What’s really sad is that anyone would think that the attorney tried to set this whole thing up. Here we have a Mexican restaurant that refuses to sell a product to someone because he’s Mexican. How stupid is that?
To “the other point of View”: I beg to differ with you. Based on the story, the refusal to sell the beer had nothing to do with his nationality. It had to do with the source of his identification. They wanted a US passport not a foreign passport to prove age.
Just saying: How can someone who is not an American citizen provide a U.S. passport?????? It has everything to do with his nationality! If a Mexican passport is good enough for U.S. immigration officials to allow someone to legally enter the country, why isn’t it good enough to buy a beer in a restaurant?
Other point…I did not say it was not good enough to buy a beer. I agree, it should have been good enough. My guess is that the employee is young and just did not know better. I still say it was not about nationality, but the passport. It could have just as easily been someone with a German passport and they would have turned them down also.
As with any American business, Chipolte has the right to refuse service to anyone and can specify the types of identification that are acceptable/not acceptable in order to prove age when ordering alcohol. In other words, foreigners visiting this country do not have the same rights as American citizens. And that’s the way it should be. The same is true for Americans visiting Mexico. And as far as the lawsuit is concerned, well, he not a U.S. citizen so put me on that jury.
Fish Man: You would do well to learn a little history. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits business from refusing service to anyone on the basis of race, color, religion, or national origin. Perhaps you would like to go back to the days when people could be refused service because of the color of their skin or because they were of a different religion or nationality, but unfortunaetly for you, the law doesn’t approve of such behavior anymore.
Oh, and one more thing Fish Man: The 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution provides that “[n]o State shall . . . deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” The U.S. Supreme court has held that this means exactlly what it says “any person.” Foreigners in this country enjoy nearly all of the same rights you and I enjoy.
I have no idea why you or anyone would look at what happened in this case (Chipoltle) and think that your sympathy lies with the restaurant.
We have updated our privacy policy to be more clear and meet the new requirements of the GDPR. By continuing to use our site, you accept our revised Privacy Policy.
The attorney probable sent him in and now the attorney is over at the Lexus dealer ordering his new auto!!!!!
What’s really sad is that anyone would think that the attorney tried to set this whole thing up. Here we have a Mexican restaurant that refuses to sell a product to someone because he’s Mexican. How stupid is that?
And by the way, you just have to Google “Bruce Nestor” the attorney in this case to see that he’s definitely not in this for the money.
To “the other point of View”: I beg to differ with you. Based on the story, the refusal to sell the beer had nothing to do with his nationality. It had to do with the source of his identification. They wanted a US passport not a foreign passport to prove age.
Just saying: How can someone who is not an American citizen provide a U.S. passport?????? It has everything to do with his nationality! If a Mexican passport is good enough for U.S. immigration officials to allow someone to legally enter the country, why isn’t it good enough to buy a beer in a restaurant?
Other point…I did not say it was not good enough to buy a beer. I agree, it should have been good enough. My guess is that the employee is young and just did not know better. I still say it was not about nationality, but the passport. It could have just as easily been someone with a German passport and they would have turned them down also.
As with any American business, Chipolte has the right to refuse service to anyone and can specify the types of identification that are acceptable/not acceptable in order to prove age when ordering alcohol. In other words, foreigners visiting this country do not have the same rights as American citizens. And that’s the way it should be. The same is true for Americans visiting Mexico. And as far as the lawsuit is concerned, well, he not a U.S. citizen so put me on that jury.
Fish Man: You would do well to learn a little history. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits business from refusing service to anyone on the basis of race, color, religion, or national origin. Perhaps you would like to go back to the days when people could be refused service because of the color of their skin or because they were of a different religion or nationality, but unfortunaetly for you, the law doesn’t approve of such behavior anymore.
Oh, and one more thing Fish Man: The 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution provides that “[n]o State shall . . . deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” The U.S. Supreme court has held that this means exactlly what it says “any person.” Foreigners in this country enjoy nearly all of the same rights you and I enjoy.
I have no idea why you or anyone would look at what happened in this case (Chipoltle) and think that your sympathy lies with the restaurant.
So you can’t buy a beer. Wa, wa, wa. Grow up and have a soda instead you big baby! Filing this lawsuit is a load of crap!