Not a legal expert but this is extremely far fetched. You must have a great deal of contempt for the US legal system if you think this.
The title was, that it hit a nerve, that bill. It seems that truely is the case...
This is an invalid argument. You are effectively defending a practice based on the argument that it's not widespread. That's the same as saying that we don't need to protect transgender issues because they hardly ever get discriminated against. No -- for one, you cannot say for certain how widespread the practice is (and "I'm transgender myself" does not make you an authority on that), and second: low prevalence is not a reason for not prohibiting something. What's next? We shouldn't make laws against police violence because they kill less than 100 people/year?
If you really want to see casteism dissolved, you should not oppose laws trying to codify exactly that.
That's absurd. The laws aren't for people who wouldn't discriminate. They're for the people who demonstrably do.
E.g. you can be white manager and not a racist and promote a better-qualified white employee rather than a less-qualified black one, and then be sued. "Just because I automatically found myself being white!"
The solution is simply to have good documentation around the reasons for who you're promoting, and then the suit will lose. (In 99.99% of cases, the suit won't happen in the first place because no lawyer would take it if there isn't hard evidence of actual racial discrimination.) This kind of documentation is generally pretty easy, and it's good business practice besides.
This has worked pretty well at making a big dent in race-based discrimination. Why should it be any different for caste-based discrimination?
You can not get away from your race. But you can get away from religions and caste. I would like to get away from my religion and caste. This bill makes it impossible.
That seems to be factually untrue. And you can't cite the lack of court cases as evidence, because court cases aren't brought unless there's a law in the first place.
> I would like to get away from my religion and caste. This bill makes it impossible.
No, the bill is a path to do precisely that. What you're saying makes as much sense as "passing anti-racism laws makes it impossible to get away from race as issue". That's not how it works.
Others probably have more expertise than me, but I would highlight the following points:
1) The only way such a lawsuit would be successful is if he actually did something to indicate some decision was based off of caste.
2) Everyone can already be sued based off of attributes they have inherited against their will. People can be sued for discriminating against the opposite (or even the same!) gender, people can be sued for discriminating on the basis of race. Your son didn't choose to get born Indian, but he could still be sued for promoting Indians over Hispanics or something.
3) It is not only higher caste Hindus that can be sued for caste discrimination if that's a protected status. A manager of no religion or any religion could also be theoretically sued for discriminating against low-caste Hindus--or descendants of Japanese butchers, which, to my knowledge, constitute a low caste in Japan.