Exposing the role that Islamic jihad theology and ideology play in the modern global conflicts

Muslim Lawyer Sues Law Firm That Rescinded Job Offer Over Her Statements About Oct. 7 Attacks

By

Foley & Lardner is a law firm in Chicago that made a job offer to a Muslim Arab woman, Jihan Chehade, and then, having learned of her postings on social media, as well as speeches, in favor of Hamas and against Israel, rescinded that offer. Now she is suing the firm, claiming discrimination because of her religion and ethnicity. More on her suit can be found in an article published six weeks ago, and worth revisiting: “Arab-Muslim lawyer files lawsuit against Chicago-based firm over revoked job offer,” by Zareen Syed and Caroline Kubzansky, Chicago Tribune, 

A Lebanese-American lawyer accused a national law firm of discrimination in a recently filed lawsuit alleging she was fired the day before she was set to start a job at the firm’s Chicago office in late October because of her Muslim and Arab identity.

Jinan Chehade alleged in a complaint filed Wednesday in U.S. District Court that Foley & Lardner discriminated against her because of her Arab Muslim background and political statements she’d made on social media and at public meetings about the crisis in Gaza.

According to the complaint, Chehade, a Georgetown Law School graduate, had been interning with Foley & Lardner in July 2022 when they offered her a full-time position to begin in fall 2023. Then, 15 hours before she was set to start work, she was fired, according to the complaint….

“As soon as we all sat down, they pulled out a packet of about 15 to 20 pages with screenshots of my social media posts, about speeches that I’ve made, about my background, my identity,” Chehade said. “When I really started to feel the anxiety and panic was when they asked me about my dad, and where he worked – and obviously as a child of immigrants, a big law firm asking you about your father… alarm bells just started going off in my head,” Chehade told the Tribune in an interview Thursday….

The firm also questioned her about her associations with Students for Justice in Palestine….

In an emailed statement, a Foley & Lardner representative said they believed Chehade’s complaint was “without merit.”

“We stand behind our decision to rescind Ms. Chehade’s employment offer as a result of the statements she made surrounding the horrendous attacks by Hamas on October 7,” a firm representative said.

Look, Ms. Chehade. The firm clearly was not discriminating against you because you are an Arab and a Muslim. They hired you as a summer intern in 2022. At the time they knew your religion and ethnicity. They made you an offer for a job starting in the late fall of 2023, knowing your religion and ethnicity. How can you, with a straight face, claim that they discriminated against you when they were clearly willing to hire you, and would have done so had you not revealed your extreme anti-Israel animus and pro-Hamas views in your social media postings and speeches? Remember how, at the interview the day before you were to start work, you were given a chance to condemn Hamas for the atrocities it committed on October 7 and refused to do so?

Did the firm have a right to rescind its offer because of those views? Of course it did. This is not a free speech issue. Foley & Lardner can choose to rescind an offer if it discovers that the would-be employee holds views that are antipathetic to the firm’s members, and likely to be cause for dismay among the firm’s clients; this could potentially lead to a loss of business. Her praise of Hamas’ attacks on October 7, as a great step toward the “liberation” of Palestine, was deeply disturbing; if it became known, it would embarrass the firm. At her interview with firm partners, held the day before she was to start work, she was asked pointblank if she condemned Hamas for its acts on October 7 and refused to do so. Imagine a law firm making a job offer to someone who, it then discovered, was a member of the Ku Klux Klan, and had praised the group on social media? Does anyone doubt that the firm could rescind its offer to that person? Why should Jinane Shehade, who praises Hamas, designated as a terror group by the American government, not be treated in the same manner?

Comments

    • Jinan Chehade is playing “THE VICTIM” here . She learned fast in this Western World that playing the victim while beïng part of a “minority group” might pay off tremendously these days….. , generate attention to the “bigger cause “of Fakestine and damage this (partly) Jewish law firm . She should learn how it really works , in the real world ; I hope it’ll be a very hard and painful lesson for her .

  3. In my opinion, the lawsuit itself shows good reason to fire or refuse to hire a person claiming to be a lawyer but showing disqualification from employment at that firm or any other. Advocating in favor of a group which has committed murder, kidnapping and war crimes is under 18 USC 2, a federal crime. The damage to the firm’s reputation would be devastating and likely permanent. Just as she would be free to leave the firm at will, the firm is, under Wood’s Rule, free to terminate employment for a good reason, bad reason or no reason at all absent a statute or contract to the contrary.

