Uber ordered to pay $1.1m to blind passenger who was denied rides 14 times

nope, they require them to follow the law, if your religion won't allow you to do that, that is on you

 

You can feel however you want about religion you just can't make a law that interferes with the free exercise thereof.

 

get banned from Uber, possibly sued, possibly fined by the ADA

not all religions require them to be honest, so they could lie when signing up, that doesn't seem to violate their religion, they have no issues bearing flase witness

 

The law shouldn't be like that.

They should not have to accept a dog in their personal car if they want to do that job.

The blind have other options. I'm okay if you want to pass a special law forcing Uber to modify it's interface to allow blind people with dogs to find drivers willing to pick them up.

 

If I'm the owner of the asset what are you going to do sue me? Arrest me and take me to Uber jail steal my car what what can you do my guess is nothing.

 

sure we can, we have laws against stoning people, this is America

even though some on the right would like to change that

"Oklahoma GOP candidate endorsed stoning gays to death"

https://news.yahoo.com/oklahoma-gop-house-stoning-gays-142432356.html

 

This member wants to use the law to force Uber to ban you from the application, if you do not comply.

 

I wonder if there's any way for someone to set up an Uber company offshore, in some other country, outside the reach of lawsuits.

Uber is entirely an information service provider, so it can all be done through the internet.

 

the drivers still have to follow the law if they want to drive in the USA

we would ban any outside company that refused to follow the ADA

 

Lose lose for Uber. They lose the asset they lose the revenue I lose nothing.

you don't get to Sue or find someone because of their religious belief so violation of the First amendment.

If Uber discriminates against Muslims or people who are allergic to dogs that seems like it's their liability. And again since they hold no assets they lose.

 

most Americans agree, that denying a blind person an Uber is wrong

 

you do if they are breaking the law, violating the ADA is against the law

they ask that you agree to follow the laws, if you say no, you're denied

if you bear false witness and lie, you will be fired when you violate the law the first time

 

well anybody who tries to sue somebody for being Muslim first will get left out of court and their lawsuit would be dismissed on standing. The First amendment to protects the right to religious freedom. No employer is allowed to request this of you. They can terminate the employment contract but that's all they can do. If anything you probably have a reasonable case for workplace discrimination

Uber is an app that connects drivers to people who want a ride. They can make all the policies in the world but because they don't have the assets they don't get to enforce them. All they do is say we won't host you anymore there's no law against pulling up and saying hey I'm giving out rides for cash.

 

They won't fire you if the company is offshore and out of reach of the law.

 

they would sue for violating the ADA, just like in this case here, nothing to do with one's religion

 

there is no law that says I can't be Muslim or adhere to Islamic traditions

being Muslim cannot violate the Ada if it does the Ada is violating Constitution and they will lose.

denied what? If I drive for Uber I own the asset what's being denied if they deny me?

There are no laws against being Muslim and following Islamic tradition there can't be it's illegal.

 

Who would be sued?

 

the employee is in the USA, they would go after the employee or ban the overseas service

 

Being Muslim doesn't violate the Ada. The ADA trying to tell me that my religious practices are illegal is the ADA violating the Constitution.

 

the person that caused them harm by violating the ADA

 

I doubt the government will be willing to come down as hard on the individual drivers as they do on a big company.

 

We're talking about people giving each other rides what are you going to do confiscate their car? You can't sue them because they own their car.

 

But harm was not actually "caused". Don't you get that?

If a driver refuses to pick up a blind person with a dog, that blind person is no more "hurt" than if the driver simply chooses not to be willing to drive anyone.

 

never said it did

the ADA does make it a crime to discriminate against the Blind

nope, one's religion does not trump the law, one can't stone people for picking up sticks on the weekend either

 

The government can't touch the driver the Ada can't touch the driver if the driver is allergic to dogs or they have a religious issue they have the right to decline and the Ada can't do anything about it.