Sharia Law in Florida Court: Islamophobia is Employment Discrimination
You are sworn-in as a juror in a Florida Court: Using Sharia law, you will decide whether a county government employer blasphemed Islam, and by doing so, wrongfully terminated an employee, a Muslim woman, from two, related jobs.
Minaz Mukhi-Skees submitted a Charge of Discrimination (08-19-17) to the Florida Commission on Human Relations, and the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Her causes of discrimination are based on race, sex and religion.
“On June 22, 2017, I was involuntarily terminated from my position as Customer Service Representative/Accounting Clerk with the Seminole County Tax Collector’s Office. I had been employed with the Tax Collector since November 3, 2014.” [Charge, PARTICULARS, I. Personal Harm]
“I believe that I have been subjected to discrimination based on my sex (female) and due to pregnancy and on the basis of my race (Asian-Indian), and religion (Islam), based on the following reasons:” [Charge; III. Discrimination Statement]
Charge “(1) Since taking office in January, 2017, Mr. [Joel] Greenberg has terminated and/or constructively discharged 5 minority employees, including myself. We are the only employees from the former administration under Ray Valdes, who have been terminated;”
Charge “(2) Mr. Greenberg made a comment on Facebook that, ‘[t]his is the reality of unchecked Muslim immigration’ which he ultimately removed;” and
Charge “(3) I went out on maternity leave on April 12, 2017 and returned early, on June 19, 2017, as I was told by Administrative Officer, Michael McLean, that I was needed. Although I was offered a total raise of 7%, and possessed the only 4 year degree within the Accounting Department I was terminated three days after my return, on June 22, 2017.”
A Right to Sue (08-17-18) was issued by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, citing: “More than 180 days have passed since the filing of this charge.” Also: “The EEOC is terminating the processing of this charge.” Translated: The claimant exhausted her administrative remedy, so she can pursue the next remedy of access to court. This notice is not evidence or substantiation of the claim.
The above is reiterated in Mukhi-Skees’ Complaint in court, and further alleges: “After Plaintiff’s termination from the Tax Collector’s Office, Plaintiff applied for and was hired by the Defendant CLERK.” [Clerk of Court; Complaint ¶29].
“A copy of the charge was sent to the Tax Collector’s Office and received by it on or about September 17, 2017.” [Complaint ¶30].
“On the following Monday, less than one business day after the Tax Collector’s Office had been notified of Plaintiff’s charge, Plaintiff was terminated by the Clerk of Court.” [Complaint ¶31].
“Plaintiffs [sic] ask for in excess of $250,000 in economic, compensatory, and punitive damages (subject to amendment based on discovery) or such amount awarded by a jury.” [Complaint; Relief Requested]
Seminole County’s defense
A Process Server has yet to deliver the Complaint and Summons to the government of Seminole County, Florida, on behalf of the offices of Tax Collector and Clerk of Court. Therefore, responsive pleadings have not been filed in federal court.
“Officials with the tax collector’s office wouldn’t comment on pending litigation, but did provide WESH 2 News with the response it gave to equal employment [EEOC] after the [Charge of Discrimination] she filed last year. The office suggested there was a, [sic] ‘negative attitude exhibited toward both her colleagues and her supervisors,’ and that she was, ‘difficult to work with and was often uncooperative.’”
Minaz Mukhi-Skees alleged in her Charge: “I was terminated by Joel Greenberg, Tax Collector, because he was the newly elected Tax Collector and I was ‘at will.’” [Charge; II. Respondent’s reason]
In her Complaint, she alleged: “The Clerk of Court informed Plaintiff that she was an at will employee and that her employment had been terminated … by the Human Resources Department of Seminole County.” [Complaint ¶¶32-33]
A constitutional officer, as an elected official, may retain current employees; or, “clean house” by terminating and / or replacing an employee, absent a contract such as one negotiated by a union. This is known as an “at will” employee.
No employment contract is alleged by Minaz Mukhi-Skees.
Consider an analogy at the federal level in the executive branch: As an elected official, the President of the United States has the constitutional authority to appoint and terminate employees. [Art. II, s. 2, U.S. Const; commonly called the “Article II power.”] An example is President Donald J. Trump’s firing of James Comey, Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation; However, most appointments (replacements) usually require advice and consent by the U.S. Senate. Presidents historically have “cleaned house” of attorneys within in the U.S. Justice Department.
The “at will” defense, alone, should dismiss this case.
Plaintiff cries Islamophobia and race
Lawsuits often are less about the merits, and more about extortion of settlement as “go away money.” Is there a valid claim when the Plaintiff tries to destroy the character of a person or organization?
