ABSTRACT
The advent of anti-discrimination laws from the 1960s onwards marked a shift in that boundary between state action and private conduct. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 in the USA rejected that boundary because it needed to address broader structures of segregation practiced against African Americans, that were causing severe economic disadvantage and social exclusion. The abandonment of the boundary between public and private spheres based upon the criterion of state action poses the problem of devising a new delimitation of the scope of the private sphere that should be kept outside the scope of anti-discrimination laws that is based on moral and political principles. Discrimination laws generally apply to employment and employment-like relationships, to landlord and tenant relationships, to associations including trade unions and political parties, and to educational institutions. Using the proportionality approach, Khaitan produces an insightful account of the scope of the unregulated private sphere which focuses on the issue of who should be duty-bearers.
