The factual allegations, from a Sept. 2025 decision in the case by Judge Susan Illston (N.D. Cal.) (the case is Radice v. Jerusalem Boxing Club, LLC consolidated with the federal government's U.S. v. Harara):
The Jerusalem Coffee House [which Harara owns] is a business establishment open to the general public.
asserted
Harara → consolidate → public
The coffee house is located on the premises of the East Bay Community Space, "which regularly hosts events that are open to the general public for exhibition or entertainment …."
asserted
that → locate → exhibition
According to the complaint, on June 10, 2024, Michael Radice—who is Jewish—went to the East Bay Community Space "for the purpose of viewing the establishment for a fundraising event for his organization."
uncertain
who → accord → organization
Radice was wearing a dark blue baseball cap with a light blue Star of David and white Hebrew lettering.
asserted
Radice → wear → David
As he approached the community space from the side where the coffee house is located, a man sitting at a table in front of the coffee house asked, "Are you a Jew?"
asserted
you → approach → house
Radice answered in the affirmative.
asserted
Radice → answer → affirmative
The man then asked, "Are you a Zionist?"
asserted
you → ask → ?
Radice declined to respond.
asserted
Radice → decline → ?
The complaint alleges that "[t]he man then began shouting numerous accusations at Mr. Radice, including that he was complicit in Israel's military actions in the Gaza Strip following the October 7, 2023 Hamas attacks and guilty of 'killing children.'"
asserted
he → allege → children
As Radice began to walk away, the man stood up and asked, "Where are you going?"
asserted
you → begin → ?
The complaint alleges, "Mr. Radice saw another man, whom he later learned was Harara, walk out of the coffee house and speak to the man, and the two went inside."
asserted
two → allege → man
On August 3, 2024, Radice returned to the East Bay Community Space to attend the fundraiser for his organization.
asserted
Radice → return → organization
Before doing so, "he entered the coffee shop to purchase a cookie, which he hoped would be seen as a sign of goodwill."
asserted
he → do → goodwill
He was not wearing the baseball cap he had worn previously.
asserted
he → wear → cap
Behind the counter were Harara, the man Radice had previously encountered, and a third employee.
asserted
Radice → encounter → counter
Before Radice could place his order, the man from the prior encounter stated, "You're the guy with the hat.
uncertain
You → place → hat
We don't want you in our coffee shop.
asserted
We → want → shop
And now from Judge Thomas Hixson's Report and Recommendation yesterday:
There is no dispute that Defendant Abdulrahim Harara violated at least six discovery orders.
asserted
Harara → be → orders
Motion at 4-7 ("Harara has flouted at least six discovery orders," and enumerating the violations); Opp. at 7 ("But the question on this motion is not whether any order was violated; it is whether the record as a whole shows the kind of deliberate, deceptive obstruction that makes a fair trial impossible and justifies ending the case without one.")…
asserted
trial → flout → one
The real issue is what remedy the Court should impose for the serial violations of its discovery orders.
asserted
Court → impose → orders
The impact of Harara's conduct basically falls into three buckets: documents were produced late that should have been produced earlier; some document productions are incomplete; and there has been a wholesale failure to produce email.
asserted
productions → fall → email
But having reviewed the voluminous evidence submitted in support of Radice's motion for sanctions, the Court thinks truth is available to the parties, and they should go ahead and have a trial on the existing record.
asserted
they → review → record
Harara's biggest failure in discovery is the nonproduction of email, and he does not have a good excuse.
asserted
he → have → excuse
In many cases the total failure to produce email would justify terminating sanctions or at least adverse inference instructions.
asserted
failure → produce → sanctions
The relevant events are alleged in-person refusals to serve Radice and another individual because they are Jewish.
asserted
they → allege → Radice
In other words, the relevant events did not occur by email.
asserted
events → occur → email
Before email existed, public accommodation discrimination claims like this were tried the old fashioned way: The participants in the alleged events testified, and the trier of fact decided who to believe.
uncertain
trier → exist → who
Email is still relevant, of course, because it could contain statements about what happened, or have evidence of the defendant's allegedly prejudicial intent.
uncertain
what → contain → intent
But here a lot of that type of evidence was produced in the form of Harara's text messages and social media feeds and other electronic records.
asserted
lot → produce → messages
These include a statement that seems to be by Harara that seems to say he throws pennies on the ground when Jews walk by; the coffee shop menu and outdoor signage with inverted red triangles, which Radice alleges is a symbol used by Hamas to mark Israeli targets in propaganda videos; the apparent introduction on the one year anniversary of the October 7 attack of a juice item named for a mastermind of the attack; a video of Harara telling a Jewish customer to leave because he had "a violent hat," referring to the Star of David on the hat; and a repost by Harara to his X account bearing the "Bay Area" screen name of a November 2, 2024 post calling that same Jewish customer "a genocidal, bottom dwelling Zionist scum" who "should be kicked out of every public establishment not just Palestinian owned ones!"
asserted
who → include → establishment
There are also text messages that replicate the kind of thing a plaintiff would dream of finding in a defendant's emails—and certainly at trial Radice and the United States will argue these texts are strong evidence of liability.
asserted
texts → be → liability
Radice is certainly of the view that he has uncovered good evidence, even if it was produced later than it should have been, and even though it does not include email.
asserted
it → uncover → email
See Motion at 15 ("The 6134 Bates-labeled pages and 2474 native files that Harara produced on or after August 7 include inflammatory documents that Harara willfully withheld until after discovery closed."); id.
asserted
discovery → see → that
("For example, a January 3, 2025 JCH Instagram post shows JCH advertising for sale a t-shirt featuring the Jerusalem Coffee House name ringed by flags with the emblem of Hamas, a designated terrorist organization dedicated to violence against Jews and Israelis."); id.
asserted
JCH → show → Jews
("His Instagram direct-messages contain both antisemitic tropes and antisemitic slurs.")
asserted
messages → contain → tropes
With all this evidence, can it really be said that Harara's failings in discovery have prejudiced Plaintiffs to such an extent that a meaningful and fair trial is no longer possible?
asserted
trial → say → extent
That adverse inferences are needed because there is not enough evidence for the trier of fact to reliably draw conclusions about what happened?
asserted
what → need → conclusions
These cases are about whether a coffee shop committed discrimination, and Harara has produced enough documents that Radice and the United States have what they need to go to trial.
asserted
they → commit → trial
Even with the nonproduction of email, it is not true that discovery failed or that truth cannot be ascertained.
asserted
truth → fail → email
The public policy in favor of deciding cases on the merits applies here.
asserted
policy → decide → merits
…and 26 more, not listed.
The Aporia