Comments by "SmallSpoonBrigade" (@SmallSpoonBrigade) on "FOX 5 New York" channel.

The issue is that this isn't within the law. If they want to be a private club, they probably could get away with this, but as a public restaurant they're definitely breaking the law. Even if they can be age restricted, having a different age for men and women is going to push it over the line. You can't have separate rules for men and women. Attorneys are going to have a field day with the civil rights violations involved with that policy.
4
Which is why this restaurant is doomed. You think any of those young people that aren't allowed in now are going to eat there when they are old enough? Not to mention the incoming civil suits over how it was implemented.
2
Yes, it's illegal regardless of what the motivation is.
2
Bars in the US have allowed people to open a tab, or pay for the drinks as they drink, for longer than I've been allowed into those establishments. Most casual dining restaurants have you pay when you order as well. Sit down restaurants tend to bill after you eat, but if it's that big of a deal, I don't see why it couldn't be done, it's just a bit of a hassle.
2
It's also blatantly illegal. If it weren't already illegal, having a different age for men and women definitely pushes it over the line. You can't have different rules for men and women.
2
That's just the initial, that can be changed later on in response to a plea agreement.
2
@tracigreen4786 Doesn't matter, it's still sex discrimination and probably race discrimination as well. It's only not age discrimination because the 14th amendment isn't normally used to help young people get fair treatment. If they want to make it a private club and require people to join, then they probably could get away with it. But, they're going to be sued into oblivion.
1
You can't set illegal rules. The place is going to be hit with civil rights lawsuits before too long. The first time a 20 something with a good job gets told they can't come in, there'll be a bunch of lawyers waiting to shut the place down. It's one thing when bars due it in response to the laws around minors and controlled substances, but this is never going to wash in court. It's a business offering public accommodations, not a private club. The two are not at all the same thing.
1
Presumably that's because there's typically an age gap when dating. But, that is probably going to be the nail in the coffin for the restaurant. You simply can't have different rules based on different sexes.
1
@notoriouseagle1074 Because young people are more likely to call out the GOP BS and actually judge policies based on their merits rather than being scared by Fox News.
1
Restaurants can already kick people out for not having control over their children. A sign indicating that when they come in would address that issue without violating the law.
1
@ChelleLlewes No, they aren't. Some of the most childish people out there are Boomers and they're well past the point where they should know better.
1
If it's that sort of a concern, why would they want them outside with nothing to do?
1
Not officially, however, there are laws on the books that would be at play. For instance having different ages for men and women is definitely illegal sex discrimination and it's likely also race discrimination as a disproportionate number of black men don't even live to see 30 let alone 35. That being said, the constitution does ban special treatment under the law, but nobody seems to care when it comes to age restrictions on the youth. I wouldn't expect it to wipe out all restrictions, for example controlled substances, but BS like age discrimination being permitted unless the person is over 40 is pretty blatantly unconstitutional. Such laws are pretty blatantly in violation of the 14th amendment, but the courts generally don't care about that.
1
It's high time the courts start to actually protect people's constitutional rights, curfews like that are not constitutional. Now, if the curfew was later, they might have a point, but that effectively bans teens from employment, going out to movies on weekdays, study groups after school and a bunch of other things. If they really care about order, they'd be fining parents that don't actually make sure their kids know how to behave.
1
Technically, the law permits discrimination based on being too young, not too old. However, if the courts would actually enforce the constitution, those provisions would apply to everybody, not just those over 40. In this case, the fact that there's 2 different ages, one for men and one for women, is the thing that would most likely get them in trouble. However, if this results in some races being kept out more than others, that would likely also be an issue. And considering that the life expectancy of black men is so much lower than for other groups, it probably wouldn't take much of a leap to file suit as a race discrimination thing the way that companies can hire people based on looks, so long as looks aren't discriminatory on any covered class.
1
@wownewstome6123 It's legal to refuse to hire young people, it's not constitutional and if it starts to become more common for employers to refuse to hire young people, we might finally get the courts to acknowledge that there's a 14th amendment right that applies to young people.
1
Um, a lot of people got killed for everybody to have the right to go to whatever public restaurants they wanted to. I don't think most people would support a return to the Jim Crow south.
1