"It’s a dystopian, shocking act of repression"
oh no
won't someone think of all those poor little helpless lawyers.
oh no
won't someone think of all those poor little helpless lawyers.
(Obviously they didn’t come for the lawyers first - the lawyers were the first who were strong enough to pick a fight over it or know how to respond - it’s shrapnel holes in returned bombers)
That aside, to use the classic stick reserved for complaining conservatives, it's a private company and venue and they have a right to choose who they want in there.
But beyond those points, we already make distinctions between private spaces and spaces open to the public that happen to be privately owned. When you invite in the public you waive some of your rights to free association. I see no reason why we can’t add further restrictions beyond the currently protected classes.
If you want to build a completely privately funded members only stadium, have at it.
And it depends on whether the ticket holder can prove they suffered damages beyond the cost of the ticket. Or whether a group of people in a class action lawsuit can do so.
At least one law firm has already successfully sued to overturn their ban.
Yes you do, that's why you're posting here. As you note, it is completely of a piece with social media bans. It is obviously newsworthy because it now extends that sort of "ideological ban" to a physical space.
Presumably the rights God inconveniently forgot to give us were enhanced by our rights as private citizens and taxpayers?
MSG is not a members only club, there are laws about venues which are generally open to the public, and we also have civil court for contracts like buying tickets to concerts.
We will see what a jury of our peers will say. But I don't think progressive snark or bad jokes about lawyers will be in the court arguments.
What does any of this have to do with ideology (conservatives vs. progressives)?
She purchased a ticket to an event and was denied entrance. That is contract and the courts may agree with her.