    I believe the bar where I am licensed on retired status would disbar me for advocating in favor of war crimes. Allowing her to have the voucher of the state supreme court through a license to practice law brings into obvious question the disrespect of the Constitution and laws that lawyers are SWORN to support and uphold. The firm is correct.

    The suit is groundless and should be dismissed with sanctions and expenses paid by the plaintiff under Rule 11 and litigation accountability law.

      • In May 1981, when I earned my second license to practice law, an applicant who was entitled to receive his license without taking and passing the bar exam (diploma privilege) was denied a license because he stated falsely on an application that he was #7 in his class instead of #70. Again, in my opinion, advocating for a criminal conspiracy and enterprise is much more serious as a violation of the duties of all lawyers than the false representation made by this applicant. Advocating illegal conduct including war crimes is clear evidence of lack of character and fitness to practice law in the US. It may be perfectly appropriate in Muslim countries where human law is meaningless when contrary to Sharia.

        • This woman’s lawsuit seems to be rather weak and likely to fail. The larger question that the courts need to settle is whether a Muslim’s allegiance to sharia should alone preclude them from a law license.

  4. Is she representing herself?

    This has the same odor as other mozlum whinings over the past years. Lawfare….wants to get money and throw the fear, the terror, into other companies for the refusals to hire or allow mozlums to dictate company rules.

    The court should dismiss the case and be done with it.

  5. This will hopefully make it all the way to court so that a Judge can toss out her BS victimhood and then award substantial costs against her.

    • I had a lawyer friend, now deceased, who did far less to offend the judge trying the case where he was representing a client. The judge disbarred him for misconduct, By automatic reciprocal discipline, he was disbarred in all other courts nationwide.

  6. She should be made ineligible for the bar everywhere in the US, for supporting illegal activities, including terrorism.
    And for her to argue that the job offer was rescinded due to her religion, she will have to argue that terrorism and the goal of wiping out Israel and later all Jews everywhere is an essential part of being a Muslim. Please, say that part out loud and have CAIR come to her defense, showing Islam for what it is.

  7. They knew she was a Muslim when they offered her a position, so indeed the lawsuit is without merit. Would a law firm rescind an employment offer to a white racist if he publicly made comments about Blacks? Assuredly so.

    • They are trained in “The Black Arts” of lying & playing the Victim.

  11. This brings to mind TWO important questions:

    1. Has the terror org CAIR or any of their terrorists chimed in on this yet?

    2. Is Jehan a proper, pious muslima, or is she sporting a clitoris like some sort of western ho’?

  12. Hi Hugh, will you please keep us informed about the end result in this court case.
    Thank you

  13. When will CIVILIZED NATIONS finally come to the proper conclusion – that ISLAM – and therefore ALL THOSE who believe in the EVIL that is inherent and undeniable in the evil koran – IS INCONSISTENT WITH EVERY CIVILIZED SOCIETY. There are 57 muzzieScum shiiteHoles where those who believe in an evil god who commands killing ALL INFIDELS, RAPING INFIDELS, and ENSLAVING INFIDELS can live. LET THEM STAY THERE!! They do not belong in America!!

  15. Let’s see she will discriminate against Israel but your not allowed to discriminate against her. Thats ISLAM.

    Tell her to take a hike.

  16. One point is clear: The law firm failed to understand the unchangeable teachings and practice of Islam. I have personal experience with a treasured community whose leaders refuse to question the “Religion of Peace” lie. To this day they refuse in spite of one of their fundamental teachings to ask every question repeatedly, even to the very existence of God. “A snake will always be a snake no matter how well it is treated.”

  20. Most people don’t realize that what the muslims think of Israel, is not very different then what they think of Christians and other religions, it’s just that they don’t have the upper hand in the US yet

  21. I hope one day it will be possible to outlaw public demonstrations or declarations of antisemitism. That way, we can start to deport these scum.

  22. Muslim Lawyer Sues Law Firm That Rescinded Job Offer Over Her Statements About Oct. 7 Attacks
    ……………………………………..

    Why should any company–much less a *law firm*–hire a thug who supports the kidnapping, rape, and murder of civilians? I hope this firm tells her to stuff it. Of course, she should also be investigated and deported if not a citizen.

Discover more from

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading

Skip to content