Some times in conversations that a candidate is too young/old. I wonder as it is illegal for companies to discriminate on basis of race/age/gender etc.
So will it be illegal for voters to think/decide on these factors?
If it is illegal, how it can be proved?
The starting point is: discrimination is legal unless there is a law that says it isn't.
So for example, when I advertise a plumbing position, I can discriminate on the basis of if a candidate is or is not a plumber and, further, I can discriminate on how good a plumber I think they are.
What I can't do, in the united-states is discriminate against someone on the basis of age if they are 40 or older. It is legal for me to discriminate against someone on age if they are younger than 40. Why? Because that's what the law says.
The full list of what constitutes illegal discrimination in employment is a person's race, color, religion, sex (including gender identity, sexual orientation, and pregnancy), national origin, age (40 or older), disability or genetic information. It is also illegal to retaliate against a person because he or she complained about discrimination, filed a charge of discrimination, or participated in an employment discrimination investigation or lawsuit.
Voters are free to vote for the candidate of their choice based on whatever reason they want. If I want to decide that the only candidates I will vote for are female homosexuals between the ages of 27 and 62 with one leg and a pirate accent, then that's my right.
So will it be illegal for voters to think/decide on these factors?
If it is illegal, how it can be proved?
Take in consideration:
The burden of proof is on the accuser. To press criminal charges against anyone, the prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt that a crime happened. With hard evidence.
in the USA, ballots are secret. There's no way to prove how a specific voter voted.
In the USA, a person is protected against self-incrimination by the Fifth Amendment.
Forcing to reveal how a particular person voted can lead to Vote-Buying, a kind of electoral fraud. It is in all parties interest to make sure vote secrecy stands.
A rational voter could vote any way they wanted. Even if voting for reason X or Y was a crime, unless they gave up their Fifth Amendment rights (and a reasonable person wouldn't as it brings them no benefits), it is impossible to prosecute such a case.
By (4) we can see that even trying to collect evidence on how a person voted, reasons notwithstanding, is a felony.
So, no. It is not illegal to use any criteria to cast a ballot because it is impossible to prosecute, even if a law against it existed. It doesn't but we won't attempt to prove a negative for obvious reasons.
Now, if the voter is not rational and goes on social media or any other public forum and brag they didn't vote for X because X has the Y protected characteristic (be it age, gender, ethnical group, disability, religion, etc), they could be liable for libel based on their statments, but not the vote.
