Intel N.Y.-Based Israeli Employee Alleges Firing Over Complaints of Executive's Pro-Hamas Posts, Seeks Pseudonymity

From a motion filed today in Doe v. Intel Corp. (S.D.N.Y.); for more on the underlying lawsuit, see Intel Axes Israeli NYC Engineer Who Complained About Boss 'Liking' X Posts Cheering Hamas: Suit (N.Y. Post, Beri Kochman):

John Doe is a Jewish Israeli executive at Intel, a global multi-technology company, who proudly served in the Israeli Defense Forces ("IDF") before joining the company. At Intel, John Doe was forced to report to a supervisor—Intel Vice President Alaa Badr ("Badr")—who was openly and proudly supporting the terrorist organization Hamas and celebrating the deaths of Israelis after Hamas's brutal October 7, 2023 attacks on Israel which took the lives of over 1,000 innocent Israelis while hundreds more were taken captive by the terrorist group. Indeed, Badr openly liked social media posts—for anyone to see—celebrating the death of IDF soldiers, like John Doe, and celebrating "successful" Hamas missile strikes, including one that struck Mr. Doe's family home. In no uncertain terms, the heinous acts doled by Hamas on October 7, 2023 changed the landscape of the modern world for Israeli Jewish citizens worldwide.

The Israel-Hamas War that erupted after Hamas's October 7th attack has led to a frenetic and violent rise in hate crimes against Jews around the world, but specifically in New York where Plaintiff resides. According to the Anti-Defamation League (the "ADL"), antisemitic incidents in New York soared 110 percent in 2023—the highest number the ADL has ever recorded in New York and the second-highest number reported in any state across America. Indeed, nearly 14 percent of all antisemitic incidents reported nationwide in 2023 took place in New York State, and in the fourth quarter of 2023 alone, the ADL recorded 815 antisemitic incidents in New York. These statistics, of course, only reflect the number of reported incidents. The actual numbers are likely significantly higher.

New York City Mayor Eric Adams recognized the inherent danger that Jewish people in New York face when he said that after October 7th, he was seeing a "normalization of antisemitism in New York…" while district attorneys representing all 62 counties in New York recognized the increase in violence, condemned violence against Jewish people and pledged to prosecute hate crimes aggressively. Despite this, however, violence against Jewish people in New York has continued to escalate in 2024 with antisemitic hate crimes climbing sharply by 45 percent in the first quarter of the year. According to New York Police Department ("NYPD") data, in July 2024 alone, the NYPD investigated 30 anti-Jewish offenses, and there have been 229 antisemitic hate crimes reported in just the first seven months of 2024.

These statistics speak to the reality that all Jewish people are facing, but former IDF personnel—like John Doe—are at an even greater risk of being targeted both domestically and by foreign actors if they are revealed to be former IDF military members. There have been countless reports of individuals being attacked simply for wearing IDF clothing. As a result, John Doe publicly stating he served in the IDF and bringing these claims places him in significant danger of being subjected to harassment, threats, and physical violence. Given the heightened violence in both the United States and Israel since the October 7th massacre, Plaintiff has a reasonable fear of retaliatory physical harm to both himself and his family if he is publicly named.

Plaintiff is understandably and exceptionally fearful that in filing this Complaint, he (and his family who remain in Israel) are at risk of great harm. This is not a trivial fear. There have been endless reports of Jewish people being attacked simply for existing, including being spit on, beat up, and hit with a baseball bat simply for "looking Jewish." While these seemingly random acts of violence have become commonplace and create a generalized fear, there have also been numerous targeted attacked against Jewish people in New York, including the five Jewish board members of the Brooklyn Museum whose homes were vandalized across Manhattan and Brooklyn after the museum held an exhibition commemorating those killed in the October 7th massacre; the Columbia University executive whose apartment building was vandalized with red paint in the shape of inverted triangles—a symbol used by Hamas to mark Israeli targets, live crickets and mealworms, and threatening posters; the Jewish student hit in the face with rocks while displaying an Israeli flag, and the Jewish man stabbed in the stomach by a suspect yelling "Free Palestine" and shouting "Do you want to die?"

