Meta Platforms (Employment/Citizenship Discrimination Claim)

The Meta discrimination lawsuit began when Purushothaman Rajaram, a naturalized U.S. citizen, alleged that Meta Platforms, Inc. refused to hire him because the company preferred to hire noncitizens holding H-1B visas, to whom it could pay lower wages. This legal action arose after multiple American citizens applied for jobs at Meta and were not hired, leading them to believe the company discriminated against American citizens in its hiring practices. The case has become a landmark decision regarding employment and citizenship bias claims under federal civil rights law.

Initially, the district court dismissed Rajaram's complaint in November 2022, ruling that Section 1981 of the Civil Rights Act does not prohibit discrimination based on U.S. citizenship. However, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reversed this decision in June 2024, holding that the statute does protect U.S. citizens from citizenship-based discrimination in hiring. This Meta discrimination lawsuit has significant implications for how companies approach hiring practices and visa-holder preferences.

The case builds upon previous enforcement action by the U.S. Department of Justice, which in 2019 initiated an investigation into whether Meta's hiring practices discriminated against U.S. citizens and nationals in favor of H-1B workers. DOJ found that Meta intentionally deterred U.S. workers from applying for certain permanent positions the company earmarked for H-1B employees who requested permanent residency status, leading to a settlement in October 2021 where Meta paid $4.75 million in civil penalties and $9.5 million into a settlement fund.

What Is Citizenship Discrimination?

Citizenship discrimination occurs when an employer treats job applicants or employees differently based on their citizenship status rather than their qualifications, skills, or ability to perform the job. In the context of the Meta discrimination lawsuit, this involves allegations that a company systematically favored noncitizen visa holders over U.S. citizens for employment positions. This type of discrimination can manifest through hiring preferences, where companies deliberately choose temporary visa holders because they may accept lower wages or face restrictions that make them less likely to leave for other opportunities. Federal law, particularly Section 1981 of the Civil Rights Act, now provides protection against such practices following the Ninth Circuit's interpretation in this case.

Why Are People Suing Meta Platforms?

The Meta discrimination lawsuit centers on allegations of systematic preference for visa holders over qualified American citizens. Multiple plaintiffs have joined this legal action based on similar experiences during their job application processes.

• Preferential hiring of H-1B visa holders: Plaintiffs allege that Meta systematically favored foreign nationals with temporary work visas over equally or more qualified U.S. citizens for technology positions.
• Wage-based motivation: The lawsuit claims Meta's preference for visa holders was financially motivated, allowing the company to pay lower salaries to workers who had limited employment mobility due to visa restrictions.
• Pattern and practice discrimination: Rather than isolated incidents, the Meta discrimination lawsuit alleges a company-wide pattern of discriminatory hiring that affected numerous U.S. citizen applicants across multiple positions and time periods.
• Rejection of qualified candidates: Plaintiffs in the case presented evidence of their strong qualifications and relevant experience, yet were repeatedly passed over for positions that went to noncitizen applicants.
• Statistical disparities: The employment and citizenship bias claims include evidence that Meta's workforce contained approximately 15% H-1B visa holders, significantly higher than the roughly 0.5% U.S. average across industries.

These allegations form the basis of claims that Meta violated federal civil rights protections by discriminating against U.S. citizens in its hiring decisions.

Legal Basis for Lawsuits against Meta Platforms

The Meta discrimination lawsuit relies on several legal foundations that establish the right to bring employment and citizenship bias claims against employers.

• 42 U.S.C. § 1981: This provision of the Civil Rights Act of 1866 guarantees all persons the same right to make and enforce contracts as is enjoyed by white citizens, and the Ninth Circuit determined this protection extends to citizenship discrimination.
• Equal employment opportunity principles: Federal law prohibits employers from making hiring decisions based on protected characteristics rather than legitimate business qualifications and job-related criteria.
• Pattern-or-practice discrimination framework: The Meta discrimination lawsuit utilizes a legal theory that demonstrates systematic discriminatory behavior across the organization rather than isolated individual incidents.
• Prior DOJ settlement evidence: The earlier Department of Justice investigation and settlement regarding similar discriminatory practices at Meta provides supporting context for the current litigation.
• But-for causation standard: Plaintiffs must demonstrate that but for Meta's alleged citizenship preference, they would have been hired for the positions they sought, establishing a direct causal link between discrimination and harm.

The legal framework supporting this Meta discrimination lawsuit represents an expansion of civil rights protections to cover citizenship-based employment discrimination.

