NEW DELHI: The California Civil Rights Department on Monday voluntarily dismissed its case in the superior court against Cisco Systems’ Indian American engineers Sundar Iyer and Ramana Kompella, who faced allegations of caste based discrimination. A mediation conference between Cisco and the CRD is still set for May 2. The CDC is keeping alive its litigation against the Silicon Valley tech giant and sent a statement to The Associated Press on Monday saying the case against Cisco “remains ongoing”. “We will continue to vigorously litigate the matter on behalf of the people of California,” it said, adding that it remains committed to “securing relief and ensuring company wide, corrective action.”
The CRD case, which was filed nearly three years ago, made headlines in the US and in India. The two Cisco engineers, Iyer and Kompella, were accused in the CDC lawsuit of discriminating and harassing an employee on the basis of caste. The employee belonged to the Dalit community. That case has now been dismissed by an order of the Santa Clara Superior County Court last week. California’s lawsuit against Cisco, filed in July 2020, alleged that the Dalit engineer received less pay and fewer opportunities and that the defendants retaliated against him when he opposed “unlawful practices, contrary to the traditional order between the Dalit and higher castes”. The engineer worked on a team at Cisco’s San Jose headquarters with Indians who all immigrated to the US as adults, and all of whom were of high caste, the lawsuit stated.
The Hindu American Foundation (HAF), an advocacy group in the US, has reacted with relief to the dismissal of the suit against the Indian American engineers and “claims about the Hindu religion and xenophobic depictions of people of Indian origin”.
“Two Indian Americans endured a nearly three year nightmare of unending investigations, a brutal online witch hunt, and a presumption of guilt in the media after the CRD sullied their reputation alleging that they engaged in discrimination based on caste,” said Suhag Shukla, executive director of HAF. “We are thrilled that Iyer and Kompella have been vindicated along with our position that the state has no right to attribute wrongdoing to Hindu and Indian Americans simply because of their religion or ethnicity.”
The dismissal, according to a HAF press release, comes just a few months after the Hindu American Foundation filed a Section 1983 claim in US District Court asserting that CRD’s case against Cisco and the engineers infringed on the civil rights of Hindus living in California by unconstitutionally and falsely asserting that Hinduism mandates caste discrimination. HAF’s filing took no position on the facts of the case.
Sources close to the CRD case revealed that HAF’s federal civil rights claim may have played a critical role in kick starting the case dismissal, according to HAF. “The CRD’s lead attorney pursuing the Cisco case was fired over another case, HAF’s federal claim was filed, and both the constitutional issues raised by the manner in which CRD pursued its case against Cisco and fabrication of evidence against the engineers became increasingly clear.”
The Indian American community has been sharply divided on this case and on the issue of caste discrimination. While Hindus for Human Rights and Hindus for Caste Equity say a safeguard is necessary to protect vulnerable community members from caste-based discrimination; HAF and the Coalition of Hindus of North America oppose such policies arguing that they will specifically target Hindus and Indian Americans who are commonly associated with the caste system.
The lawsuit against Cisco and its engineers fuelled a movement against caste discrimination led by groups including Oakland, California-based Equality Labs. This lawsuit has also been named in first ever ordinance passed by the Seattle City Council in February to include caste in its anti-discrimination laws. Last month, California State Senator Aisha Wahab proposed a Bill, which if it passes, could make the state the first in the nation to outlaw caste-based bias.
“This trial presents a cautionary tale of the legal morass that awaits Indians, Hindus and all South Asians, if the state of California adopts a policy that applies to only South Asians and institutionalizes false and negative claims that stigmatize our community” said Samir Kalra, HAF’s California based managing director. “If you want to know why we’re opposed to ethnically profiling South Asians with the creation of caste as a stand-alone category, this case launched by the CRD is a brutal illustration of a fate that can befall any South Asian working in the state,” he added.
HAF’s legal team noted that the best avenue of remedy for allegations of caste or other intra-community discrimination is under existing law and categories such as national origin, ethnicity or ancestry.
