The applicable laws protect “language minorities” or discuss “race, color, or national origin.” The race vs ethnicity argument isn’t legally relevant since the scope is broader than that.
If it’s that they’re white and born in the USA, it doesn’t matter. If they’re Latino because of ancestry, it’s well established in US law that that’s covered by “national origin.” They’re still a protected group.
“Protected” from discrimination, etc. I understand what you mean. Maybe that’s not a great word to use in this case, but it’s not lawful to use that grouping method for these purposes — good or bad. It can (and has) been used to worsen such a demographic’s situation instead of help.
The applicable laws protect “language minorities” or discuss “race, color, or national origin.” The race vs ethnicity argument isn’t legally relevant since the scope is broader than that.
Aren’t Latinos mostly white (christian) US-Americans?
Perhaps, but what are you getting at?
If it’s that they’re white and born in the USA, it doesn’t matter. If they’re Latino because of ancestry, it’s well established in US law that that’s covered by “national origin.” They’re still a protected group.
How are they being protected by preventing a representative be selected by them?
“Protected” from discrimination, etc. I understand what you mean. Maybe that’s not a great word to use in this case, but it’s not lawful to use that grouping method for these purposes — good or bad. It can (and has) been used to worsen such a demographic’s situation instead of help.