Equality Labs released one of the earliest widely cited U.S.-focused survey reports on caste in the South Asian diaspora, helping frame caste as a civil-rights and workplace issue in American institutions, including tech.
California Assembly Bill 1820 took effect, authorizing California’s civil-rights agency to bring certain federal civil-rights claims (including Title VII) in court—an authority later cited in high-profile workplace discrimination litigation.
California’s Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH) sued Cisco Systems and two former managers, alleging a Dalit engineer faced discrimination, harassment, and retaliation tied to caste (argued as covered via ancestry/national origin/religion/race theories). The case became a landmark flashpoint for caste and employment debates in U.S. tech.
The California State University system added caste as a protected category in its systemwide anti-discrimination policy, signaling growing institutional recognition of caste bias in U.S. education and employment pipelines relevant to the tech sector.
A planned internal talk on caste discrimination by Equality Labs’ Thenmozhi Soundararajan—organized for Dalit History Month—was canceled after employee backlash; the incident drew national attention to how caste discussions were being contested inside major U.S. tech companies.
California’s Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH) was renamed the California Civil Rights Department (CRD), the agency continuing to play a central role in caste-related workplace enforcement and litigation.
Seattle City Councilmember Kshama Sawant and community leaders introduced legislation to add caste as a protected category under Seattle’s anti-discrimination code, explicitly reaching employment practices in a major U.S. tech hub.
California State Senator Aisha Wahab introduced SB 403 to explicitly address caste discrimination by clarifying and expanding how “ancestry” is defined in key civil-rights statutes—an effort spurred in part by high-profile controversies involving employment discrimination claims.
Seattle became the first U.S. city to explicitly ban caste discrimination by adding caste as a protected category in the city’s anti-discrimination laws, covering employment, housing, and public accommodations.
Alphabet Workers Union–CWA issued a public statement supporting California’s proposed caste-discrimination legislation (SB 403), framing caste protections as both a civil-rights and labor issue in the U.S. tech workforce.
Fresno City Council voted to add caste to its local anti-discrimination protections, becoming the first city in California to do so—extending the debate beyond Silicon Valley while still closely tied to employment protections.
California lawmakers passed SB 403, positioning California to become the first U.S. state to explicitly prohibit caste discrimination via civil-rights law clarifications; the bill drew intense advocacy and opposition from South Asian diaspora organizations.
California Governor Gavin Newsom vetoed SB 403, arguing explicit caste language was unnecessary because existing protections (such as ancestry and national origin) already cover caste discrimination. The veto intensified disputes over whether explicit statutory caste protections are needed for tech-sector workplaces.
Carnegie Endowment published findings from its 2024 Indian American Attitudes Survey, reporting self-reported caste-based discrimination experiences and broad support for rules prohibiting caste discrimination—data often referenced in policy and workplace debates.
Carnegie Endowment released 2026 survey results indicating the share of respondents reporting caste-based discrimination (since the start of 2025), situating caste within a broader set of discrimination experiences reported by Indian Americans in the United States.
Caste, employment and controversy in the United States tech sector (2016–present)
