That being said, I’ve seen very little evidence of this as well.

Which makes it even more perplexing why groups would oppose the addition of caste among the list of factors on which someone can be discriminated.

I do think Newsom is right in that it’s covered under current ancestry laws (proponents point to a case in NY decades ago when ancestry wasn’t included). Clearly the CA govt actually believes that because they’re sued Cisco over caste discrimination a few years ago.

But again, I don’t see why people are opposing adding it to the list. If it’s added and redundant it makes no difference, except then they can point to the lack of caste based discrimination in the U.S. based on the low number of such cases that have succeeded.