GINA (Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act) was signed into US federal law in 2008, and (to my knowledge) basically says you can't discriminate based on ones genetic information with regards to employment and insurance.
In a previous question I asked, it seems the answer is that one can discriminate against ugly people (so long as it doesn't explicitly dip into a proxy for discriminating against a protected class like e.g. race or sex). This includes short men, or people with a cleft lip, vitiligo, facial paralysis, or any other unattractive maladies that aren't counted as disabilities.
However, would GINA be proper grounds to protect these classes? A man's height is explicitly due to genetics for the most part. Same with cleft lip, vitiligo, and even just having an "unattractive" face for that matter. Discriminating against a girl with a cleft lip is discriminating against someone specifically because of what their genetic code is. So my question is, in such cases, could GINA reasonably be applied to categorize the discrimination as something legally actionable? Or is GINA not far-reaching/strong enough to apply?
Lastly, a lot of other things are generally considered genetic (e.g. alcoholism, several mental illnesses, etc.). Does GINA protect from being discriminated against for these things too?
As with my previous question, assume that there is irrefutable proof of the discrimination. E.g. the recruiter explicitly said she didn't hire the guy cuz he was so short, or the cleft lip would be too ugly to look at all day long. And assume that the genetic condition the person had had nothing to do with the job they were meant to perform.
