The law has an inexorable logic.  Whatever is in law will be tested in the courts, and the limits found.  If the law has no limits, then the failure to specify limits will be exploited.  Such bad law does damage both to the victims of the bad law and the Rule of Law in general.

Anti-discrimination law is a good example.  It has no limits, and new groups are constantly agitating to be declared a protected class so they can enjoy the advantages of that designation.

This article highlights this lack of limits.  The federalEEOC threatening to sue employers who refuse to hire criminals.  (alsohere for the hard core) If you run a bank, and refuse to hire a felon – a bank robber – who has just been released from prison, the EEOC may sue you.

Really?

The worst part is that state laws often require background checks for certain sensitive positions.  This becomes a catch-22.  If youdo the background check, and find a criminal record, you could get sued for discrimination.  If you do not do the background check, then the state may go after you for negligence.

There is only one word for this – insanity. (read here, and here)

The core principle of a free society is that we are free to go about our business.  One characteristic of the Rule of Law is that a citizen can have confidence, day to day, that he either is, or is not on the right side of the law.  We should know when we are breaking the lawbut this is impossible when there are too many laws, full of crazy conflicts, conflicting goals, and political agendas.

It is my job to choose my employees.  I need to think about their skills their character, and yes, things like demeanor.  I want people working for me who want to work for me.  I want people who I think will be happy with the work I have for them, and must be careful not to hire people who can damage my business, or who are a potential threat to my customers.  For example, people who habitually pick their noses are not likely to get a job serving food in my restaurant.  I have both the right, and the responsibility to make these judgements.

Criminals are the latest in a growing parade of groups who seek to be declared a protected class.  They want to be given that legal cudgel to compel others to meet their demands.  The handicapped with the ADA, racial minorities, allergy sufferers, the mentally ill, and certain age groups, have all been given this status.  Those who insist that same-sex-marriate is a “civil right” want to join the club, so everyone in their lives can be compelledto honor the “equality” of their private lives.

Each addition to the “club” is proclaimed as “groundbreaking”.  Those on the business end of the legal weapon, who are denied their freedom, money, or consciences are given no sympathy, because they are simply “wrong”.

The sensitive champions of progress protecting the feelings of those wielding the clubs have a phrase for those they beat into submission.  “Too damn bad”.

Freedom means being able to make choices.  I have a right to choose where to shop, and I likewise have a right to choose who I rent my spare room to.  Likewise, I have a responsibility and a right, to choose my employees, without second guessing by the courts. The concept of protected classes using the law to correct past sins may have served a purpose, but when I can’t refuse to hire a bank robber as a bank guard because that’s “discrimination”, the law has clearly lost its way.