Abstract

Excerpted From: Shreya Ram, Casteism and the Hindu Far-Right: A Statutory Proposal for Adding Caste as a Protected Class to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, 57 Columbia Human Rights Law Review 467 (Winter 2025) (197 Footnotes) (Full Document)

“We are good at our jobs[,] and we are good engineers. We are role models for our community[,] and we want to continue to work in our jobs. But it is unfair for us to continue in hostile workplaces, without protections from caste discrimination.” These are the words of thirty female Dalit engineers working for various U.S. technology companies who shared an anonymous statement with The Washington Post. Their statement followed the announcement of the California Civil Rights Department’s (CRD) lawsuit against Cisco Systems, a tech company, alleging caste discrimination (California Department of Fair Employment and Housing v. Cisco Systems). These women immigrated to the United States not just in search of job opportunities but for an escape from the torment they faced at the hands of upper-caste elites at India’s top engineering schools.

Contrary to their expectations, many of the same issues surfaced in America. The women described sexual harassment, exclusion from promotions, comments about affirmative action for Dalits, and inappropriate jokes aimed at Dalit and Muslim women in their workplaces. The women hoped that their Dalit identities would not be as “obvious” outside of India, only to find that vegetarianism, choice of partner, sacred threads, and linguistic style all operated as “caste locaters” to dominant-caste supervisors and employers. Advocacy groups, individual testimony, lawsuits, academic studies, internal emails from tech companies, as well as the profound piece by Nitasha Tiku in The Washington Post consolidating this information, all confirm that the oppression faced by the female Dalit engineers is no anomaly; it is descriptive of the rampant caste discrimination in U.S. workplaces.

The increase in caste advocacy, however, has not come without opposition. Conservative Hindu groups, such as the Hindu American Foundation (HAF), have put significant resources into challenging state and local measures addressing caste discrimination. In response to Cisco, HAF filed a lawsuit against CRD alleging violations of Hindus’ First Amendment rights. HAF also launched large-scale efforts countering legislation remedying caste discrimination. For instance, the group spent $300,000 to lobby against S.B. 403, a California state bill which aimed to add caste to the state’s antidiscrimination legislation. Governor Newsom ultimately vetoed this bill. The underlying claim in all these challenges is that caste-based protections portray Hindus in essentialist terms. Conservative Hindu groups claim that by calling out caste discrimination, such laws target Hindus and South Asians as bigots in a manner amounting to ““Hinduphobia.” While these legal claims are not always successful, the alignment of far-right Hindu organizations with the Trump administration, as well as the current Supreme Court majority’s support of the types of freedom of religion claims made by these organizations, make a consideration of their arguments worthwhile.

A federal solution to caste-based employment discrimination is necessary given the prevalent and horrific injustices of caste discrimination among the South Asian American population. Accordingly, this Note proposes statutory language for a legislative amendment to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to add “caste” as a protected class. Part I provides background information on the origins of caste and its prevalence in the United States. Part II surveys scholarly opinions on whether caste is already protected under Title VII through an existing protected class. Highlighting the diverging opinions on Title VII’s adequacy, Part II concludes that only an explicit recognition of caste as a protected class can secure protection in the face of unpredictable judicial interpretations of Title VII. While many scholars have assessed the need for federal caste protections, this Note takes a unique case study approach accompanied by analysis of conservative Hindu opposition. Part III describes the methodology for this Note’s case study. In determining the “optimal” statutory language for a Title VII amendment, Part III outlines two parameters: historical and factual accuracy and protection from First Amendment challenges. Historical and factual accuracy refers to caste’s connections to Hinduism, South Asia, and the South Asian diaspora, as well as caste’s impact on non-Hindu South Asians and non-South Asian communities. Protection from First Amendment challenges focuses on the legal opposition to efforts to ban caste discrimination from far-right Hindu groups, like HAF. Part IV executes a case study that explores seven approaches to addressing caste discrimination at the city, state, and university level. The benefits and drawbacks of these approaches are assessed based on the aforementioned parameters. Finally, Part V integrates the conclusions from Part IV to propose statutory recommendations and addresses counterarguments.

[ . . . ]

This Note used two criteria--historical and factual accuracy and protection from First Amendment challenges--to suggest statutory language for an amendment to Title VII adding caste as a protected class. Uncertainty looms regarding how the second Trump administration will continue to affect the civil rights of minorities. The American Sangh, however, has positioned itself to maximize influence from President Trump and his allies. As long-term advocates for Prime Minister Narendra Modi and his Bharatiya Janata Party, organizations like the HAF have defended Modi’s atrocious human rights record, lobbied against a 2011 Indian law which would have strengthened protections for anti-minority violence, and helped organize several receptions for Modi in the United States. Given Modi and Trump’s close alliance, HAF’s consistent support for Modi will likely keep them among Trump’s respected groups. To minimize challenges from a conservative political bloc that is only gaining more power, this Note aims to carefully construct a Title VII amendment so as to avoid language that has fallen prey to the HAF’s critiques in the past.

Employment discrimination only scratches the surface of the oppression faced by lower caste communities in the United States. Much more work on documenting such discrimination is to be done, as evidenced by the fact that Equality Labs’ report is the only comprehensive study of caste in the United States in recent years. This Note hopes to not only reimagine the potential of Title VII but also increase awareness of caste issues in the United States.

One author pursuing a similar aim is Isabel Wilkerson, whose book, Caste: The Origins of Our Discontents, links the caste systems of America, India, and Nazi Germany to explore the motivations and consequences of caste across civilizations. Wilkerson shows how in the United States, race is the visible agent that reinforces a caste system relegating Black and Brown individuals to an inferior status compared to Caucasians. In doing so, Wilkerson employs the term “caste,” which is typically used in the context described in this Note, to mean any insidious, hierarchical social system. The findings of this Note should be read in tandem with Wilkerson’s work. The caste system originating from Hinduism and South Asia cannot be separated from the other hierarchical systems of injustice that contradict basic notions of humanity. In fact, all of Title VII’s protected classes were created to address the various hierarchical systems that have subjugated people of color, women, the LGBTQ+ community, non-American citizens, and other marginalized groups for generations.

Finally, this Note would be incomplete without an acknowledgement of Dr. Bhimrao Ramji Ambedkar, a leading figure in the Dalit liberation movement and drafter of the Indian Constitution. Ambedkar wrote that “the outcaste is a bye-product of the caste system. There will be outcastes as long as there are castes. Nothing can emancipate the outcaste except the destruction of the caste system.” An amendment to Title VII is far from the destruction of the caste system. But as our collective awareness of caste’s ills builds, the annihilation of caste will hopefully ensue.

Shreya Ram, J.D. Candidate, Columbia Law School, 2026.