Meta Sued by Former Manager Who Says He Was Fired Over AI Immigration Letter

Former Meta product design manager James Tillinghast is suing Meta Platforms, alleging the company fired him after he refused to sign an immigration support letter that he says overstated another employee's work and after he raised concerns about how Meta provided immigration assistance to workers.

The lawsuit, filed Aug. 17 in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey, names Meta and Tillinghast's former manager, Bolan Wang. Tillinghast brings retaliation claims under Section 1981 of the Civil Rights Act of 1866 and the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination, or NJLAD. The dispute centers on an immigration petition tied to artificial intelligence work and Tillinghast's claim that Meta provided immigration support unequally.

The conflict began in 2024, when Meta and outside immigration counsel were preparing an I-140 petition seeking an EB-2 National Interest Waiver for an employee in Tillinghast's product design organization, according to the complaint. A proposed managerial reference letter allegedly attributed about $638 million in additional advertising revenue to the employee and described the worker as having developed artificial intelligence tools and held broader leadership responsibilities.

A National Interest Waiver allows some people who qualify for the EB-2 employment-based immigration category to seek permanent residence without the usual requirement for a specific job offer and labor certification. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services considers whether the proposed work has substantial merit and national importance, whether the applicant is well positioned to advance it, and whether waiving the usual requirements would benefit the United States. Evidence describing a person's work, accomplishments and expected contribution can therefore play an important role in the petition.

Tillinghast claims portions of the proposed letter did not accurately describe the employee's responsibilities. He alleges engineering staff was responsible for much of the technical work credited to the employee and says he consulted Meta's immigration legal team and worked with the worker to revise the document. Tillinghast ultimately refused to sign statements he believed he could not support, according to the lawsuit.

His complaint also alleges Meta provided company-coordinated immigration assistance more frequently to certain Chinese national employees than to similarly situated workers from other countries. The support allegedly included access to immigration lawyers, preparation and review of petition materials, and help obtaining managerial reference letters. Tillinghast claims the assistance was not distributed under neutral and consistently applied criteria.

New Jersey's Law Against Discrimination prohibits employers from discriminating based on protected characteristics that include race, national origin, nationality and ancestry. Its protections extend beyond hiring and firing to other terms and benefits of employment, and the law also bars retaliation against workers who oppose conduct they reasonably believe is discriminatory. Tillinghast argues Meta's immigration assistance functioned as an employment-related benefit and that his objections to how the company provided that support were protected under state law.

Section 1981, which forms the basis of his federal retaliation claim, protects the right to make and enforce contracts without racial discrimination and can apply to employment relationships. The U.S. Supreme Court has recognized that the statute can also protect someone from retaliation for opposing discrimination covered by the law. For Tillinghast, the federal claim will depend in part on whether the conduct he opposed falls within Section 1981's protections and whether his objections led to an adverse employment action.

After Tillinghast raised his concerns with team leaders, Wang allegedly provided or signed a replacement letter for the immigration petition. Meta revoked Tillinghast's access to its internal systems around Aug. 29, 2024, and formally ended his employment effective Sept. 30, the complaint states.

Tillinghast alleges Meta's termination materials did not identify a performance improvement plan, written warning, or documented performance problem. He says the company later attributed his dismissal to underperformance and claims that explanation was a pretext for retaliation.

The former manager is seeking roughly $566,000 in alleged compensation losses and about $491,000 in forfeited equity, along with damages for mental anguish, pain and suffering. His wife, Nancy Cuddy Tillinghast, is also named in the lawsuit and seeks damages for loss of consortium.