The following information is from a motion filed in the case of Doe v. Intel Corp. in the Southern District of New York. John Doe, a Jewish Israeli executive at Intel, was forced to report to a supervisor who openly supported Hamas and celebrated the deaths of Israelis. The events of October 7, 2023, where over 1,000 innocent Israelis were killed by Hamas, have led to a rise in hate crimes against Jews in New York. The plaintiff, who served in the Israeli Defense Forces, fears for his safety and that of his family if his identity is made public due to the heightened violence against Jewish people. The plaintiff’s family in Israel is also at risk due to their proximity to Hamas. The current political climate and the plaintiff’s connection to Israel make him a target for violence from anti-Israel protestors and Hamas. The plaintiff’s fear of retaliation and harm is not unfounded given the history of violence against Jewish individuals. There is a strong likelihood that if Plaintiff’s name is made public, Plaintiff and his family will face intimidation, harassment, and even physical harm or death. Defendant is already aware of Plaintiff’s true identity, so there is no prejudice in allowing Plaintiff to proceed anonymously. Plaintiff has taken measures to keep his identity confidential, such as not disclosing it publicly and maintaining private social media profiles. Anonymity does not impact the facts of the case but is crucial for Plaintiff’s safety and that of his family in Israel.
Additionally, Badr’s public celebration of the death of Israelis, including IDF soldiers, poses a serious threat to Mr. Doe and his family, especially considering the current unrest in New York. The case is likely to attract international media attention, particularly in Israel due to Intel’s connections there, making Plaintiff and his family potential targets for terrorist organizations like Hamas and Hezbollah if his identity is revealed.
Courts are generally open to granting pseudonymity in cases where there is a real risk of physical harm, though they may be skeptical if the danger is seen as too speculative. For more information on the legal aspects of pseudonymous litigation, refer to “The Law of Pseudonymous Litigation” by Eugene Volokh. Updates on the defendant’s response and the judge’s decision will be provided in future blog posts.
Special thanks to David Sokasits for the information.
Source link
