About these places refusing entry/services to vac'd/masked people:

[ret5hd]

Back 25 or so years ago, DFW Airport had a smoking lounge within the “secure” area, so smokers wouldn’t have to leave then go through the security line again.

It was all enclosed, separately ventilated, and heavily used.

Then someone with asthma or some other breathing problem sued the airport under the disabilities laws, saying that as a disabled person they were unable to use the smoking lounge because of the smokers inside of it.

This person won. There was/is no longer a smoking lounge in the airport.

Why would not an immunocompromised, etc person be able to sue one of these establishments on the same grounds—as a disabled person they are unable to use the facilities/services of the restaurant/bar/etc because of the owners lack of making those areas accessible to them as a disabled person?

Lawyers of DU — thoughts?

[unblock]

1. Rule of law is out the window already. These people are guilty of reckless endangerment already

The fact that these pro-COVID spreaders are tolerated at all is mind-boggling.

They're doing the biological equivalent of driving on the wrong side of the highway and people act like it's a personal choice. Freedom.

Ffs. If our laws and enforcement were at all consistent, all these people who go out in public seeking and spreading COVID would be in prison.


In theory, the lawsuit you're talking about seems to me to have merit, but first, the courts are very slow and the damage will have been done by the time a decision is handed down. Second, these days the decision is a likely as not to be as political and corrupt as everything else, so who knows.

[JustAnotherGen]

2. Would a public facility be a better example?

I literally have delayed trips because of the Pandemic - and I have a genetic autoimmune disease.

Would it work in a state, town, locality where the government is not following masking guidelines? Example - a School. Library. Police Station.