San Francisco, CA, June 27, 2024 — The Ninth Circuit issued an opinion today in Rajaram v. Meta Platforms, Inc., No. 22-16870 (9th Cir.) holding that 42 U.S.C. § 1981 extends to claims of citizenship discrimination against U.S. citizens.
Kotchen & Low LLP’s client, Purushothaman Rajaram, sued Meta (Facebook) for citizenship discrimination, alleging that Meta prefers to hire foreign visa workers rather than U.S. citizens for positions in the U.S. While the Supreme Court has recognized that Section 1981 applies to citizenship discrimination claims brought by non-U.S. citizens, courts are divided on whether Section 1981 applies to citizenship discrimination claims brought by U.S. citizens.
Section 1981 provides, in relevant part, that “[a]ll persons within the jurisdiction of the United States shall have the same right . . . to make and enforce contracts . . . as is enjoyed by white citizens.” 42 U.S.C. § 1981(a). The Ninth Circuit panel ruled 2 to 1 in favor of Mr. Rajaram. In an opinion authored by Judge Eric Miller, the Court reasoned:
An employer that discriminates against United States citizens gives one class of people—noncitizens, or perhaps some subset of noncitizens—a greater right to make contracts than “white citizens.” If some noncitizens have a greater right to make contracts than “white citizens,” then it is not true that “[a]ll persons” have the “same right” to make contracts as “white citizens.” That is precisely what the literal text of the statute prohibits.
Judge Lawrence VanDyke dissented, reasoning that the statute guarantees “[a]ll persons” only the rights “enjoyed by white citizens,” and that Mr. Rajaram does not allege that he has not been treated as well as a citizen, only that he has not been treated as well as a noncitizen.
Even the dissent recognized, however, that U.S. citizens should be protected from citizenship discrimination:
I personally like the majority’s conclusion better than mine. It’s only natural to think that this sort of discrimination protection should be reciprocal—if noncitizens can’t be discriminated against in favor of citizens, then surely citizens shouldn’t be disadvantaged in favor of noncitizens.
The district court’s granting of a motion to dismiss was reversed, and the case will return to the trial court for further proceedings. The case is still in the preliminary stages and the parties have yet to begin discovery.
The parties’ briefs are linked here: Opening Brief; Opposition Brief; Reply Brief.
Media coverage: Reuters; Bloomberg; Forbes; Law360 (subscription).
