The Volokh Conspiracy
Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent
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.
Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Even with "Heller" don't think "Constitutional Carry" is legal in New Yawk, whatever happened to Kurt Sleewa's "Guardian Angels"?? you don't have to kill these Anti-Semites, you have them start getting the few teeth they have knocked out, watch the "Hate Crimes" drop. In Georgia, Texas, Florida you don't need a permit to purchase or carry a firearm, open, or concealed, funny how there aren't Moose-lums stabbing Jews in Texas (there are Jews in Texas, remember Jack Ruby(Rubenstein)?? or Florida (I've heard there are a few there)
Frank
Its kind of a mind**** these days constantly thinking I accidentally somehow surfed to or clicked a link to Stormfront. or a Neonazi, or KKK Grand Dragon’s website or social media profile and it turns out its just some mainstream lefty spouting off now completely mainstream socially acceptable lefty positions and will turn around the next minute and start calling people racist/sexist/homophobic/transphobic/ and even antisemitic etc. IE Musk is antisemitic for liking some tweet about white replacement but you’re not for cheering on an Israeli home being bombed and jews being kidnapped and raped.
cheering on... jews being kidnapped and raped
I think he was cheering Israelis being kidnapped and raped, not Jews.
What a coincidence?! He meant to attack Israelis and accidentally attacked Jews.
Not really a coincidence: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_Law:_Israel_as_the_Nation-State_of_the_Jewish_People
Oh look, Nazi rationalizing his hatred of Jews. Totally unexpected of Nazi martin.
Thus is Jew hatred cleansed of all that historical, religious, Nazi nastiness!
Just as designed. What a memetic evolution, like moths on dirty birches.
And all at the hands of the ADL. Good job ADL, making antisemitism safe again.
Randal appreciates the work they've done to make him feel good about his antisemitism. *taps chest* Gets you right here.
Why not defend Wounded Knee by saying it wasn’t at all a massacre of Native Americans. It was just a massacre of Lakotas, not at all the same thing. If you can say Israelis are merely citizens of a political entity, not a race or a religion, you can with equal logic say the same thing about Lakotas. So Wounded Knee was all good, right? Nothing against Indians. Just those uppity Indian nationalists who keep claiming they’re native to America and keep wanting independent homelands on American land.
I'm not defending kidnapping and raping Israelis. I don't think it's somehow ok to kidnap and rape Israeli citizens.
I think it's weird that you do.
There were some Americans kidnapped & raped.
No. No pseudonymity just for being ex-IDF (which is almost totally coextensive with being Israeli) and/or just being Jewish.
If he's pseudonymous, you won't be able to target him. You'd better attack them all just to be sure.
Incredibly brave or foolish to file this-- even if he wins pseudonymity, the company and the referenced VP know who this guy is and entirely possible they pass that information to Hamas & friends and he and his family will be murdered for this pleading regardless.
On the merits, I'm not so sure. It seems like an argument that proves too much, in that every member of the IDF and hence nearly every Israeli could make the same argument and we have to maintain the presumption that litigation is open. On the other hand, surely at this point the judiciary can take notice that Muslim groups really do routinely use political murder in a way that other groups mostly don't, so crossing them entails risk that's just not true with anybody else. I'm glad I don't have to make this decision, because it seems the for and against cases both have compelling arguments.
Fortunately, since there’s zero evidence of the kind of “political murder” taking place in you racist imagination, the court has a pretty easy decision in front of it.
Hamas is well known for its reluctance to use violence against political adversaries.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fatah%E2%80%93Hamas_conflict
Islam is an ideology, not a race. Calling somebody racist for commenting on what Islam actually does is as nonsensical as calling somebody racist for commenting on what the Ku Klux Klan actually does.
To the extent you're taking the position that Muslim groups don't use political murder: May I remind you that this lawsuit traces back to the Muslim attacks on October 7? Perhaps you'd like to chat about it with the editors of Charlie Hedbo. I'll meet you on the top deck of the World Trade Center for tea & croissants to discuss. We live in a world defined by Islamic political murder and the fear of same. If you have not noticed this, then you have not been paying attention.
None of those things are “political murder” of this sort:
the company and the referenced VP know who this guy is and entirely possible they pass that information to Hamas & friends and he and his family will be murdered
That’s fully insane. That would be like granting all Ukranian Americans pseudonymity because the KGB is probably gonna come and poison them.
Calling somebody racist for commenting on what Islam actually does...
Listen to your racist ass. "Islam" doesn't do shit. Imagine someone saying "I'm not racist, I'm just commenting on what Black people do." Generalizing about what Black or Muslim people do is practically the definition of racist. Ok I'm using "racist" to include religious bigotry. Sue me.
None of those things are “political murder” of this sort:
Oh, those other Islamic political murders are slightly different! Sure, at a certain level of abstraction, all things are distinct.
That’s fully insane. That would be like granting all Ukranian Americans pseudonymity because the KGB is probably gonna come and poison them.
You’re missing the point. The Hamas-aligned exec already knows who this guy is. Whether or not he’s granted pseudonymity is beside the point; Hamas may already know who this guy is.
Listen to your racist ass. “Islam” doesn’t do shit. Imagine someone saying “I’m not racist, I’m just commenting on what Black people do.” Generalizing about what Black or Muslim people do is practically the definition of racist.
The two things are totally different. Skin color is an accidental, incidental, mostly immutable characteristic. Being Muslim is a choice. It’s not bigoted to notice what the KKK does. Nor is it bigoted to notice what Islam does. This special pleading is only ever brought up for Islam; were I to say, “KKK members lynched over 100 people in the 1890’s,” nobody would rush in to say, “Woah, that was only certain members of the KKK, they weren’t ALL involved in lynchings.” Muslims are in the same boat.
So then, do you also not believe in antisemitism?
I’m not actually sure he has a discrimination or harassment case. He may have to put up with having Hamas supporters in his workplace.
I also tend to agree that having the public know he is suing doesn’t necessarily mean he’s in any more real danger from having filed the suit than having the named executive know he’s suing. And the executive already knows.
He may have to put up with them in his workplace, but should he have to put up with being fired over a complaint that they are there?
Having the general public know he's fighting against discrimination would make it easy for random antisemites to attack him. Unless you think the allegedly pro-Hamas executive will out the employee as an ex-IDF Israeli Jew, it doesn't seem likely that the executive alone poses a similar threat.
I’m attempting to look at this in strictly legal terms, not my own view of morality or justice.
I don’t this is discrimination on one of the grounds federal civil rights law covers. Federal law doesn’t prohibit firing people over differences in political views.
One could imagjne a company that, to curry favor with Russia, adapts Putin’s line that Ukraine is naturally part of Russia, and its government are nothing but illegitimate squatters on Russian territory, seeded by settler-colonialists from the West intent to sow discord and overthrow Russian civilization, who regularly discriminate against Russian speakers. The upshot would be Russia’s invasion of Ukraine was entirely right and just. It’s not exactly Hamas’ line about Israel. But there is a certain resemblance.
If they fired an employee for disagreeing, what would be the grounds for suing?
California protects political activity as a matter of state civil rights lae. But there’s no allegation that the employee engaged in, let alone was fired for, political activity. An internal complaint is not political participation.
Imagine the following scenario:
A black employee complains about a fellow-employee retweeting a racist KKK cartoon. He then gets fired.
I see the instant case as analogous.
(For the record, I would let private companies run their own affairs, period. Meaning: both the hypothetical black plaintiff above and the plaintiff in the instant case would lose.)
Intel is lucky he didn't show up at work with a sawed-off shotgun.