Yes, and everybody who has been forced to settle out a discrimination case where the alleged facts included questions about the candidate's zip code had a reason other than "we don't want Black folks working here" answer, and if they were dumb enough to take that case all the way to court, they might even have prevailed with it, but in employment law it's the ride not the rap.
I'm assuming everybody who's been a witness (or god forbid a party) to a protected-class employment lawsuit had their eyebrows shoot up all the way off their head at the premise of this article, which is "rooting out secret North Koreans from an incoming flow of candidates, in part using forensic interview questions".
I'm not interested in the axiomatic derivation. Just search for "illegal interview questions" and things like "residency" or "where candidate lives". I'm confident there's a way to handle this, but just Leeroy Jenkins-ing it with "what's your nearest Metro stop" probably isn't it.
I'm assuming everybody who's been a witness (or god forbid a party) to a protected-class employment lawsuit had their eyebrows shoot up all the way off their head at the premise of this article, which is "rooting out secret North Koreans from an incoming flow of candidates, in part using forensic interview questions".