Islamophobia and racism are alleged by Minaz Mukhi-Skees in her Complaint: “Joel Greenberg has a history of posting several anti-Muslim posts on social media.” [C[Complaint; ¶20; Exhibit C]/p>
Let us examine Plaintiff’s claims of Islamophobia. In Plaintiff’s first example, she attached an alleged screen-shot of Joel Greenberg’s post on his Facebook page, described below. However, such a post usually is a comment related to an attached news story. Did Plaintiff crop-out (delete) the related news story? The post is undated, and without reference to a URL. The screenshot is undated. There is not an investigator’s sworn affidavit of the authenticity of the proffered post. Absent basic rules of investigatory preservation of evidence, the post is not admissible in court.
The alleged post: “This is the reality of unchecked Muslim immigration.” A search engine was used to research this sentence for possible clues of context. The phrase, “unchecked Muslim immigration,” has been used by politicians and pundits to describe the lack of vetting of refugees from then ISIS-controlled Middle East, and many instances of migrants’ jihadi attacks.
Plaintiff’s definition of Islamophobia would be applied to this post (11-14-15) by the Rev. Franklin Graham: “I’ve said this before, and many people criticized me for saying it. We must reform our immigration policies in the United States. We cannot allow Muslim immigrants to come across our borders unchecked while we are fighting this war on terror. If we continue to allow Muslim immigration, we’ll see much more of what happened in Paris–it’s on our doorstep. France and Europe are being overrun by young Muslim men from the Middle East, and they do not know their backgrounds or their motives and intentions. Islam is not a peaceful religion as George W. Bush told us and as President Barack Obama has said–that is just not true. Our president and our politicians in Washington need to wake up before it’s too late. This is not the time to be politically correct. Our nation’s security is at stake. The future of our children and grandchildren is at stake. We should not allow any political or religious group who want to destroy us and our way of life to immigrate to this country. Right now let us continue to pray for the victims and family members of the #parisattacks.”
In Plaintiff’s second example, she attached an alleged screen-shot of Joel Greenberg’s post on his Facebook page:
“A very simple question… Name just ONE society in the developed world that has benefited in ANY WAY from the introduction of more Muslims. Just one,” Joel Greenberg posted (08-18-18; afternoon). “Asking for a friend.”
On social media, observe the absence of any serious answer. Instead, inquiring minds want to complain about the question, and attack anyone who dares to pose the question for public discourse. Robert Spencer is an expert on Islam. Neal Boortz is a retired host of a talk show on radio. Joel Greenberg is the Tax Collector for Seminole County, Florida. So what? The question was posed by Boortz and Greenberg as individuals, not as an official inquiry by a government official. [<[Geller Report]p>
Muslims and Democrats have protested for the resignation or removal of Joel Greenberg as Tax Collector for Seminole County, Florida.
“This is Islamophobic,” said Rasha Mubarak, a Muslim activist, who criticized Greenberg individually (Orlando Sentinel); and Greenberg as a politician. (WESH-TV) Rasha Mubarak was the “Orlando Regional Coordinator for the Council on American Islamic Relations Florida.” In-other-words, a spokesperson for CAIR-Florida, until July, 2018, according to her page on Facebook. CAIR was named a terrorist organization by the United Arab Emirates in 2014. (Fox News) Rasha Mubarak now is the President of Young Democrats of Orange County, Florida.
The call for Greenberg’s resignation was renewed during a press conference, concerning the lawsuit, by Minaz Mukhi-Skees, and her attorney, Carlos Leach. [N[Not “Leech;” see their goofy photo courtesy of Orlando Weekly]p>
Criticism of Islam is blasphemy
“Islamophobic? Of course, I’m not Islamophobic. I don’t care what religion people are,” Greenberg said, as the Orlando Sentinel paraphrased: “adding that he thought members of all religions ‘benefited’ society.”
Islam is actually a political system wrapped in a religion. “Only the political system is of interest to kafirs (non-Muslims) since it determines how we are defined and treated. The Islamic political system is contained in the Koran, the Hadith (the traditions of Mohammed) and his biography, the Sira.” (Political Islam)
Plaintiff seeks money for a claim of Islamophobia, a politically correct version of Sharia law, in an American court. This creeping Sharia leads to Civilization Jihad:
“Islam isn’t in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant. The Quran should be the highest authority in America.” – CAIR founding chairman Omar Ahmad, quoted in the Muslim Mafia, by P. David Gaubatz [Ch.[Ch. 17, p. 265; See Ahmad’s denial: fn1, p. 400]ad the Muslim Brotherhood (HAMAS-CAIR)’s Strategic Memorandum to designate Islam as the official religion and impose Sharia law in the United States. (Clarion Project; Geller Report)
One attorney’s business model may be “door law,” in which he takes any client who walks through the door. Another attorney may pursue “shake-down law,” in which he hopes the defendant will cave under the high cost of litigation and instead settle for “go away money.”
If a person came to my law office, and presented a case based on these facts and law, I would show her the door. My integrity is more important than money.
Read the lawsuit’s pleadings:
Read a related case’s pleadings:
Article posted with permission from Pamela Geller
Gerald Lostutter is a Florida licensed attorney, college professor, journalist, and life member of the National Rifle Association. This article does not create an attorney-client relationship. You should consult a licensed attorney for advice.