Amalgamated Bank is currently tied to two very different lawsuits: a securities fraud class action in which the bank is the lead plaintiff against Facebook parent Meta over the Cambridge Analytica disclosures, and a July 2025 employment discrimination suit filed against the bank in New York by three current and former Hispanic employees. The Facebook case survived a trip to the U.S. Supreme Court in November 2024 and is moving forward in the lower courts. The employee case is in its early motion stage.
The Facebook Shareholder Case
Amalgamated Bank serves as lead plaintiff in a securities fraud class action against Facebook (now Meta Platforms) and its executives, representing a class of shareholders through the bank’s investment funds. The suit centers on how Facebook described data-misuse risk in its SEC filings after learning that researcher Aleksandr Kogan had harvested roughly 30 million user profiles through a personality quiz app in 2014 and shared that data with Cambridge Analytica, which built psychographic profiles used in political campaigns including Ted Cruz’s 2016 presidential bid.1Georgetown Law Journal. Facebook v. Amalgamated Bank
Facebook learned the data had been taken in violation of its policies and instructed Cambridge Analytica to delete it, but the complaint alleges the company never disclosed the breach publicly. In its February 2017 Form 10-K, Facebook’s “Risk Factors” section used conditional language — “could” and “may” — to describe the possibility that user data might be improperly accessed, framing it as a future risk rather than something that had already occurred.2Cornell Law Institute. Facebook, Inc. v. Amalgamated Bank
When the full Cambridge Analytica story broke in March 2018, Facebook’s stock dropped about 7% on the first trading day and nearly 18% within a week.3U.S. Department of Justice. Brief for the United States as Amicus Curiae Amalgamated Bank filed suit in October 2018, alleging the risk disclosures were material misrepresentations under Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act and SEC Rule 10b-5.
From District Court to the Supreme Court
The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California dismissed the case with prejudice after three amended complaints, ruling that the shareholders had not adequately alleged the disclosures were false or misleading.4U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Amalgamated Bank v. Facebook, Inc.
In October 2023, a divided Ninth Circuit panel reversed in part. The majority held that shareholders had adequately alleged falsity in the 2016 Form 10-K risk disclosures, reasoning that describing a materialized risk as purely hypothetical could mislead a reasonable investor. The panel affirmed dismissal of other claims tied to Facebook’s statements about its Cambridge Analytica investigation, finding the inference of intent to deceive was not strong enough on those points.4U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Amalgamated Bank v. Facebook, Inc.
The Supreme Court granted Facebook’s petition for certiorari on June 10, 2024, agreeing to consider whether risk-factor disclosures are false or misleading when they fail to disclose that a warned-of risk has already occurred.5U.S. Chamber of Commerce. Facebook Inc. v. Amalgamated Bank Oral arguments were held on November 6, 2024. Sixteen days later, on November 22, 2024, the Court issued a one-sentence order dismissing the writ as “improvidently granted” without reasoning and without reaching the merits.6Supreme Court of the United States. Facebook, Inc. v. Amalgamated Bank, Per Curiam Opinion
The effect: the Ninth Circuit ruling stands, and the shareholder class action can proceed to discovery in district court.1Georgetown Law Journal. Facebook v. Amalgamated Bank Neither side got a Supreme Court ruling in its favor, and the broader question of how forthcoming companies must be about risks that have already materialized remains unresolved nationally.7SCOTUSblog. Facebook, Inc. v. Amalgamated Bank
The 2025 Employee Discrimination Lawsuit
On July 29, 2025, three current and former Amalgamated Bank employees, all Hispanic, sued the bank and several top executives in New York Supreme Court, New York County, alleging racial discrimination, harassment, retaliation, and misuse of corporate funds.8American Banker. Amalgamated Bank Discriminated Against Employees, Lawsuit Alleges
The plaintiffs are Jacqueline Rosa, former chief diversity, equity, and inclusion officer; Patricia Velez, former executive assistant to the chief strategy and administrative officer; and Christopher Muy, former senior account executive in commercial banking and former branch manager.
The complaint describes a hostile work environment in which racist remarks were directed at the plaintiffs and their families, and it says all three were passed over for promotions in favor of less-qualified, non-Hispanic candidates. Rosa alleges the bank treated her DEI role as a “figurehead” position, withholding resources and shutting down her initiatives, and that she was placed on what she calls a “sham” performance improvement plan designed to force her out. Velez and Muy say they were wrongfully terminated.8American Banker. Amalgamated Bank Discriminated Against Employees, Lawsuit Alleges
Claims Against CEO Priscilla Sims Brown
CEO Priscilla Sims Brown is named individually. The suit alleges she misused corporate funds, citing a non-business executive trip to Napa, California, paid for by the bank. It also claims Brown cut DEI staff headcount to hire Saidu Jalloh, whom the plaintiffs describe as “her handyman, friend and tenant,” in what they characterize as a “quid pro quo personal relationship.” The complaint further alleges bank leadership placed family members of executives into internship programs outside proper DEI channels.8American Banker. Amalgamated Bank Discriminated Against Employees, Lawsuit Alleges
Seven other officials are named as defendants alongside Brown: Edgar Romney (chief strategy and administrative officer), Tye Graham (chief human resources officer), Jason Darby (chief financial officer), Sean Searby (chief operations officer), Sam Brown (chief banking officer), Mandy Tenner (chief legal officer), and Sabrina Stratton (northeast regional director).8American Banker. Amalgamated Bank Discriminated Against Employees, Lawsuit Alleges
Where the Case Stands
The case is assigned to Justice David B. Cohen. The defendants filed a motion to dismiss, which was fully submitted as of mid-August 2025. The court also granted a motion admitting an out-of-state attorney to represent one of the parties.9UniCourt. Rosa, Velez, and Muy v. Amalgamated Bank Amalgamated Bank has said it intends to “defend ourselves vigorously” against the claims.8American Banker. Amalgamated Bank Discriminated Against Employees, Lawsuit Alleges The case remains open.
Other Cases the Bank Has Been Part Of
Amalgamated Bank has appeared in other proceedings in different roles. In 2018, a visually impaired plaintiff named Eugene Duncan filed a class action in the Eastern District of New York alleging the bank’s website violated the Americans with Disabilities Act and New York state and city human rights laws by failing to work with screen-reading software.10ClassAction.org. Duncan v. Amalgamated Bank, Class Action Complaint As an institutional investor, the bank served as a class representative in the Enron securities litigation through its LongView investment funds11U.S. District Court, Southern District of Texas. In Re Enron Corporation Securities, Derivative and ERISA Litigation and as lead plaintiff in a securities fraud action against Duke Energy. In 2017, the bank filed a brief supporting New York City’s municipal ID program (IDNYC) in a state court challenge; a Richmond County Supreme Court judge ruled in the city’s favor.12Amalgamated Bank. Amalgamated Bank Applauds Court Decision on NYC Municipal ID Program