Financial Compensation Victims of Citizenship Discrimination Can Pursue

Individuals affected by the Meta discrimination lawsuit and similar employment and citizenship bias claims may be entitled to various forms of financial recovery.

• Compensatory damages: Victims can seek monetary compensation for actual losses suffered, including lost wages, lost benefits, and the difference between what they would have earned and what they actually earned during the period of discrimination.
• Lost career opportunities: Compensation may cover the value of missed promotions, professional development, and career advancement that would have occurred if the discriminatory hiring had not taken place.
• Emotional distress damages: The Meta discrimination lawsuit allows for recovery of damages related to the psychological harm, stress, anxiety, and emotional suffering caused by discriminatory treatment.
• Punitive damages: In cases involving willful or malicious discrimination, courts may award punitive damages designed to punish the employer and deter future discriminatory conduct.
• Attorney's fees and costs: Successful plaintiffs in civil rights cases can typically recover reasonable attorney's fees and litigation costs from the defendant company.

The potential for significant financial recovery in the Meta discrimination lawsuit demonstrates the serious consequences employers face for engaging in citizenship-based discrimination.

How a Class Action Lawyer Can Maximize Your Compensation

Representation by qualified legal counsel can significantly impact the outcome and recovery amount in employment and citizenship bias claims like the Meta discrimination lawsuit.

• Thorough case investigation: Attorneys conduct comprehensive investigations to gather evidence of discriminatory patterns, collect relevant documents, identify witnesses, and build a strong factual foundation for claims.
• Accurate damage calculation: Legal representation ensures proper valuation of all losses, including complex calculations of lost future earnings, benefits, and career advancement opportunities.
• Strategic litigation approach: Attorneys develop litigation strategies that maximize leverage, including determining whether individual or class action representation best serves client interests in a Meta discrimination lawsuit context.
• Expert witness coordination: Counsel engages statistical analysts, industry professionals, and other witnesses who can provide compelling evidence of discriminatory patterns and financial damages.
• Negotiation strength: Having legal representation increases negotiating power with corporate defendants and their insurance companies, often resulting in significantly higher settlement offers.
• Procedural navigation: Attorneys handle complex procedural requirements, court deadlines, discovery obligations, and motion practice that can make or break employment and citizenship bias claims.

Class Action 101 understands the complexities of discrimination litigation and works to ensure victims receive full compensation for the harm they have suffered.

Who Can File a Citizenship Discrimination Lawsuit against Meta Platforms?

Understanding eligibility is crucial for individuals considering joining the Meta discrimination lawsuit or bringing similar employment and citizenship bias claims.

• U.S. citizens denied employment: Any U.S. citizen who applied for positions at Meta during the relevant time period and was not hired may have standing to bring claims if they can demonstrate discriminatory treatment.
• Naturalized citizens: The original plaintiff in the Meta discrimination lawsuit was a naturalized citizen, establishing that protection extends to individuals who obtained citizenship through naturalization, not only those born in the United States.
• Applicants during relevant timeframe: Individuals who applied for positions at Meta between May 2020 and March 2022, or potentially other relevant periods identified through discovery, may qualify for the class action.
• Those with comparable qualifications: Potential plaintiffs should have qualifications, experience, and skills comparable to or exceeding those of noncitizen visa holders who were hired for similar positions.
• Multiple application attempts: Individuals who applied for multiple positions at Meta and were consistently rejected despite strong qualifications present particularly compelling cases.
• Workers in affected job categories: The Meta discrimination lawsuit focuses on certain technology roles and positions that were allegedly earmarked for H-1B visa holders.

Class Action 101 can evaluate your specific circumstances to determine whether you qualify to participate in this litigation or have grounds for related employment and citizenship bias claims.

Citizenship Discrimination Lawsuit Cases We Take

Class Action 101 handles various types of discrimination claims related to the Meta discrimination lawsuit and similar employment and citizenship bias claims throughout the employment process.

• Hiring discrimination cases: We represent U.S. citizens who were denied employment opportunities because employers preferred visa holders or foreign nationals for financial or other improper reasons.
• Wage disparity claims: Cases where employers systematically paid U.S. citizens less than noncitizens or used visa status to justify lower compensation for comparable work.
• Promotion and advancement barriers: Claims involving employers who favored visa holders or foreign nationals for promotions, leadership positions, or career advancement opportunities over qualified citizens.
• Retaliation cases: Representing individuals who faced adverse employment actions after complaining about citizenship-based discrimination or participating in investigations like the DOJ inquiry into Meta.
• Pattern and practice litigation: Class actions and collective actions demonstrating systematic discrimination affecting multiple employees or applicants across an organization.
• Technology sector cases: Given the prevalence of H-1B visa usage in technology companies, we handle discrimination claims throughout the tech industry similar to the Meta discrimination lawsuit.

