Judge Says Meta Must Face Lawsuit Alleging Hiring Bias Against US Citizens

Mark Zuckerberg talks about the Orion AR glasses during the Meta Connect conference in Menlo Park, Calif., on Sept. 25, 2024. Godofredo Vásquez/AP Photo

A federal judge has ruled that a lawsuit alleging that Facebook parent Meta favors hiring foreign workers over U.S. citizens can move forward.

U.S. Magistrate Judge Laurel Beeler on Feb. 25 denied Meta’s motion to dismiss the lawsuit, which accuses the big tech giant of systematically preferring H-1B visa holders because it could pay them less than American workers.

The lawsuit, filed by three U.S. citizens, alleges that Meta’s hiring practices violate 42 U.S.C. § 1981(a) by discriminating against American citizens.

It accuses Meta of abusing the H-1B visa program, which is intended to bring foreign workers into the United States to perform services in specialty occupations where there are insufficient U.S. workers. The three plaintiffs allege they were passed over for jobs because Meta preferred to hire foreign H-1B visa holders to perform the work to maximize profit.

“When hiring for U.S. positions, Facebook considers United States citizens, lawful permanent residents (e.g., green card holders), and foreign citizens with proper work permits (e.g., H-1B or L-1 visa holders),” the plaintiffs’ complaint states. “But while visa holders make up just a fraction of the United States labor market, Facebook prefers to hire visa-dependent workers for certain U.S. positions, as it can pay these employees less than American workers performing the same work.”

The plaintiffs cited a separate lawsuit against Meta by the Department of Justice (DOJ) that accused the company of discriminating against U.S. workers by reserving certain positions for temporary visa holders, including those on H-1B visas. To resolve those allegations, Meta agreed to a settlement involving payment of a $4.75 million civil penalty to the U.S. government and up to $9.5 million to eligible victims of the alleged discrimination.

As part of that settlement, Meta also committed to revising its recruitment and hiring practices to ensure greater transparency and accessibility for U.S. workers.

The current lawsuit claims Meta continues to favor visa holders, citing workforce statistics showing that 15 percent of Meta’s U.S. workforce holds H-1B visas, compared to 0.5 percent of the overall U.S. workforce.

“These allegations support the plaintiffs’ overall complaint that they were not hired because Meta favors H-1B visa holders,” the judge wrote in her order.

Meta has denied the allegations and previously sought to have the case dismissed. It argued that the plaintiffs failed to prove any intentional discrimination or that they would have been hired if not for the alleged discrimination. The company also moved to exclude from the lawsuit any references to the DOJ case and the settlement. The judge rejected Meta’s arguments.

“The plaintiffs are correct: their complaint relies on more than the DOJ allegations, and allegations that Meta favored non-citizen employees in another context are relevant to the plaintiffs’ claim,” the judge wrote in the order. “The court finds that none of the material that Meta seeks to strike is ’redundant, immaterial, impertinent, or scandalous.'”

Meta also sought to pause the discovery process, arguing that it should not be required to turn over hiring data while its motion to dismiss was still pending. The judge also rejected that request, allowing the case to proceed.

Meta did not respond to a request for comment.