From the motion filed today U.S. Department of Energy v. Intel Corporation (New York); for more information on potential litigation, see Intel Fires Israeli New York Engineer Who Complained Boss ‘Liked’ X Post Cheering Hamas: Lawsuit (New York Post, Beri Kochman):
John Doe is a Jewish-Israeli executive at global multi-technology company Intel, where he proudly served in the Israel Defense Forces (“IDF”). At Intel, John Doe was forced to report to a supervisor—Intel Vice President Alaa Badr—who openly and proudly supported the terrorist organization Hamas, and in Hamas 2023 Celebrating the deaths of Israelis following a brutal attack on Israel on October 7. In fact, Badr publicly liked social media posts — visible to anyone — celebrating the deaths of IDF soldiers like John Doe and celebrating Hamas’ “successful” missile strikes, including one that struck Doe Home missile attack. There is no doubt that the heinous acts carried out by Hamas on October 7, 2023, changed the face of the modern world for Israeli Jewish citizens around the world.
The Israel-Hamas war that erupted in the aftermath of the Hamas attacks on October 7 led to a wild and violent increase in hate crimes against Jews around the world, particularly in New York, where the plaintiff lives. According to the Anti-Defamation League (“ADL”), anti-Semitic incidents in New York surged 110% in 2023, the highest number recorded by the ADL in New York and the second-highest number reported by any U.S. state. In fact, nearly 14% of all anti-Semitic incidents reported nationally in 2023 occurred in New York State, with the ADL recording 815 anti-Semitic incidents in New York State in the fourth quarter of 2023 alone. Of course, these statistics only reflect report event. The actual number is likely much higher.
Acknowledging the inherent dangers faced by New York’s Jews, New York City Mayor Eric Adams said that after October 7, he saw “the normalization of anti-Semitism in New York…” while speaking on behalf of all 62 New Yorkers District attorneys in several counties also acknowledged the increase in violence, condemned violence against Jews and pledged to aggressively prosecute hate crimes. However, despite this, violence against Jews in New York continued to escalate in 2024, with anti-Semitic hate crimes rising sharply by 45% in the first quarter of this year. According to the New York Police Department (“NYPD”), in July 2024 alone, the NYPD investigated 30 anti-Semitic crimes, and in the first seven months of 2024 alone, 229 anti-Semitic hate crimes were reported.
These statistics illustrate a reality faced by all Jews, but former IDF personnel, such as Jane Doe, face a greater risk of being targeted by domestic and foreign actors if they are discovered to be former IDF military members. There are numerous reports of people being attacked simply for wearing IDF clothing. As a result, John Doe’s public disclosure that he served in the Israel Defense Forces and these allegations put him at substantial risk of harassment, threats, and physical violence. Given the intensification of violence in the United States and Israel since the October 7 massacre, the plaintiff has reason to fear that he and his family would be subject to retaliatory physical harm if his name were made public.
The plaintiff is understandably very concerned that in filing this complaint he (and his family members left in Israel) are at great risk of harm. This is not a trivial fear. There are countless reports of Jews being attacked for simply existing, including being spat at, punched, and hit with baseball bats simply for “looking Jewish.” While these seemingly random acts of violence have become commonplace and created widespread fear, New York has also seen a number of targeted attacks against Jews, including five Jewish board members of the Brooklyn Museum, whose Homes were damaged in areas of Manhattan and Brooklyn. A high-rise apartment building at Columbia University was vandalized with inverted triangles of red paint – a symbol used by Hamas to mark Israeli targets, live crickets and mealworms, and threatening posters; a Jewish student was stoned while displaying an Israeli flag In the middle of the face, a Jewish man was stabbed in the abdomen by a suspect who shouted “Free Palestine” and “Do you want to die?”
The level of risk to the plaintiffs’ families in Israel if their names were made public cannot be overstated, given Hamas’ proximity to their location and the extremely brutal nature of its operations. Using the plaintiff’s real name to file this complaint undoubtedly puts the lives of his family in the hands of Hamas…
Under normal circumstances, being a Jewish Israeli former IDF soldier might not be considered highly sensitive. But these are not normal times. Since October 7, the streets of New York have been filled with anti-Israel protests, and Jews and Israelis in New York, where the plaintiff lives, have been targeted by multiple attacks. As mentioned in this article, people considered merely jewish Being physically attacked. Given the current political climate, this case is likely to receive significant media attention, which will not only target the plaintiffs directly over the head, but also have a chilling effect on future plaintiffs in similar situations if they are forced to reveal their identities…
The defendant, Badla, actively celebrated the deaths of Israelis, even posting on social media cheering for them to be burned alive. The family will face significant risk of physical harm from anti-Israel protesters in the United States and the terrorist organization Hamas.
Clearly, anti-Israel protesters in both the United States and Hamas have shown through past actions that they will use every tool at their disposal to harm those who challenge their anti-Israel belief systems. There is no doubt that if the plaintiff’s name were made public, the plaintiff and his family would at least be intimidated and harassed, and at worst suffer real physical harm and possibly death….
The defendant already knew the plaintiff’s true identity. Therefore, “the defendant[] will not be harmed by an anonymous lawsuit because the defendant[] Clearly, the plaintiff’s anonymity does not create any prejudice to the defendants and does not in any way affect the defendants’ ability to litigate this matter. and their families…
Furthermore, the plaintiff has taken meaningful steps to keep his identity confidential. For example, he did not speak publicly about the events that formed the cause of action, nor did he publicly disclose the fact that he was a John Doe. In fact, few of the plaintiff’s closest family or friends knew he was Jane Doe or that he had filed a lawsuit. Additionally, the plaintiff’s social media profiles are in “private” settings, so the public cannot view the content and cannot identify him by the characteristics or characteristics noted in the complaint…
“[P]Arty anonymity does not impede public perception of the issues involved or the ability of the courts to resolve them. The plaintiff’s anonymity is irrelevant to the underlying facts and causes of action, but, as noted above, it is important to the plaintiff’s well-being and that of his family members who remain in Israel.
Furthermore, Badr publicly celebrated the deaths of Israelis and IDF soldiers. In essence, Badr publicly celebrated the death of Mr. Doe’s community and family, himself an IDF veteran. Given that the streets of New York are increasingly filled with unrest every day, there is simply no certainty that Mr. Doe or his family will suffer untold harm if his identity is revealed.
Finally, this operation will almost certainly receive international media coverage, especially in Israel due to Intel’s close ties to Israel, including the fact that Intel is Israel’s largest private employer. Terrorist groups such as Hamas, Hezbollah and the Houthis will therefore almost certainly be aware of the operation. If John Doe is identified, these organizations will be able to identify his family, many of whom still live in Israel, which would make them targets for international violence.
Cases seeking anonymity are deeply divisive in various areas (for example, whether an alleged victim of sexual assault can sue anonymously), but if the court is persuaded, revealing the complainant’s identity does create a serious risk of physical assault (not just say, , social or professional ostracism), courts are often open to pseudonyms. At the same time, courts tend to be skeptical of claims of risk of personal injury if they deem them too speculative. To learn more, see my pseudonym litigation law (especially pp. 1397-99). I hope to blog about the defendants’ objections, when and if they were filed (some defendants did not object to the plaintiff’s request for anonymity), and the judge’s final decision.
