Do governments need to institute anti-discrimination laws to protect the working poor? When it comes to other disadvantaged classes — those suffering from discrimination due to gender, race colour, religion and/or sexual orientation — many societies are putting, or have put, laws in place.
No such protection exists for those whose “crime” or “anti-social behaviour” is to have very little income. When under attack for the imagined sins of poverty that has led to homelessness, they have little or no legal protection from claims of discrimination.
Even with powerful allies and advocates, low and no income citizens face an uphill battle when outrageous claims are made about them. Opponents freely characterize the poor without fear of reprisal. They can be, and often are, painted as a class of criminals and/or degenerates that threaten the safety and property of neighbours, passers-by, women, children — indeed just about anybody.
A recent court judgement highlights the uphill battle that low-income citizens face. It has been won in New York City, with the city itself championing a class of particularly industrious homeless, people with jobs or actively seeking them out.
The decision comes after several years fighting off what many would describe as an entirely frivolous law-suit funded by a wealthy neighbourhood. The evidence? The intentions, activities and characters of people who are working and homeless, which was the foundation of the lawsuit itself.
Read more in Common Dreams: Wealthy Spent Over $300K in Failed Bid to Stop Manhattan Hotel From Housing Homeless
