Prohibiting Caste Discrimination in the U.S. Under the Civil Rights Act of 1964
Location
Littlefoot B Room 124B
Start Date
22-4-2023 2:25 PM
End Date
22-4-2023 3:40 PM
Publication Date
2023
Disciplines
Arts and Humanities | Law | Social and Behavioral Sciences
Description
The information technology boom in 1990 saw an exponential increase in the migration of I.T. workers from India to the United States of America. Currently, there are about 2.7 million people of Indian origin living in the U.S. It is the fastest-growing immigrant group in the U.S.
However, a survey conducted by Equality Labs (NGO) between 2016 -17 among the Indian origin Americans found that the practice of caste discrimination (an extreme form of apartheid) found in India has been transmuted to the U.S.— establishment of caste organizations; discrimination of lower caste Indians at establishment supervised or owned by upper-caste Indians; prohibition of inter-caste marriages; use of caste slurs against Dalits (ex-untouchables).
Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, author of the Indian Constitution in 1917, rightly predicted, “if the Hindus migrate to other regions on the earth, the Indian caste would be a world problem.” His prediction has come true. The prevailing caste discrimination among the Indian diaspora in the United States of America raises an important question —can’t the Civil rights Act of 1964 and a host of equality clauses be invoked to abolish caste discrimination in the U.S.? This paper argues that caste can be a valid ground for discrimination in the U.S., drawing from the United Kingdom experience—Britain has a substantial number of immigrants from India. In Chandhok & Anor v Tirkey, UKEAT 0190_14_1912, the British Employment Court held that caste discrimination is unlawful even though it is not explicitly mentioned in the U.K.
Equality Act,2010. This paper argues that U.S. legal institutions could adopt the U.K. approach to prohibit caste discrimination.
Description Format
html
Recommended Citation
Kumar, Ashok, "Prohibiting Caste Discrimination in the U.S. Under the Civil Rights Act of 1964" (2023). International Conference on Hate Studies. 78.
https://repository.gonzaga.edu/icohs/2023/seventh/78
Full Text of Presentation
wf_no
Media Format
flash_audio
Session Title
Leadership, Othering, and Discrimination
Type
Panel
Prohibiting Caste Discrimination in the U.S. Under the Civil Rights Act of 1964
Littlefoot B Room 124B
The information technology boom in 1990 saw an exponential increase in the migration of I.T. workers from India to the United States of America. Currently, there are about 2.7 million people of Indian origin living in the U.S. It is the fastest-growing immigrant group in the U.S.
However, a survey conducted by Equality Labs (NGO) between 2016 -17 among the Indian origin Americans found that the practice of caste discrimination (an extreme form of apartheid) found in India has been transmuted to the U.S.— establishment of caste organizations; discrimination of lower caste Indians at establishment supervised or owned by upper-caste Indians; prohibition of inter-caste marriages; use of caste slurs against Dalits (ex-untouchables).
Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, author of the Indian Constitution in 1917, rightly predicted, “if the Hindus migrate to other regions on the earth, the Indian caste would be a world problem.” His prediction has come true. The prevailing caste discrimination among the Indian diaspora in the United States of America raises an important question —can’t the Civil rights Act of 1964 and a host of equality clauses be invoked to abolish caste discrimination in the U.S.? This paper argues that caste can be a valid ground for discrimination in the U.S., drawing from the United Kingdom experience—Britain has a substantial number of immigrants from India. In Chandhok & Anor v Tirkey, UKEAT 0190_14_1912, the British Employment Court held that caste discrimination is unlawful even though it is not explicitly mentioned in the U.K.
Equality Act,2010. This paper argues that U.S. legal institutions could adopt the U.K. approach to prohibit caste discrimination.