Facebook Hit With Discrimination Claims Over Financial Services Ads
Some of the same plaintiffs lawyers who reached a settlement with Facebook in March over ads for housing, employment and credit opportunities that excluded protected classes sued the company again claiming it still allows advertisers for financial services to discriminate against women and older users.
October 31, 2019 at 05:06 PM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on The Recorder
Updated at 2:55 pm PT on 10/31/19 with comment from a Facebook spokesperson.
Some of the plaintiffs lawyers who reached a sweeping settlement with Facebook Inc. earlier this year that forced changes in how the company allows advertisers to target promotions for housing, employment and credit opportunities sued the company again claiming it still allows advertisers for financial services to discriminate against women and older users.
Facebook in March agreed to create a separate portal for advertisers hoping to publish housing, employment and credit advertisements, or HEC, on Facebook, Instagram or Messenger as part of deal to settle multiple civil rights suits brought across the country.
On Thursday lawyers who had been involved in the earlier litigation—a group including counsel from Outten & Golden, Handley Farah & Anderson, Aqua Terra Aeris Law Group and the Law Office of William Most—filed suit against Facebook in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California claiming that the company violates California's Unruh Civil Rights Act. The complaint maintains that the company continues to allow advertisers for financial services besides credit products—services including bank accounts, insurance, financial services consulting and investment—to exclude women and older people from receiving promotions.
"Due to Facebook's discriminatory practices, millions of older and female Facebook users have been denied the opportunity to receive valuable advertisements about financial services opportunities that advertisers sent to younger persons and men, and to pursue those financial services opportunities within and outside of Facebook," wrote the plaintiffs lawyers, led by Outten & Golden's Peter Romer-Friedman. "As a result, Facebook intentionally denied its own users the full and equal accommodations, advantages, facilities, and services of Facebook, and it aided and abetted numerous financial services companies in denying Facebook's users the full and equal accommodations, advantages, facilities, and services of those financial services companies," they wrote.
The suit seeks to certify a class of women and people over 40 who use Facebook that were excluded by financial services advertisers over the past three years, aside from those who informed Facebook that they didn't want to receive financial services ads. The lawsuit seeks an injunction barring Facebook from allowing financial services advertisers to exclude women and older users going forward and disgorgement of any profits from ads that allowed companies to exclude women and older people.
A Facebook spokesperson said the company is reviewing the complaint. "We've made significant changes to how housing, employment and credit opportunities are run on Facebook and continue to work on ways to prevent potential misuse," the spokesperson said in an email. "Our policies have long prohibited discrimination and we're proud of the strides we're making in this area."
Romer-Friedman said in a phone interview Thursday that the plaintiffs team has been monitoring Facebook's advertising practices over the past three years. He said the company has eliminated the ability for advertisers to target ads in a discriminatory manner for credit products since September, but the same is not true for other financial services products.
"There's a much broader range of financial services being advertised on Facebook aside from credit where there appear to be no rules," Romer-Friedman said. "We're not talking about shampoo, here. We're talking about things that matter to whether people can have economic opportunity."
Read more:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllSo You Want to Be a Tech Lawyer? Consider Product Counseling
New Class Action Points to Fears Over Privacy, Abortions and Fertility
5th Circuit Rules Open-Source Code Is Not Property in Tornado Cash Appeal
5 minute readHow Qualcomm’s General Counsel Is Championing Diversity in Innovation
6 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Friday Newspaper
- 2Judge Denies Sean Combs Third Bail Bid, Citing Community Safety
- 3Republican FTC Commissioner: 'The Time for Rulemaking by the Biden-Harris FTC Is Over'
- 4NY Appellate Panel Cites Student's Disciplinary History While Sending Negligence Claim Against School District to Trial
- 5A Meta DIG and Its Nvidia Implications
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250