🚀 go-pugleaf

The text of the amendment is enlightening, and as one of the providers of it
pointed out, it is the final clause about being unable to make claims on the
basis of discrimination that is the damaging part.  All the rest could be
seen as grandstanding and unpleasant but without much legal force.

I'm sure there's been plenty of legal debate about whether the constraint 
against a claim of discrimination could stand up, and maybe somebody familiar
in Colorado could (very briefly) summarize it.

But the fact remains that the amendment passed indicating a very hostile
view, one that goes beyond what I regard as acceptable limits of acceptance
and tolerance.  On this basis I would support critical action by my
professional association with respect to future meetings in Colorado and
with respect to public statements.  I would note that the criticism by ALA
(and others) should be based on the intolerance and allowed state hostility to
a minority group, not on the substance of what the minority group is.

But the January midwinter ALA is too soon to practically cancel or shift;
it could however be a forum for a properly organized protest to the state and
to its citizens.  

--Peter Graham, Rutgers University Libraries