On the other hand, Thenmozhi Soundararajan, founder and executive director of Equality Labs, a Dalit-led advocacy group, said last week’s action “does not change anything” including the fact that the Cisco case “has given so many Dalits the courage to come forward with their stories about caste discrimination in education, the medical and tech industries.”
“This is not a loss, but progress,” she said. “The Dalit community owes (the engineer) and the Civil Rights Department gratitude for having the courage to bring such a historic case forward.”
Sharing the details of the court filings of the case against the Cisco engineers, the HAF press release said: “Iyer, the CEO of the division, was accused of harassment on the basis of caste despite evidence that he actively recruited ‘John Doe’, who self-identifies as Dalit and on whose behalf CRD filed suit, and offered Doe a generous starting package with stock grants valued in the millions.
“These same court records showed that Iyer also hired at least one other self-identified Dalit who held one of the only three leadership positions in the division. This individual was also offered the other two leadership positions, including the one John Doe claimed discrimination over, prior to Doe filing his discrimination complaint.”
Court filings clearly indicate that CRD was aware of the diversity within the division and despite over eight years of Doe’s employment, CRD was unable to allege anything against Iyer or Kompella that legally or factually constituted harassment, HAF said in its release.
Just before CRD dismissed its case, Iyer and Kompella echoed the legal arguments of HAF’s civil rights claim in a motion for sanctions against CRD and alleged that the state engaged in prosecutorial abuse and unethical conduct, including suppressing and fabricating key evidence.
In their motion, the engineers also argued that the CRD has no right to define what Hindus believe and no standing to assign them a religion or caste upon which presumptions about wrongdoing are made on the basis of their national origin or ancestry. CRD was aware of the fact that Iyer had publicly identified as an agnostic for over 20 years, and was still falsely identified as Hindu by the state. Based on a December case management filing, CRD’s withdrawal of its case was premised on Iyer and Kompella withdrawing their motion for sanctions.
HAF has criticised Equality Labs and said that the CRD relied upon its report to bolster its claims of widespread caste discrimination in the tech sector, including at Cisco. “The judge refused to accept this report as evidence in February 2021.”
HAF’s legal team had been involved in the Cisco caste case since the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing (renamed to the California Civil Rights Department in 2022) first sued the engineers. HAF lawyers also believe that the CRD case offers important insight into consequences South Asians in California will face if State Senator Wahab’s proposed caste bill that would add ‘caste’ to state-wide non-discrimination policies, SB 403, is implemented.
The CRD case, which was filed nearly three years ago, made headlines in the US and in India. The two Cisco engineers, Iyer and Kompella, were accused in the CDC lawsuit of discriminating and harassing an employee on the basis of caste. The employee belonged to the Dalit community. That case has now been dismissed by an order of the Santa Clara Superior County Court last week. California’s lawsuit against Cisco, filed in July 2020, alleged that the Dalit engineer received less pay and fewer opportunities and that the defendants retaliated against him when he opposed “unlawful practices, contrary to the traditional order between the Dalit and higher castes”. The engineer worked on a team at Cisco’s San Jose headquarters with Indians who all immigrated to the US as adults, and all of whom were of high caste, the lawsuit stated.
The Hindu American Foundation (HAF), an advocacy group in the US, has reacted with relief to the dismissal of the suit against the Indian American engineers and “claims about the Hindu religion and xenophobic depictions of people of Indian origin”.
“Two Indian Americans endured a nearly three year nightmare of unending investigations, a brutal online witch hunt, and a presumption of guilt in the media after the CRD sullied their reputation alleging that they engaged in discrimination based on caste,” said Suhag Shukla, executive director of HAF. “We are thrilled that Iyer and Kompella have been vindicated along with our position that the state has no right to attribute wrongdoing to Hindu and Indian Americans simply because of their religion or ethnicity.”
The dismissal, according to a HAF press release, comes just a few months after the Hindu American Foundation filed a Section 1983 claim in US District Court asserting that CRD’s case against Cisco and the engineers infringed on the civil rights of Hindus living in California by unconstitutionally and falsely asserting that Hinduism mandates caste discrimination. HAF’s filing took no position on the facts of the case.
