Highlights:
- HAF asks US appeals court to revive dismissed lawsuit
- Case challenges California Civil Rights Department’s caste enforcement approach
- Dispute linked to caste discrimination complaint involving Cisco Systems
- HAF argues caste framing unfairly targets Hindus and South Asians
- Outcome could influence how caste is addressed in US workplace policies
The Hindu American Foundation (HAF) has approached a US appeals court to revive its lawsuit against the California Civil Rights Department (CRD), arguing that the agency’s approach to caste discrimination unfairly links caste to Hinduism and disproportionately targets Indian and South Asian communities.
HAF challenges caste enforcement approach in appeals court
In a reply brief filed before the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, HAF requested the court to remove what it described as procedural barriers that led a lower court to dismiss its case. HAF stated that the district court did not examine the substance of its claims, focusing instead on procedural grounds.
HAF argues that the CRD’s enforcement strategy “explicitly and implicitly links ‘caste’ to Hinduism and people of Indian or South Asian descent,” effectively singling out a minority community. According to HAF, this framing creates a broader concern about bias in how workplace discrimination laws are applied.
HAF links case to Cisco Systems complaint
The dispute originates from a high-profile complaint filed by the CRD against Cisco Systems and two of its managers. The regulator alleged caste-based discrimination within the company and publicly stated that it had “Sue(d) Cisco Systems, Inc. and Former Managers For Caste-Based Discrimination” under California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act.
HAF maintains that the CRD reinforced its position by stating that Cisco should have addressed caste discrimination “occurring within its South Asian Indian workforce.” The foundation pointed out that the term “caste” appears repeatedly in the complaint, indicating a targeted framing.
HAF raises concerns over caste and religion linkage
HAF claims that the CRD’s position relies on what it describes as “racist and demonstrably false tropes” about Indians and Hindus. The foundation specifically referenced an earlier statement by the CRD that described “India’s caste system” as “a strict Hindu social and religious hierarchy.”
Although the CRD has since removed that wording and argued that the issue is now moot, HAF maintains that the underlying concern has not been resolved.
“Removing the phrase ‘Hindu social and religious hierarchy’ doesn’t change the fact that the CRD is attempting to direct ‘caste’ policies solely at the company’s Indian, South Asian, and Hindu workforce,” the foundation said.
HAF highlights broader community impact
HAF has emphasized that the implications of the case extend beyond a single lawsuit. Needhy Shah, Senior Legal Director at HAF, said the issue affects a wider set of communities.
“The Hindu American, Indian American, and South Asian American communities are concerned, and if they aren’t, they should be,” Shah said.
She added, “The CRD is attempting to wield its enforcement powers by singling out the very minority groups it is charged to protect. Californians are paying attention, and so are employers and businesses regulated by the CRD.”
Shah also stated, “The CRD is playing caste cop, blaming caste discrimination on Hinduism, and it’s only a matter of time until they identify their next Hindu target.”
HAF case could shape US workplace caste policies
HAF is represented by lead counsel Tim Travelstead of Narayan Travelstead Ku P.C. The foundation continues to argue that the legal interpretation of caste must avoid linking it exclusively to religion or ethnicity.
The decision by the Ninth Circuit on whether to revive the case could have broader implications for how caste is addressed under US civil rights law. The outcome may influence how regulators, employers, and courts interpret caste discrimination, particularly in workplaces with significant South Asian representation.
Caste has emerged as a debated issue in parts of the United States, especially in the technology sector, where large South Asian workforces are present. While some advocacy groups support explicit caste protections in workplace policies, others argue that such measures risk reinforcing stereotypes about specific communities.
As the case proceeds, HAF continues to position its argument around fairness in enforcement and the need to avoid targeting specific religious or ethnic groups in the application of civil rights laws.
