back

by jjmarr·1y ago·view on hn ↗
It's on a state-by-state basis.[1] In California in particular, courts have ruled online businesses that are public accommodations cannot discriminate:[2]

> The California Supreme Court held that entering into an agreement with an online business is not necessary to establish standing under the Unruh Act. Writing for a unanimous court, Justice Liu emphasized that “a person suffers discrimination under the Act when the person presents himself or herself to a business with an intent to use its services but encounters an exclusionary policy or practice that prevents him or her from using those services,” and that “visiting a website with intent to use its services is, for purposes of standing, equivalent to presenting oneself for services at a brick-and-mortar store.”

I'm not sure what Catholic hospitals refuse non-Catholics care. My understanding is they refuse to provide medical treatments such as abortion that go against Catholic moral teachings, and this refusal is applied to everyone.

[1] https://lawyerscommittee.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/Onli...

[2] https://harvardlawreview.org/print/vol-133/white-v-square/

1 comments
> In California in particular, courts have ruled online businesses that are public accommodations cannot discriminate.

Yes.

But there is a legal distinction between a business website that offers goods/services to the public (like an online store), and a social media platform's moderation decisions or user-created communities.

Prager University v. Google LLC (2022)[1] - the court specifically held that YouTube's content moderation decisions didn't violate the Unruh Act. There's a clear distinction between access to services (where public accommodation laws may apply), and content moderation/curation decisions (protected by Section 230).

[1] https://law.justia.com/cases/california/court-of-appeal/2022...

You are right, thank you for the citation.

edit: there's another comment chain you might be interested in about whether the federal civil rights act is applicable.

Thanks :-)