News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Cheerleader’s Snapchat rant leads to ‘momentous’ Supreme Court case on speech. Parent comment

Re:Cheerleader’s Snapchat rant leads to ‘momentous’ Supreme ... by root_axis on Monday April 26, 2021 @06:00PM (#26948804)
Religious affiliation is protected but that doesn't mean every action taken based on a religious belief is protected. For example, if the individual started wearing the t-shirt the day after a heated religious debate in the office with an individual that identifies as non-binary, that could be perceived as targeted harassment.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Cheerleader’s Snapchat rant leads to ‘momentous’ Supreme ... by AnthonyMouse on Monday April 26, 2021 @10:20PM (#26951133)
> For example, if the individual started wearing the t-shirt the day after a heated religious debate in the office with an individual that identifies as non-binary, that could be perceived as targeted harassment.

But most of these cases are equivalent to someone being fired for wearing whatever t-shirt at home, so that's not really a distinction that gets you out of the problem.

[ Parent | on HN ]