After all, if a private person wants someone removed from their private property, the reason for the removal shouldn't matter.
To illustrate, let's consider a related question of public policy. In other parts of the country women are fighting for the right to go completely topless in public. A suit challenging New Hampshire's prohibition on topless women is currently before that state's Supreme Court.If women win the right to go topless in public, does that mean private businesses must also allow it? Will places like restaurants and grocery stories, which already implement a universal dress code requiring things like shoes and shirts for all, be forced to allow toplessness too?
The property rights belong in the same place all "property rights" are with respect to commercial activity in view of the civil rights act. Which is not to say the answer is clear there.
State law is not really relevant to the extent it conflicts with constitutional rights. "Accommodation" refers to the ADA, which has the same type of constraints as the civil rights act.
Yes, the potential conflict is go read about the civil rights act, the ADA, and protected classes and what the constitutional power is that is the basis for them.
See what you did, Testy?
Quote from: Pavlovs Dog on January 19, 2018, 09:23:39 AMSee what you did, Testy?Do you see what you haven't done?
You have no idea what you are talking about.
Quote from: Pavlovs Dog on January 19, 2018, 08:06:06 AMYou have no idea what you are talking about.Yes, you've said that more than once. However, you've yet to even begin to show that your understanding of this topic is superior to mine, nor have you done anything to actually support your assertions. Indeed, your apparent claim that the concept of "public accommodation" is only relevant to the ADA is a glaring falsehood. It's pretty clear that your posts in this thread addressed to me are just lame trolling. If you at least exerted yourself enough to show a spark of wit, I could respect that.