Sarah Sanders (Press sec for Trump) asked to leave a restaurant

[Bingpot]

Just wanted to gather thoughts on this one as I'm not sure what I think.

Sarah Sanders is Trump's press secretary. She was politely asked to leave a restaurant over the weekend, following a staff vote (ostensibly in protest over the recent news over the Trump administration's treatment of immigrants).

Any thoughts?

I think they had every right to refuse to serve someone who represents such a morally vacuous and globally dangerous regime. And if you run and own your business you can refuse to serve whoever you wish.

Has anyone got behind the firewall (NYT or WaPo?) to read their version of events?

Sounds like restaurant owner had legal rights to do this.

Don't forget Steven Miller similarly told to leave a Mexican restaurant.

Good.

If I owned a shop or restaurant I can think of a lot of politicians I wouldn’t want to serve.

I think the staff were mainly immigrants and didn't feel happy to serve someone who represents an anti immigrant regime

I'm in the US. If I saw her in a restaurant I would walk out and I know many others who would do the same. The restaurant has a complete right to do what it did.

Not just that, but her tweet on the matter arguably violated ethical guidelines.

AND we're only a couple of weeks post the supreme court ruling that it was legitimate for a Christian bakery to refuse custom from two gay men. So apparently it's legitimate to refuse custom on the basis of homophobia, but not because of her political leaning...

She is utterly contemptible.

Good tbh.
Wasn't there a case where on religious grounds a bakery didn't have to bake a cake for a gay couple.
So why should you be made to serve people who you morally disagree with?

Good for them! I would refuses service to anyone in trump's regime.

Well, courts upheld the right of a bakery firm not to fulfil a gay wedding order, because it offended their religious views.

Bearing in mind the unChristian nature of the current government, I reckon the owner is well within their rights to say 'no thanks'

Can't have it one way and not the other.

What they all said.

I don't agree with discrimination. People shouldn't be refused service because of who they are even if you profoundly disagree with their views.

However, the Trump organisation have no issue with discrimination and Sarah is more than happy to be the spokeswoman for them, repeatedly lying and gaslighting the nation.

So it's kind of amusing when someone who seems keen on discrimination suddenly finds themselves on the end of discrimination herself. And the same arguments they use to support discrimination are used to discriminate against her.

She said that the action says enough about the owner of Red Hen. In the same way, the actions of the Trump administration says enough about them.

First they came for the Muslims...and no one spoke up.

Eventually, they came for the Trump Administration.

Stephen Miller & K. Nielsen harrassed or hounded out by patrons.
Saunders should count herself lucky that her exit was so polite.

Good for the restaurant. A workforce of immigrants no doubt would have refused to serve her, so the management had no choice really. They have the right to refuse service to anyone they want.
I'd have walked out if they welcomed her in.

I find how it came out ludicrous. She tweeted it - the name of the restaurant and all. She's getting a lot of hate for that, because it makes her look petty and ridiculous.

Good for her. And I hope it does well for her business

I think if people uphold the restaurants right to not serve her they must also uphold the Christians right to not serve gay couples

However I suspect people would be up in arms if that happened. So people need to make their mind up if they think service providers should have the right to refuse service on moral grounds or not.

She supports businesses to refuse to serve gay people but guess she doesn’t like it when discrimination happens to her eh...

I would argue that the safety of others in the restaurant would have been jeopardised by her remaining. Given the lax gun laws in the US.

The owner took a poll and the staff discussed it, the staff were not comfortable serving her following the child separations. I believe there were also other customers complaining and trouble starting both inside and outside the restaurant. So it extends to a safety issue, taking it out of discrimination territory, as well as moral.

A business does have a right to refuse custom. Sanders said she was refused service "because she works for POTUS" but it wasn't this, it was specifically the border and child separation issue, which she is part of by staying in her role. She doesn't just work for the president, she is part of the policy in this case as she presents it to the press and defends it.

So the owner took what they described as a "moral stance". Not a political one i.e. no republicans/democrats, but a moral one. I think that's the difference.

Yes the supreme court did rule in favour of the baker and the wedding cake for the gay wedding, religious freedom was the reason given by baker for right to not create what was considered art for a purpose contrary to religious beliefs. Now, without getting into cakes being "art" or "religious freedom" being allowed to exclude, that was the nuanced legal interpretation and the ruling was very narrow i.e. just about this one case so the Justices didn't create something that could be quoted as precedent/new law in many situations. I didn't personally agree that it was a particularly "christian" thing to refuse service, but legally wishing limited scope it was allowed. Baker also doesn't bake bachelorette party style cakes, so it wasn't only gay people focused on, not that this removes discrimination. That was a bizarre only in America case for me.

Also is different as Sanders is not working based on her "religious freedom" nor is anything she does "art".

Religious freedom, restaurant staff and owner believe in humane treatment of children, Human Rights groups have spoken out saying the child separation is inhumane and "torture" re young children isolated. So religious freedom to say don't believe in torture/mistreatment that is being internationally recognised as such and will not serve those involved.

Sanders is being criticised for using her official twitter white house account to complain about a personal incident, because this is not allowed.

Every day more crazy.....

It must be really hard for people who have to serve / look after those people who have publicly spoken out about people like them. Look at some of the horrendous stuff people like Hopkins has said about Muslims - yet no doubt someone in the public sector such as a nurse or doctor who was a Muslim or an immigrant would be expected to look after them.

Wasn’t the table also booked in another/‘her husband’s’ name so it is not like they were aware upfront that she was coming...

She also used her official/govt twitter account to defame a citizen /personal vendetta ... obviously just mirroring her boss ..

Hasn't child separation been going on since 2010? Yes Trump is a twat but it's not actually his doing! People have been happily ignoring it till now!

I can't stand the woman. I guess she will consider this bullying though. She has a total victim mentality while completely ignoring the plight of those actually being bullied.

It might give her some empathy for people who are treated differently because of who they are.

Hasn't child separation been going on since 2010? Yes Trump is a twat but it's not actually his doing! People have been happily ignoring it till now!

Even the White House admits that the level of separation that has hugely increased. It's no longer just in extreme, special cases, it's being done indiscriminately as a deterrent to limit legitimate asylum seekers. Thousands of children were separated within the space of a few weeks. That's what's so shocking to everyone.

And if you run and own your business you can refuse to serve whoever you wish.

Are you really sure you want to concede that as a general principle?