Our firm thoroughly evaluates each potential case to determine the strongest legal theories and strategies for pursuing employment and citizenship bias claims.

Take Action Today - Protect Your Rights

If you believe you were denied employment at Meta Platforms or another company because of citizenship discrimination, time is critical. Legal deadlines limit how long you can wait to pursue employment and citizenship bias claims. Class Action 101 offers consultation to evaluate your situation and explain your legal options. The Meta discrimination lawsuit has established important precedents protecting U.S. citizens from discriminatory hiring practices. Contact us to discuss whether you qualify to join this litigation or have grounds for your own claim. Your rights deserve protection, and we are here to help you seek justice and fair compensation.

Citizenship Discrimination Lawsuit against Meta Platforms - FAQs

What is the current status of the Rajaram v. Meta Platforms lawsuit?

The Meta discrimination lawsuit is proceeding after the Ninth Circuit reversed the district court's dismissal in June 2024. Additional plaintiffs joined the case in September 2024, and Meta filed another motion to dismiss in October 2024, which was denied in February 2025. The case is now in the discovery phase, where both sides gather evidence to support their positions.

Does the Meta discrimination lawsuit only affect people who applied between 2020 and 2022?

While the current Meta discrimination lawsuit focuses on applications submitted between May 2020 and March 2022, individuals who applied outside this timeframe may still have viable employment and citizenship bias claims depending on when the alleged discrimination occurred and applicable statutes of limitations. The DOJ investigation and settlement covered different time periods, suggesting discriminatory practices may have existed over a longer duration.

Can permanent residents or green card holders join this lawsuit?

The Meta discrimination lawsuit specifically addresses discrimination against U.S. citizens in favor of temporary visa holders. The legal theory relies on Section 1981 protections for citizens. Permanent residents and green card holders face different legal frameworks, though they may have claims under other anti-discrimination laws depending on their specific circumstances.

What evidence do I need to prove citizenship discrimination?

To support employment and citizenship bias claims in the Meta discrimination lawsuit or similar cases, helpful evidence includes job applications and correspondence, rejection notices, proof of qualifications matching or exceeding those of hired candidates, information about the citizenship status of successful applicants, company hiring statistics, and any internal communications suggesting citizenship-based preferences. Statistical evidence showing patterns of disparate treatment can also strengthen claims.

How long does a discrimination lawsuit like this typically take?

The Meta discrimination lawsuit demonstrates that these cases can span several years. This case began in 2022, went through initial dismissal and appeal by 2024, and continues with discovery and potential trial still ahead. Complex employment discrimination class actions typically require two to five years or more to reach final resolution, whether through settlement or trial verdict.

Will I have to pay attorney's fees upfront?

Most employment discrimination cases, including the Meta discrimination lawsuit, are handled on a contingency fee basis. This means attorneys receive payment from any settlement or judgment award rather than requiring upfront payment. If there is no recovery, you typically owe no attorney's fees, though some costs may vary by firm policy.

Can Meta retaliate against me for joining this lawsuit?

Federal law prohibits employers from retaliating against individuals for participating in protected activities, including joining discrimination lawsuits or filing complaints. If you are a current Meta employee or applicant and experience adverse treatment after participating in the Meta discrimination lawsuit, such retaliation may constitute a separate legal violation with its own remedies.

What makes the Ninth Circuit decision important?

The Ninth Circuit's ruling in the Meta discrimination lawsuit established significant precedent by determining that Section 1981 protects U.S. citizens from citizenship-based discrimination. This reversed previous interpretations and created new legal pathways for employment and citizenship bias claims. The decision affects all states within the Ninth Circuit's jurisdiction and may influence courts in other regions.

Are other tech companies facing similar lawsuits?

While the Meta discrimination lawsuit has garnered significant attention, citizenship discrimination concerns affect the broader technology industry due to widespread H-1B visa usage. The DOJ has investigated multiple companies for similar practices, and the Ninth Circuit's interpretation of Section 1981 may encourage additional employment and citizenship bias claims against other employers engaging in comparable hiring preferences.