Controversial Muslim group CAIR forced to reveal sources of funding after defamation case against former employee backfires
The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) will be forced to open its books and reveal its sources of funding after a defamation suit it filed against a former employee completely backfired.
US Magistrate Judge David Schultz ruled Monday that CAIR’s donors, funding sources – including potentially foreign ones – and any assets owned by the group are all within the “scope of permissible discovery” as part of former chapter leader Lori Saroya’s lawsuit against the controversial Muslim rights group.
Saroya filed a federal defamation complaint against CAIR in January after the group dropped its own lawsuit against the former employee, which accused her of embarking on a “defamation campaign” against the organization, including by implying that CAIR is funded by foreign governments and terrorist organizations.
CAIR alleged that Saroya’s statements – posted on social media, in comment sections and emailed to the group’s supporters – damaged the organization’s ability to fundraise and build partnerships, but it ultimately dropped the lawsuit in January of 2022 over fears that Saroya’s legal team would “demand the names of CAIR supporters who have donated to us.”
Jeffrey Robbins, Saroya’s lawyer, described Monday’s ruling as “the mother of all legal boomerangs.”
“It’s a very important ruling,” Robbins said of the Minnesota district court judge’s order, in an interview with The Post, noting that the ruling is “very methodical, very careful, very detailed and very analytical.”
Robbins explained that the order will force CAIR to “turn over evidence about everything from fundraising practices, such as having raised money from foreign sources and concealed it; whether it deceived donors; whether it mismanaged donor money; whether it retaliated against employees or threatened to retaliate against employees for raising concerns about sexual harassment or the like.”
The judge noted that “the thrust of CAIR’s allegations against Saroya in the 2021 complaint is that Saroya falsely implied CAIR received funding from foreign governments and terrorists when she stated CAIR accepted ‘international funding through their Washington Trust Foundation.’”
Schultz stated that “CAIR points to no public admission that it received funding from terrorists or that it received funding through the Washington Trust Foundation” but “discovery into these matters is proportionate to the needs of the case.”
“CAIR has not shown that the burden or expense of the proposed discovery outweighs its likely benefit, or that it unwarrantedly taxes its resources,” he ruled.
Formed in 1994 by a group of young Muslim activists concerned about the rise in anti-Muslim discrimination, CAIR is now the biggest Muslim civil rights group in the US and includes about 33 local chapters across the US.
Federal tax filings show that CAIR received more than $5 million in grants and charitable contributions in both 2021 and 2022.
As a tax-exempt 501(3) nonprofit organization, CAIR is not typically required to reveal information about the identity of its donors.
A September 2013 Department of Justice Office of Inspector General report on CAIR noted that evidence obtained during a 2008 federal case against the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development – a Muslim charity organization in the US found to have funneled millions of dollars to the Hamas terror group – “linked CAIR leaders to Hamas, a specially designated terrorist organization, and CAIR was named as an unindicted co-conspirator in the case.”
CAIR officials have denied the DOJ OIG’s claim.
More recently, the White House cut ties with CAIR last year after the group’s co-founder, Nihad Awad, said he was “happy” to witness Hamas’ terror attack against Israel on Oct 7.
Robbins told The Post that he didn’t want to speculate about what discovery disclosures would reveal about CAIR’s funding sources but he said he expects the Minnesota federal court to issue a deadline for the group to fork over the names of its secret donors soon.
“We served requests that CAIR produce the documents that would show that what Ms. Saroya had said was true, and CAIR took the position that it should not have to turn over those documents,” he said.
“So the ruling is almost across the board that CAIR does indeed have to turn over this evidence.”
Saroya is seeking at least $75,000 in compensation from CAIR and an injunction forcing the group to retract a January 2022 press release which allegedly defames her.
CAIR did not respond to The Post’s request for comment.