It also cannot be overstated the level of risk Plaintiff's family in Israel will be in if he is publicly named given that Hamas is within striking distance of their location and operates with astonishing brutality. Filing this complaint using Plaintiff's real name unequivocally puts his family's life at risk at the hands of Hamas….

Under normal circumstances, being a Jewish-Israeli former IDF soldier may not be considered highly sensitive. But these are not normal times. Since October 7th, the streets of New York have been swarmed with anti-Israel protests and Jewish and Israeli people have been the targets of numerous attacks in New York, where Plaintiff resides. As described herein, people who are merely believed to be Jewish have been physically attacked. Given the current political climate, this case will likely receive a significant amount of media attention, which will not only place a direct target on Plaintiff's head but will also have a chilling effect on future plaintiffs in similar circumstances should Plaintiff be forced to disclose his identity….

Defendant Badr has actively celebrated the death of Israelis, going so far as to like social media posts cheering on burning them alive. The terrorist organization Hamas is within mere miles of Plaintiff's family in Israel. If Plaintiff's identity is made public, he and his family would be at a significant risk of physical harm by both anti-Israel protestors in the United States and the terrorist organization Hamas.

It is evident that both anti-Israel protestors in the United States and Hamas have shown through their past conduct that they will use every tool at their disposal to harm those who challenge their anti-Israeli belief systems. There can be little doubt that if Plaintiff's name is disclosed publicly, Plaintiff and his family will be subjected a campaign of intimidation and harassment at the very least, and real physical harm and possibly death at the worst….

Defendant already knows the true identity of Plaintiff. As such, "Defendant[] would not be prejudiced by an anonymous proceeding because Defendant[] knows specifically who filed this lawsuit." Plainly, nothing about Plaintiff's anonymity prejudices Defendants nor does it in any way impact Defendant's ability to fully litigate this matter. As detailed herein, however, the disclosure of Plaintiff's name has potentially severe, and dangerous, implications for Plaintiff and his family….

Further, Plaintiff has taken meaningful steps to keep his identity confidential. For example, he has not spoken publicly about the events that underly the causes of action or otherwise publicly disclosed the fact that he is John Doe. In fact, almost none of Plaintiff's closest family members or friends know that he is John Doe or that he has filed a lawsuit. Moreover, Plaintiff's social media profiles are all on "private" settings such that the general public cannot view the content nor identify him through characteristics or traits noted in the Complaint….

"[P]arty anonymity does not obstruct the public's view of the issues joined or the court's performance in resolving them." "The assurance of fairness preserved by public presence at a trial is not lost when one party's cause is pursued under a fictitious name." Thus, whether Plaintiff proceeds anonymously is of no matter to the underlying facts and causes of action, however, as detailed above, Plaintiff remaining anonymous is of great importance to his well-being and the well-being of his family who remains in Israel.

Moreover, Badr publicly celebrated the death of Israelis and IDF soldiers. In essence, Badr publicly celebrated the death of Mr. Doe's community and family—and Mr. Doe, for that matter, who is an Israeli IDF veteran himself. There is simply no telling, given the growing unrest that floods the streets of New York on a daily basis, the untold harm that would befall Mr. Doe or his family should his identity be revealed.

Finally, this action is almost certain to get international media coverage, particularly in Israel given Intel's close ties to Israel—including the fact that Intel is Israel's largest private employer. As such, terrorist organizations such as Hamas, Hezbollah and the Houthis are virtually certain to learn about this action. If John Doe is identified, these organizations will be able to identify his family members, many of whom still live in Israel, which will make them targets for international violence.

Cases seeking pseudonymity are badly split in all sorts of areas (e.g., whether alleged sexual assault victims may sue pseudonymously), but where a court is persuaded that revealing the plaintiff's identity would indeed create a serious risk of physical attack (and not just, say, social or professional ostracism), courts tend to be open to pseudonymity. At the same time, courts are often skeptical about claims of risk of physical harm if they see them as too speculative; for more, see my The Law of Pseudonymous Litigation (especially pp. 1397-99). I expect to blog about defendant's opposition, when and if that is filed (some defendants don't oppose plaintiffs' requests for pseudonymity), and about the judge's eventual decision.