In 2024, the Hindu American Foundation (HAF) and eight individual plaintiffs sued the California Civil Rights Department (CRD) for violating the rights of Hindu Americans by disparaging Hinduism and promoting racist claims about Indian and South Asian Americans. HAF has been pursuing this case for years because the CRD’s discriminatory enforcement theory explicitly and implicitly links “caste” to Hinduism and people of Indian or South Asian descent. Instead of addressing these issues on the merits, the CRD is focused on creating procedural roadblocks to avoid having to explain itself in open court.
On Monday, April 6, HAF filed a reply brief asking the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to remove those roadblocks. HAF strongly believes in the merits of its case and that the District Court erred by dismissing it on procedural grounds.
Since 2020, the CRD has repeatedly made clear that it filed a lawsuit against two managers and an entire company based on a single complaint alleging caste discrimination. The CRD doubled down on its theory that Cisco should have been preventing caste discrimination specifically from “occurring within its South Asian Indian workforce.” The CRD issued press releases touting that it “Sue[d] Cisco Systems, Inc. and Former Managers For Caste-Based Discrimination” and that it “filed a lawsuit under California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) against [Cisco] and two managers for caste-based discrimination, harassment, and retaliation.” (CRD Press releases available here and here). In its answering brief dated February 2026, the CRD attempts to distance itself from its focus on caste – but “caste” appears 57 times in its active complaint.
Rather than protect the community, the CRD premised its lawsuit on racist and demonstrably false tropes long wielded against Indians, South Asians, Hindus, and Hinduism. The CRD initially claimed that “India’s caste system” is “a strict Hindu social and religious hierarchy.” Now, the CRD claims the matter is moot because, under heavy scrutiny, it removed its most egregious slanders against Hinduism.
HAF disagrees. 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.
Needhy Shah, HAF Senior Legal Director, summarized the issue:
“The Hindu American, Indian American, and South Asian American communities are concerned, and if they aren’t, they should be. 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. 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.”
Tim Travelstead, Esq. (Shareholder, Narayan Travelstead Ku P.C.) is lead counsel representing HAF and the individual plaintiffs.
