Hindu American Foundation challenges California caste discrimination approach in US court

The Hindu American Foundation has approached a US appeals court alleging that California’s civil rights regulator wrongly linked caste discrimination to Hinduism while pursuing a case against Cisco, raising broader questions about how caste is addressed in American workplaces.

Washington: The Hindu American Foundation (HAF) has approached a US appeals court, arguing that California’s civil rights regulator has wrongly linked caste discrimination to Hinduism and targeted Indian and South Asian communities, in a case that could shape how caste is addressed in US workplaces.

In a reply brief filed on April 6 before the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, HAF urged the court to remove what it called procedural hurdles that led a lower court to dismiss its lawsuit against the California Civil Rights Department (CRD). The foundation said the district court erred by not examining the substance of its claims.

---

HAF argues that the CRD’s enforcement approach “explicitly and implicitly links ‘caste’ to Hinduism and people of Indian or South Asian descent,” effectively singling out a minority community.

The case traces back to a high-profile complaint filed by the CRD against Cisco Systems and two managers, alleging caste-based discrimination. The regulator publicly stated it had “Sue(d) Cisco Systems, Inc. and Former Managers For Caste-Based Discrimination” and filed action under California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act.

According to HAF, the CRD “doubled down” on its theory that Cisco should have prevented caste discrimination “occurring within its South Asian Indian workforce.” The foundation noted that the term “caste” appears repeatedly in the agency’s active complaint.

HAF contends that the CRD’s framing relied on “racist and demonstrably false tropes” about Indians and Hindus. It cited the department’s earlier claim that “India’s caste system” is “a strict Hindu social and religious hierarchy.”

The CRD has since removed that phrasing and argued that the issue is now moot. But HAF maintains that the core problem persists.

“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.

Needhy Shah, HAF Senior Legal Director, warned that the implications extend beyond a single case.

“The Hindu American, Indian American, and South Asian American communities are concerned, and if they aren’t, they should be,” Shah said.

“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 added.

She further said, “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 is represented by lead counsel Tim Travelstead of Narayan Travelstead Ku P.C.

The Ninth Circuit’s decision on whether to revive the case could have broader implications for how US civil rights law interprets caste and its association with religion or ethnicity, particularly for Indian-origin communities.

Caste has emerged as a contentious issue in parts of the United States, especially in technology sector workplaces with significant South Asian representation. Some advocacy groups have pushed for explicit caste protections, while others argue such measures risk stereotyping entire communities.