Comment by diggan

1 day ago

So it would be legal to bar non-US residents then? "Residency" seems different from all the criteria's you listed.

Residency inherently includes national origin, since if your national origin is the US you're automatically a resident.

  • Yeah, but the opposite isn't true, my national origin can be Swedish but I can reside in Spain, so banning by residency isn't banning by national origin, seems like a way to ban foreigners (non-residents).

    Edit: Actually wait

    > since if your national origin is the US you're automatically a resident

    This isn't true is it? If you're born in the US but you live (100% of the time) elsewhere, you're no longer a resident, are you?

    • Ok, but you're a citizen, which is a higher status than a "permanent resident."

      Actually, you fully can discriminate for or against local or state residency. I think national residence would be harder, though to be fair you're absolutely able to not hire non-residents.

      Frankly the biggest barrier might be that as actual residents would get mad if you asked for proof, and if you didn't test everyone it would likely be an open-and-shut racial (or maybe national origin if you tested on the basis of accent) case.

      5 replies →

Sometimes I believe one can also face legal trouble for unreasonably banning things strongly correlated with a protected characteristic.

I can’t sidestep gender discrimination law by refusing to hire people with long hair, unless the job is something like “wig model” or “Jeff bezos impersonator” where being bald is a bona fide occupational qualification.