18th Annual Workplace Class Action Report - 2022 Edition

Annual Workplace Class Action Litigation Report: 2022 Edition 477 whether the LDH’s alleged policy of not providing IHCBS harmed all class members was discriminatory predominated over any individualized questions. The Court further reasoned that since Plaintiffs sought only declaratory and injunctive relief, there was no issue that such relief predominated over monetary relief. Id . at *38. Finally, the Court held that the injunctive relief that Plaintiffs seek was specific, and would be fashioned in the form of a single injunction that would provide relief to each member of the class. Id . For these reasons, the Court granted the motion for class certification. Clark, et al. v. City Of New York, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 28536 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 12, 2021). Plaintiffs, two Muslim women and the organization Turning Point for Women and Families ("Turning Point"), filed a class action against Defendant alleging claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and New York law arising from the policy of the New York Police Department (“NYPD”) requiring all arrested individuals to have their photographs taken without a head covering. Plaintiffs filed a motion for class certification pursuant to Rule 23(b)(3), which requested certification of a class consisting of all persons who were required to remove religious head coverings for post- arrest photographs while in NYPD custody. The Court granted the motion. As to numerosity, the Court concluded that according to the City’s records, Plaintiffs’ proposed class included over 4,400 individuals for a four-year period alone, and thus easily established numerosity. Relative to the commonality requirement, Plaintiffs presented one question that was common to all members of the proposed class, i.e. , whether the Policy violated the state and federal constitutions and the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act. Id . at *11. The Court ruled that each member of the class had the same claim because each member objected, due to their sincerely-held religious beliefs, to some or all of the activity that the Policy compelled. Further, the Court opined that due to the fact that all class members, like the named Plaintiffs, had to remove their religious head coverings in accordance with the Policy, the class members’ alleged injuries derived from a unitary course of conduct. Id . at *12-13. The Court rejected Defendant’s argument that it would have to undertake individualized determinations into each proposed class member’s religious beliefs because although the proposed class members had differing religious beliefs, those minor factual variations did not preclude certification because they did not predominate. Id . at *13. Finally, the Court ruled that a class action would be the superior method for adjudicating the dispute. For these reasons, the Court granted Plaintiffs’ motion for class certification. Clark, et al. v. City Of New York, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 177534 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 17, 2021). Plaintiffs, two Muslim women and the organization Turning Point for Women and Families ("Turning Point"), filed a class action against Defendant alleging claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and New York law arising from the policy of the New York Police Department (“NYPD”) requiring all arrested individuals to have their photographs taken without a head covering. Defendant filed a motion to dismiss for lack of standing pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1) and failure to state a claim pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6). The Court denied the motion. Pursuant to Defendant’s policy enacted in March of 2015, arrestees were required to remove their religious head coverings for any booking photograph. In order to accommodate those who refused to removed head coverings for religious reasons, Defendant implemented a process in which the arrestee could remove their religious head covering and have their photograph taken in private by an officer of the same gender. The resulting booking photographs, which depicted arrestees without religious head coverings, were "integrated into other law enforcement databases, including the NYPD’s so-called ‘Forensic Imaging System,’ that use sophisticated facial recognition software." Id . at *4. Plaintiffs alleged that this practice increased “the likelihood that images of arrestees without their religious head coverings will be viewed by many people long after” the booking photograph was taken. Id . Plaintiffs were separately arrested and had booking photographs taken privately without their head coverings, which they contended led to emotional trauma and fear of others outside of their family seeing them without head coverings against their religious beliefs. Defendant argued that Plaintiffs’ alleged injuries were not sufficient to confer standing on Turning Point, as an organization. The Court disagreed. It found that Turning Point sufficiently alleged organizational standing by alleging that Defendant’s policy compelled the organization to "divert its limited resources to respond to allegations by its members that they had been forced to remove their hijabs for the booking photograph." Id . at *11. Defendant further contended that Plaintiffs’ claim under § 1983 should be dismissed because the policy was "reasonably related to the City’s recognized interest in identifying prisoners and maintaining safety and security." Id . at *17-18. Plaintiffs argued that the policy could not survive even rational basis scrutiny, because it substantially burdened the sincerely-held religious beliefs of arrestees who use religious head coverings, specifically Muslim women who wear hijabs, and had no