Antidiscrimination Laws, Policy Knowledge and Political Support

This study investigates how antidiscrimination policy and related policy knowledge influence citizens’ support for the democratic system and its institutions. The article argues that antidiscrimination measures and knowledge about rights to equal treatment foster perceptions of government responsiveness, which increase political support among target groups and citizens who advocate egalitarianism. Utilizing a longitudinal design and more valid measures to resolve causality issues, the results of the empirical models show that increases in policy knowledge over time systematically predict higher political support, especially among individuals who hold egalitarian values. Individuals who are discriminated against express particularly high political support in contexts where antidiscrimination laws are expanded. Overall, the results amplify the role of policy knowledge as a key factor in studying policy feedback effects.

Does Protecting Older Workers From Discrimination Make It Harder to Get Hired? Evidence From Disability Discrimination Laws

We explore the effects of disability discrimination laws on hiring of older workers. A concern with antidiscrimination laws is that they may reduce hiring by raising the cost of terminations and—in the specific case of disability discrimination laws—raising the cost of employment because of the need to accommodate disabled workers. Moreover, disability discrimination laws can affect nondisabled older workers because they are fairly likely to develop work-related disabilities, but are generally not protected by these laws. Using state variation in disability discrimination protections, we find little or no evidence that stronger disability discrimination laws lower the hiring of nondisabled older workers. We similarly find no evidence of adverse effects of disability discrimination laws on hiring of disabled older workers.

Assertive Pluralism for a World of Irreducible Diversity

Drawing from the preceding case studies, the concluding chapter finds hate spin to be a sophisticated form of contention that is strategic, versatile and networked. These characteristics make hate spin difficult for the law to deal with. Laws against offense are fundamentally flawed because they fail to take into account the subjectivity of offense, which makes such laws prone to abuse by hate spin agents. Prohibition of incitement is necessary but usually insufficient, because hate propaganda can be designed in ways to evade the law. Rather than merely addressing speech, democracies should institute strong antidiscrimination laws. Hate spin causes the most damage in contexts where equality for minorities is not guaranteed. A multicultural, equality-protecting constitutional order is the only viable way to organize a society that is internally diverse.