![if gte IE 9]><![endif]><![if gte IE 9]><![endif]><![if gte IE 9]><![endif]>
Thank You For Submiting Feedback!
United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
September 9, 2015, Filed
File Name: 15a0630n.06
[*560] SUHRHEINRICH, Circuit Judge.
Omar Alomari ("Plaintiff") filed suit against the Ohio Department of Public Safety ("ODPS"), ODPS Director Thomas Charles, former ODPS Director Thomas Stickrath, and former Ohio Homeland Security ("OHS") Director William Vedra (collectively, "Defendants"), alleging, inter alia, that Defendants discriminated against him on the basis of national origin, [**2] religion, and race. Plaintiff further alleged retaliation against his exercise of protected First Amendment speech. The district court granted summary judgment for Defendants. For the following reasons, we AFFIRM.
In November 2005, OHS, a division within ODPS, hired Plaintiff as a contract employee. He became a permanent, full-time Multicultural Liaison Officer one year later. Plaintiff reported to John Overly, Executive Director of OHS, and then to William Vedra, Overly's successor. Plaintiff's duties included (1) building productive relationships between OHS, law enforcement, and Arab and Muslim communities; (2) researching and authoring publications on Arab and Muslim communities; and (3) presenting his research to law enforcement at training sessions.
During these training sessions, Plaintiff's views often conflicted with the views of law enforcement officials. For example, at a November 2008 training session for Ohio law enforcement officials, Plaintiff made a presentation in which he explained that Muslims generally fell into four categories: Fundamentalists, Islamists, Jihadists, and Secular Moderate Muslims. After Plaintiff's remarks, Todd Sheets, an Officer with the Columbus Police Department [**3] ("CPD"), gave a presentation on international terrorism. Officer Sheets commented on Plaintiff's statements. He said, "I'm not sure about Fundamentalist, Islamist or Jihadist. When I stop a Muslim, I don't ask if they're a Fundamentalist, Islamist or Jihadist. To me, they're all the same." Officer Sheets claimed that Arab Muslims in Central Ohio had links to terrorism, and that Islam commanded violence. Afterwards, Plaintiff complained to Director Vedra about Officer Sheets's comments, alleging that they implied all Arabs and Muslims were terrorist suspects, which contradicted Plaintiff's presentation. Plaintiff believed that the inconsistent messages could confuse law enforcement.
In January 2009, Plaintiff attended a two-day training session at the Columbus Police Academy. At this session, a presenter claimed that Christianity and Islam have been in conflict for more than 1,400 years, and Muslims will use violence to conquer and convert the entire world to Islam. Plaintiff told the presenter that he was irresponsible for "giving his opinions, not facts" to the law enforcement community. During and immediately after the training session, Plaintiff complained to numerous officials, [**4] including CPD Deputy Director John Rockwell; Chief Deputy Steve Martin of the Ohio Sheriff's Department; OHS Regional Coordination Unit Supervisor Andrew Stefanik; OHS Fusion Center Counterterrorism Research Analyst Ben Presson; and OHS Senior Strategic [*561] Planning Officer Tracy Proud. Plaintiff also emailed George Selim, a Policy Advisor at the U.S. Department of Homeland Security's ("DHS") Office of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties, to voice his concern that public DHS funds supported biased training sessions. Finally, because Director Vedra did not attend the session, Plaintiff drafted a report summarizing the event and sent it to him. The report stated that the first day of training was full of inaccuracies about the history and tenets of Islam, as well as Arab culture.
Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.
626 Fed. Appx. 558 *; 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 16237 **; 2015 FED App. 0630N (6th Cir.)
OMAR ALOMARI, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. OHIO DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY, Defendant-Appellee.
Notice: NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION. SIXTH CIRCUIT RULE 28 LIMITS CITATION TO SPECIFIC SITUATIONS. PLEASE SEE RULE 28 BEFORE CITING IN A PROCEEDING IN A COURT IN THE SIXTH CIRCUIT. IF CITED, A COPY MUST BE SERVED ON OTHER PARTIES AND THE COURT. THIS NOTICE IS TO BE PROMINENTLY DISPLAYED IF THIS DECISION IS REPRODUCED.
Subsequent History: US Supreme Court certiorari denied by Alomari v. Ohio Dep't of Pub. Safety, 2016 U.S. LEXIS 1199 (U.S., Feb. 29, 2016)
Prior History: [**1] ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO.
Alomari v. Ohio Dep't of Pub. Safety, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 131270 (S.D. Ohio, Sept. 13, 2013)Alomari v. Ohio Dep't of Pub. Safety, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 112090 (S.D. Ohio, Aug. 13, 2014)
district court, communications, legal advice, deposition, documents, training session, in-house, media, attended, presentation, termination, employment application, destroyed, discriminatory, argues, law enforcement, remarks, plaintiff's claim, summary judgment, work environment, national origin, misconduct, reasons, disparate treatment, adverse inference, official duty, mixed-motive, harassment, hostile, session
Civil Procedure, Summary Judgment, Entitlement as Matter of Law, General Overview, Appellate Review, Standards of Review, Appeals, Standards of Review, Abuse of Discretion, Civil Rights Law, Section 1983 Actions, Elements, Constitutional Law, Equal Protection, Labor & Employment Law, Disparate Treatment, Evidence, Burdens of Proof, Mixed Motive, Circumstantial & Direct Evidence, Reviewability of Lower Court Decisions, Preservation for Review, Judgments, Pleadings, Complaints, Requirements for Complaint, Fundamental Freedoms, Freedom of Speech, Public Employees, Evidence, Relevance, Preservation of Relevant Evidence, Spoliation, Judicial Officers, Judges, Discretionary Powers, Discovery, Privileged Communications, Attorney-Client Privilege, Privileges, Attorney-Client Privilege, Scope, Testimony, Credibility of Witnesses, Weight & Sufficiency, Attorneys, Methods of Discovery, Depositions, Oral Depositions