John Williams over at Thudfactor, disagrees with me on the case of this mall arrest. He likens corporations to a 'new monarchy', and says "With no legal recourse and no way to 'vote with our pocketbooks' what will we do?"

He is correct that companies cannot practice blanket discrimination on the basis of race, religion, etc. However, when a business owner chooses to discriminate against someone on the basis of their actions, and behavior, that is, and should be perfectly legal. Except in the case of a monopoly, you always have the choice to 'vote' with your pocketbook, and you always have legal recourse against a private entity. Sure, you may lose a lawsuit, but you can still file one, which no company wants to have happen.

As for this mall in New York, I agree that they were out of line for asking those people to leave. I never said what they were doing was intelligent, or good for business. I merely pointed out that they were exercising their right to refuse service to these individuals, and that the arrest for trespassing after they refused to leave was completely justified. (It is analogous to the increasing number of businesses that are refusing to sell and service French and German products, but shouldn't be confused with the Texas firm that illegally refused to do business with Israel. That was a whole 'nother matter.)

As for economic justice, from what I've heard, the mall is already facing public backlash and a lawsuit from the ACLU. Both can be financially detrimental. Also, businesses within the mall are probably not too happy about the negative publicity, which adds even more to the financial pressure.

Basically, I am sick and tired of people who stand up and make an ass of themselves, and then cry when they face ridicule and backlash. Just because you have the freedom to express yourself, doesn't mean you shouldn't pay a price for what you say. (Just as this mall will face public opinion and boycotts for it's behavior.)

Contrary to what many people believe, freedom of expression is not absolute on private property. If someone comes into your home or place of business, for instance, they are expected to abide by your rules. Just as private citizens can eject that drunken party goer who hits on their wife, businesses can require shirt and shoes, or a jacket and tie, or whatever. If you don't like it, take your business elsewhere.

UPDATE: Kudos to John Hawkins for covering the story behind the story. As the Smoking Gun points out, the two anti-war shirt wearers were heckling customers. It was those customers that had complained to mall security about the harrassment in the first place.

While this certainly reinforces the rationale behind the decision to remove the shoppers, the right of the business owner shouldn't have been an issue to begin with.