Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
What a shitty clickbait title. Makes it sound like this is a bad thing, even though the article doesn't paint it in that way. I'm sure people who only read the title will stir up a bit of outrage over nothing.
Before anyone says it, I know the title is the same as the article. I'm aiming my criticism at that, not the post.
“Because discrimination based on caste is already prohibited under these existing categories, this bill is unnecessary,” he said in the statement.
Just to highlight the reason for the veto.
So he didn't want to add another bullet point to the states penal code?
*slow clap*
The penal code? No one goes to prison for discrimination. It's a civil matter.
When I read a title that sounds completely ridiculous, I tend to ignore it. Certain politicians, however, really vex me by being such ridiculous people in the first place that it turns out headlines about them are true. Thusfar, Newsom isn't one of them.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
In his message Newsom called the bill “unnecessary,” explaining that California “already prohibits discrimination based on sex, race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, disability, gender identity, sexual orientation, and other characteristics, and state law specifies that these civil rights protections shall be liberally construed.”
A United Nations report in 2016 said at least 250 million people worldwide still face caste discrimination in Asia, Africa, the Middle East and Pacific regions, as well as in various diaspora communities.
Opponents, including some Hindu groups, called the proposed legislation “unconstitutional” and have said it would unfairly target Hindus and people of Indian descent.
Thenmozhi Soundararajan, executive director of Equality Labs, the Oakland-based Dalit rights group that has been leading the movement to end caste discrimination nationwide, said she still views this moment as a victory for caste-oppressed people who have “organized and built amazing power and awareness on this issue.”
“With the stroke of his pen, Governor Newsom has averted a civil rights and constitutional disaster that would have put a target on hundreds of thousands of Californians simply because of their ethnicity or their religious identity, as well as create a slippery slope of facially discriminatory laws,” said Samir Kalra, the Hindu American Foundation’s managing director.
Brian Jones and Shannon Grove called on Newsom to veto the bill, which they said will “not only target and racially profile South Asian Californians, but will put other California residents and businesses at risk and jeopardize our state’s innovate edge.”
The original article contains 831 words, the summary contains 245 words. Saved 71%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
This article isn’t about nothing. I don’t have a dog in this fight but I do know that there are types of discrimination that aren’t clear from the outside looking in. California in particular has a bunch of newly emigrated Indian residents that may be brining over their old prejudices to the state.
I’m guessing you can’t tell which job applicants are Dalits are which aren’t just from the names of the applicants. There are plenty of people in positions of power who can.
Is that all that was in the bill? I completely mistrust ..."vetoed bill that sounds like good stuff" statements as bills are never that clean, there are nearly always poison pill attachments when that seems to be the case.