On December 20th, 2022, the US District Court for the District of Columbia found that the Hindu American Foundation (HAF) did suffer damages due to “plausibly verifiably false statements” made by some of the defendants in HAF’s lawsuit against Hindus for Human Rights co-founders Sunita Vishwanath and Raja Rajagopal, Indian American Muslim Council executive director Rasheed Ahmed, Federation of Indian American Christian Organizations of North America chairman John Prabhudoss, and Rutgers University professor Audrey Truschke.
The Court, however, dismissed HAF’s lawsuit for defamation and conspiracy to defame on procedural grounds. The Court noted the “daunting” standard under the law to claim libel in the US. This may have prevailed in countries like the UK or India, but the bar is set really high in the US for defamation standards.
HAF sued for defamation after the defendants made patently false claims to Al Jazeera that HAF misappropriated COVID-19-related Paycheck Protection Program relief funds to support violence and “slow genocide” against Christians and Muslims in India and that HAF has “parent organizations” that continue to spread hatred in Hindu communities toward Muslims and Christians.
In its ruling, Judge Amit Mehta found that HAF did incur civil injury (“tortious damage”) caused by the defendants. Specifically, the Court found that Viswanath’s claim that HAF has “parent organizations” in India is “verifiably false.” The Court also noted that “some of Truschke’s statements are arguably verifiably false.”Still, Judge Mehta dismissed HAF’s complaint on procedural grounds for lack of personal jurisdiction, ruling that most of the defendants were not closely tied enough to Washington, DC, even though false statements were made to Washington, DC-based Al Jazeera.
The Court also ruled that as HAF is a “public figure” the bar for proving “actual malice” is very high; and though HAF presented evidence that the organization did not, in fact, send money to support extremist activity in India, the court ruled that some of the defendants’ statements were “opinion” and “rhetorical hyperbole” and did not meet the “high bar” for defamation.
HAF leaders emphasized that this ruling would not deter HAF’s commitment to serving Hindu Americans’ education and advocacy needs and pursuing justice.
In early April 2021, defendants Vishwanath, Rajagopal, Ahmed, and Prabhudoss were all quoted in two Al Jazeera articles presenting patently false claims that HAF misappropriated COVID-19 related Paycheck Protection Program relief funds to support violence and “slow genocide” against Christians and Muslims in India.
HAF’s complaint outlined how the defendants used the US-based Coalition to Stop Genocide in India to provide cover to make further defamatory statements against HAF and demand the US government start an investigation into HAF and other Hindu organizations for allegedly using Federal funds to “sponsor hate” in India.