Sources close to the CRD case revealed that HAF’s federal civil rights claim may have played a critical role in kick starting the case dismissal, according to HAF. “The CRD’s lead attorney pursuing the Cisco case was fired over another case, HAF’s federal claim was filed, and both the constitutional issues raised by the manner in which CRD pursued its case against Cisco and fabrication of evidence against the engineers became increasingly clear.”
The Indian American community has been sharply divided on this case and on the issue of caste discrimination. While Hindus for Human Rights and Hindus for Caste Equity say a safeguard is necessary to protect vulnerable community members from caste-based discrimination; HAF and the Coalition of Hindus of North America oppose such policies arguing that they will specifically target Hindus and Indian Americans who are commonly associated with the caste system.
The lawsuit against Cisco and its engineers fuelled a movement against caste discrimination led by groups including Oakland, California-based Equality Labs. This lawsuit has also been named in first ever ordinance passed by the Seattle City Council in February to include caste in its anti-discrimination laws. Last month, California State Senator Aisha Wahab proposed a Bill, which if it passes, could make the state the first in the nation to outlaw caste-based bias.
“This trial presents a cautionary tale of the legal morass that awaits Indians, Hindus and all South Asians, if the state of California adopts a policy that applies to only South Asians and institutionalizes false and negative claims that stigmatize our community” said Samir Kalra, HAF’s California based managing director. “If you want to know why we’re opposed to ethnically profiling South Asians with the creation of caste as a stand-alone category, this case launched by the CRD is a brutal illustration of a fate that can befall any South Asian working in the state,” he added.
HAF’s legal team noted that the best avenue of remedy for allegations of caste or other intra-community discrimination is under existing law and categories such as national origin, ethnicity or ancestry.
On the other hand, Thenmozhi Soundararajan, founder and executive director of Equality Labs, a Dalit-led advocacy group, said last week’s action “does not change anything” including the fact that the Cisco case “has given so many Dalits the courage to come forward with their stories about caste discrimination in education, the medical and tech industries.”
“This is not a loss, but progress,” she said. “The Dalit community owes (the engineer) and the Civil Rights Department gratitude for having the courage to bring such a historic case forward.”
Sharing the details of the court filings of the case against the Cisco engineers, the HAF press release said: “Iyer, the CEO of the division, was accused of harassment on the basis of caste despite evidence that he actively recruited ‘John Doe’, who self-identifies as Dalit and on whose behalf CRD filed suit, and offered Doe a generous starting package with stock grants valued in the millions.
“These same court records showed that Iyer also hired at least one other self-identified Dalit who held one of the only three leadership positions in the division. This individual was also offered the other two leadership positions, including the one John Doe claimed discrimination over, prior to Doe filing his discrimination complaint.”
Court filings clearly indicate that CRD was aware of the diversity within the division and despite over eight years of Doe’s employment, CRD was unable to allege anything against Iyer or Kompella that legally or factually constituted harassment, HAF said in its release.
Just before CRD dismissed its case, Iyer and Kompella echoed the legal arguments of HAF’s civil rights claim in a motion for sanctions against CRD and alleged that the state engaged in prosecutorial abuse and unethical conduct, including suppressing and fabricating key evidence.
In their motion, the engineers also argued that the CRD has no right to define what Hindus believe and no standing to assign them a religion or caste upon which presumptions about wrongdoing are made on the basis of their national origin or ancestry. CRD was aware of the fact that Iyer had publicly identified as an agnostic for over 20 years, and was still falsely identified as Hindu by the state. Based on a December case management filing, CRD’s withdrawal of its case was premised on Iyer and Kompella withdrawing their motion for sanctions.
HAF has criticised Equality Labs and said that the CRD relied upon its report to bolster its claims of widespread caste discrimination in the tech sector, including at Cisco. “The judge refused to accept this report as evidence in February 2021.”
HAF’s legal team had been involved in the Cisco caste case since the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing (renamed to the California Civil Rights Department in 2022) first sued the engineers. HAF lawyers also believe that the CRD case offers important insight into consequences South Asians in California will face if State Senator Wahab’s proposed caste bill that would add ‘caste’ to state-wide non-discrimination policies, SB 403, is implemented.