Court Opinion

ID: 9620457
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 05:42:30.751946+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:04:50.738629
License: Public Domain

Mr. Justice Pringle
dissenting:
The majority does not hold that the Anti-Discrimination Act itself is unconstitutional but only that it cannot apply to employers engaged in interstate commerce, and *283relies heavily on Hall v. DeCuir, 95 U.S. 485, 24 L.Ed. 547, (1877) to support its position. I agree that if Hall v. DeCuir, supra, is to be placed in limbo it can be done only by the hand which promulgated it — the Supreme Court of the United States.
However, I cannot believe that a law passed by a state which implements a basic concept of our form of government — the right of a man, otherwise well qualified, not to be denied a job solely because of his race, color or creed — can be deemed to be a burden on interstate commerce.
Moreover, I would point out that, in my opinion, the Colorado Anti-Discrimination statute cannot affect the uniformity of regulation in interstate commerce, for if any state passed a law permitting or requiring the discrimination complained of here, it would certainly be struck down as a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. Brown v. Board of Education, 347 U.S. 483.