Hacker News Reader

Comment by Retra | Hacker News Reader

Depends on how a judge rules. You could be required to find another venue or to admit women regardless.

Either way, the fact that it is a private rule means it is not a public law. The government doesn't have to abide by laws you just made up for yourself on a whim. If I say "no shoes allowed on my private property" the police aren't forced to comply with that, so why would a government official at an event be required to comply with some inane sexist rule?

View on HN

The government official isn't the police, but even more so, I'm not talking about the government official, but the random public who attends. I can say they aren't allowed on my property at which point it is a crime for them to be there.

A crime but not a felony nor even a misdemeanor. Trespass is a tort, and I think a 'civil tort'. So unless they're doing damage I don't think they owe anything for this 'crime'.

Misdemeanor here:

http://www.legislature.mi.gov/(S(2d5ss4y1dr2wfo0uz3r0a3zk))/...

I wouldn't bet against there being some jurisdiction where it is a felony.

If you're the gatekeeper for who can enter and leave, it wouldn't make sense to call it a public event.

The police can ignore your rules in certain special cases when they have a legal reason to enter your property without your consent. In normal circumstances, you can certainly deny them entrance if they don't take off their shoes.

No, you can deny them entrance. A "no shoes rule" would be entirely your own device and only of concern to them insofar as it gives you a (personal) reason to deny entrance. It has no legal weight.

If you permit them to enter, and you have a no shoes rule posted, they are free to enter with shoes. Because such a sign means fuck all in the world.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com