends up as an natural monopoly that can be just as dangerous to your political freedoms as any out of control government department by virtue of being just as powerful in the real world.



> The current US law regarding restaurants is in fact that an commercial establishment have very little freedom to refuse to save people based on who they are.

To be clear, current US law protects things that one can not change about themselves eg: race --and even this is a bit of an oversimplification (see being gay or a woman)-- but it in no way prevents a restaurant from serving someone because of the attire they are wearing or the speech they are speaking.


Or their profession.

A classic example being that it is permissible to refuse to rent an apartment to a lawyer. (And in fact this is common in some places.)


exactly, think of a bartender refusing to serve a problematic former client a drink, or the bouncers not letting them in, due to them being specifically sanctioned. private business absolutely has the right to refuse service to people over their behavior or expressed intentions.

the US first amendment protects against GOVERNMENTAL infringement.

in terms of this Twitter tempest-in-a-teapot, they ALSO have a right to free speech and Trumps demonstrably FALSE claims can absolutely be addressed, labeled as false, and that is an absolute right to free speech that Trump has already threatened with specious "governmental action" which PRECISELY violates both the letter and the spirit of the first amendment!

Trump is violating it!


> The current US law regarding restaurants is in fact that an commercial establishment have very little freedom to refuse to save people based on who they are.

I was referring to non-protected classes of people.

For example, I have the right to refuse to serve someone who has written bad checks at my establishment, for example.

Or I have the right to refuse service to someone who has caused harm to my clients.

Which leads back to my question: Should I be forced to serve these people?




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: