6:16-cv-00058-KEW Document 3 Filed in ED/OK on 02/17/16 Page 1 of 11  UNITED  STATES  DISTRICT  COURT   FOR  THE  EASTERN  DISTRICT  OF  OKLAHOMA     (1)  RAJA’EE  FATIHAH                Plaintiff,                    vs.   Case  No.    16-­‐‑CV-­‐‑58-­‐‑KEW       (1)  CHAD  NEAL   COMPLAINT   FOR   INJUNCTIVE            (d.b.a.  SAVE  YOURSELF  SURVIVAL     RELIEF   AND   SUPPLEMENTAL     STATE            AND  TACTICAL  GUN  RANGE),   TORT  RELIEF   (2)  NICOLE  MAYHORN  NEAL              (d.b.a.  SAVE  YOURSELF  SURVIVAL              AND  TACTICAL  GUN  RANGE),                Defendants.     Plaintiff   Raja’ee   Fatihah,   by   and   through   his   attorneys,   brings   this   action   because   Defendants   denied   him   access   to   the   use   and   enjoyment   of   their   place   of   public   accommodation  based  on  his  religion.  In  support  of  this  action,  Plaintiff  alleges  and  states  as   follows:     PRELIMINARY  STATEMENT   1. Defendants   run   an   explicitly   segregated   business.   A   sign   posted   on   their   business’s   front  window  announces  that  Muslims  are  not  permitted  at  Defendants’  store  and  gun   range.  This  store  and  range  is  otherwise  operated  as  a  place  of  public  accommodation.   It  is  open  to,  and  reliant  on,  the  patronage  of  the  general  public.       1   6:16-cv-00058-KEW Document 3 Filed in ED/OK on 02/17/16 Page 2 of 11 2. Beginning  in  October  2015,  Plaintiff  Fatihah  sought  to  practice  shooting  at  Defendants’   business.   Fatihah   serves   in   the   United   States   Army   Reserve   and   enjoys   recreational   shooting.  Fatihah  has  been  denied  access  to  Defendants’  business  and  refused  service   by  them  based  solely  on  his  adherence  to  the  Muslim  faith.     3. By  operating  a  segregated  place  of  public  accommodation,  Defendants  violate  both  the   letter  and  spirit  of  the  Civil  Rights  Act  of  1964  and  Oklahoma  anti-­‐‑discrimination  law.   Both  bodies  of  law  exist  to  further  the  guarantees  of  equality  embodied  in  the  United   States   Constitution.   Equality   is   one   of   the   most   important   rights   in   our   nation   and   among   the   most   foundational   principles   on   which   strong   communities   are   founded.   Moreover,   Defendants’   practice   of   segregation   based   on   religion   is   an   affront   to   fundamental  principles  of  religious  freedom.       4. This   action   seeks   to   remedy   these   violations   and   restore   equal   access   to   public   accommodations  for  Oklahomans  of  all  faiths.       JURISDICTION  AND  VENUE   5. Subject  matter  jurisdiction  is  proper  in  this  Court  as  this  suit  is  brought  as  a  civil  action   seeking  remedy  for  deprivation  of  rights  protected  by  the  Civil  Rights  Act,  42  U.S.C.  §§   2000a-­‐‑2000a-­‐‑6.   As   such,   Plaintiff’s   claim   for   relief   raises   a   federal   question   under   28   U.S.C.  §  1331.       2   6:16-cv-00058-KEW Document 3 Filed in ED/OK on 02/17/16 Page 3 of 11 6. Plaintiff   also   alleges   the   tort   of   discrimination   in   public   accommodation   under   Oklahoma  state  law.  The  factual  allegations  supporting  this  claim  are  identical  to  those   of  the  federal  claim,  making  supplemental  jurisdiction  proper  under  28  U.S.C.  §  1367.     7. The  Court  has  personal  jurisdiction  over  Defendants:  Defendants’  residency  and  place   of  business  are  located  in  Muskogee  County,  within  the  Eastern  District  of  Oklahoma.     8. The  events  and  circumstances  giving  rise  to  the  allegations  herein  are  alleged  to  have   occurred  entirely  in  Muskogee  County,  within  the  Eastern  District  of  Oklahoma.     9. The   Eastern   District   of   Oklahoma   is   the   most   convenient   venue   for   all   parties,   being   the   place   of   residence   and   business   for   the   Defendants,   the   site   of   the   discrimination   alleged   below,   and   immediately   adjacent   to   Plaintiff’s   place   of   residence   in   Tulsa   County.     PARTIES   10. Plaintiff   Raja’ee   Fatihah   (hereinafter   “Plaintiff”   or   “Fatihah”)   is   a   natural   person   and   citizen   of   the   United   States   and   of   the   State   of   Oklahoma.   He   is   a   native   of   Tulsa,   Oklahoma,  where  he  and  his  family  reside.     11. Plaintiff  serves  honorably  in  the  United  States  Army  Reserve  in  a  Civilian  Affairs  Unit.   He   advises   unit   commanders   and   deploys   at   times   to   both   combatant   and   non-­‐‑   3   6:16-cv-00058-KEW Document 3 Filed in ED/OK on 02/17/16 Page 4 of 11 combatant   situations.   When   not   on   military   duty,   Fatihah   works   for   the   State   of   Oklahoma   as   an   investigator.   He   previously   worked   for   the   University   of   Oklahoma   Police   Department   as   a   Community   Service   Officer   and   participated   in   the   Reserve   Officer   Training   Corps   (ROTC)   at   the   University   of   Oklahoma.   He   is   familiar   with   firearms,  and  enjoys  shooting  for  sport  and  maintaining  proficiency  in  marksmanship.     12. Plaintiff   is   a   practicing   Muslim.   He   adheres   to   Islamic   faith   and   teaching,   which   is   based   on   the   words   and   religious   doctrines   of   the   Prophet   Mohammed,   and   which   holds   that   there   is   no   god   but   God,   and   prescribes   adherents   to   worship   God   and   follow  God’s  teachings.       13. Defendants  Chad  Neal  and  Nicole  Neal  operate  an  establishment  that  includes  both  a   store   and   shooting   range.   Customers   of   the   range   pay   a   fee   to   shoot   for   leisure,   personal  entertainment,  or  other  purposes.     14. Defendants’  establishment  is  known  as  the  “Save  Yourself  Survival  And  Tactical  Gun   Range”  (hereinafter,  “business”).     STATEMENT  OF  FACTS   15. Defendants’   business   is   located   in   a   high-­‐‑traffic   location   on   an   interchange   immediately  off  of  United  States  Highway  69,  in  Muskogee  County,  Oklahoma.       4   6:16-cv-00058-KEW Document 3 Filed in ED/OK on 02/17/16 Page 5 of 11 16. The   business   is   easily   accessible   to   the   public,   residing   in   a   building   that   was   previously  a  highway  gas  station  and  convenience  store..  There  is  no  gate  or  restricted   access  of  any  kind  to  enter  the  property.     17. The   business   is   an   establishment   open   to   the   general   public   and   advertised   to   attract   usage  from  the  general  public.     18. The  business  maintains  regular  business  hours  and  advertises  these  hours  prominently   on  the  front  window  of  the  establishment.     19. The   business   uses   commercial   signage   including   a   prominent   sign   on   the   adjacent   United  States  Highway  to  advertise  its  service  to  the  general  traveling  public.     20. Access  to  the  business  is  not  restricted  to  any  group  of  private  members.  The  general   public   can   purchase   “memberships”   singly   or   for   families,   for   day   passes   or   yearly   passes,  or  as  gift  certificates.       21. The  business  offers  entertainment  in  the  form  of  an  outdoor  shooting  range.  It  also  sells   goods   and   services   including,   but   not   limited   to,   firearm   accessories,   targets,   and   apparel  appealing  to  gun  enthusiasts.       5   6:16-cv-00058-KEW Document 3 Filed in ED/OK on 02/17/16 Page 6 of 11 22. A   substantial   portion   of   the   goods   sold   move   in   interstate   commerce,   being   made   or   obtained  outside  the  state  of  Oklahoma.     23. Firearms   utilized   at   the   business   and   providing   the   primary   means   of   entertainment   for   patrons   are   regulated   federally   as   articles   moving   in   interstate   commerce,   as   recognized   in   the   enactment   of   the   National   Firearms   Act   of   1934,   Omnibus   Crime   Control   and   Safe   Streets   Act   of   1968,   Gun   Control   Act   of   1968,   Firearm   Owners   Protection  Act,  and  other  later  acts  of  Congress.     24. On  or  about  July  21,  2015,  Defendants  posted  a  sign  near  the  front  entry  of  the  business   that  reads  as  follows  (reproduced  here  in  like  punctuation  and  orthography):     THIS  PRIVATELY  OWNED   BUSINESS  IS  A     MUSLIM  FREE     ESTABLISHMENT!!!     WE  RESERVE  THE  RIGHT  TO   REFUSE  SERVICE  TO  ANYONE!!!     THANK  YOU!     25. On  information  and  belief,  as  of  the  time  of  this  filing,  the  “Muslim  Free”  sign  remains   posted.       6   6:16-cv-00058-KEW Document 3 Filed in ED/OK on 02/17/16 Page 7 of 11 26. On   October   23,   2015,   during   regular   business   hours,   Plaintiff   entered   Defendant’s   establishment  and  asked  to  use  the  range.       27. Defendant  Nicole  Mayhorn  Neal  was  present  at  the  business’s  main  counter.  She  asked   Fatihah  to  fill  out  a  liability  waiver  and  provide  his  name,  address,  and  driver’s  license   number.         28. Fatihah   complied   with   Nicole   Neal’s   request.   Neal   did   not   request   any   additional   information  or  inform  Fatihah  of  any  additional  process  required  before  he  could  use   the  range.     29. At  this  time,  Nicole  Neal  did  not  claim  that  any  exclusive  membership  system  existed   or   that   any   other   approval   was   required,   nor   did   she   indicate   to   Fatihah   that   any   further  process  was  needed  to  use  the  range  for  entertainment  purposes.     30. At  the  conclusion  of  the  initial  transaction  and  signing  of  the  liability  waiver,  Fatihah   then  informed  Mrs.  Neal  that  he  was  Muslim.     31. Following  Fatihah’s  disclosure,  Mrs.  Neal  summoned  Defendant  Chad  Neal,  who  had   been  in  an  adjacent  area  of  the  business.       7   6:16-cv-00058-KEW Document 3 Filed in ED/OK on 02/17/16 Page 8 of 11 32. The  Defendants  armed  themselves  with  handguns  and  refused  to  allow  Fatihah  to  use   the  gun  range.     33. Fatihah  was  asked  if  he  was  at  the  gun  range  to  commit  an  act  of  violence  or  as  part  of   a  “jihad.”       34. Fatihah  was  accused  of  being  there  in  order  to  murder  the  Defendants,  as  Defendants   claimed  that  “[Fatihah’s]  Sharia  law”  required  such  an  action.     35. Fatihah   does   not   adhere   to   any   religion   requiring,   encouraging,   or   even   allowing   the   murder  of  a  fellow  human  being.     36. Defendants  then  claimed  that  Plaintiff  would  need  to  have  a  membership  application   processed   and   approved   by   members   of   the   “gun   club.”   This   is   the   first   time   the   business  was  referred  to  as  a  club.     37. Defendant  was  then  made  to  leave  the  gun  range  without  receiving  service.     38. No  such  extended  membership  application  and  approval  procedure  is  required  of  non-­‐‑ Muslim   patrons,   who   are   able   to   use   the   range   immediately   on   payment   of   the   membership  fee  and  signing  of  the  liability  waiver.       8   6:16-cv-00058-KEW Document 3 Filed in ED/OK on 02/17/16 Page 9 of 11 39. On   information   and   belief,   Defendants   control   the   operation   and   policies   of   the   gun   range.  There  is  no  body  of  members  who  determines  operation  and  policy.     40. As   of   the   time   of   this   filing,   Plaintiff   has   not   received   any   communication   as   to   any   alleged  processing  of  the  purported  membership  application.       41. Plaintiff   has   attempted   to   verify   the   status,   if   any,   of   his   purported   application   by   contacting  Defendants’  gun  range.  He  has  received  no  response.     CAUSES  OF  ACTION   42. Plaintiff  incorporates  all  of  the  allegations  contained  in  the  previous  paragraphs  of  this   Complaint  as  though  fully  set  forth  herein.       43. Plaintiff,   like   all   Americans   and   all   Oklahomans,   has   a   right   to   equal   enjoyment   of   places  of  public  accommodation.         44. Plaintiff  was  denied  access  to  Defendant’s  place  of  public  accommodation  based  on  his   religion,   in   violation   of   the   Civil   Rights   Act   of   1964.   Specifically,   Defendants   have   violated  42  U.S.C.  §2000a  by  –  pursuant  to  an  explicit  policy  of  segregation  –  denying   Muslims   service   at   a   place   of   entertainment   (as   defined   by   42   U.S.C.   §2000a(b)(3))   whose  operations  affect  commerce  .       9   6:16-cv-00058-KEW Document 3 Filed in ED/OK on 02/17/16 Page 10 of 11 45. Defendants’   operation   of   a   segregated   business   violates   Plaintiff’s   right   to   equal   enjoyment   of   places   of   public   accommodation   under   Oklahoma   law.   Specifically,   Defendants’   conduct   constitutes   discrimination   in   public   accommodations   under   Oklahoma  common  law  and  as  defined  in  25  O.S.  §§  1401-­‐‑1402.       PRAYER  FOR  RELIEF     WHEREFORE,   Plaintiff   incorporates   the   allegations   previously   stated   and   makes   the   following  prayer  for  relief,  respectfully  requesting  that  this  Court:     46. Enter   a   permanent   injunction   ordering   the   Defendants   to   comply   with   the   requirements  of  the  Civil  Rights  Act  by  allowing  Plaintiff  equal  access  to  Defendants’   establishment  without  regard  to  his  religion.     47. Enter  a  permanent  injunction  ordering  Defendants  to  comply  with  the  requirements  of   Oklahoma  common  law  and  25  O.S.  §§  1401-­‐‑1402  by  allowing  Plaintiff  equal  access  to   Defendants’  establishment  without  regard  to  his  religion.     48. Grant  Plaintiff  a  judgment  for  nominal  and  actual  money  damages,  including  but  not   limited  to  damages  for  mental  and  emotional  distress,  to  be  determined  at  trial.       49. Enter  a  judgment  for  Plaintiff’s  costs  and  attorneys’  fees  herein  against  Defendants  as   permitted  by  law.     10   6:16-cv-00058-KEW Document 3 Filed in ED/OK on 02/17/16 Page 11 of 11   50. Any  and  all  such  further  or  other  relief  as  the  Court  deems  just  and  equitable  against   Defendants.     Respectfully  submitted,     __/s/  Brady  Henderson_________   Brady  R.  Henderson,  OBA#21212   American  Civil  Liberties  Union  of  Oklahoma  Foundation   3000  Paseo  Drive   Oklahoma  City,  OK  73103   (405)  524-­‐‑8511,  (405)  525-­‐‑2296  (fax)   Email:  bhenderson@acluok.org     Veronica  Laizure,  OBA  #32040   Council  on  American  Islamic  Relations  of  Oklahoma   3000  United  Founders  Blvd.,  Suite  226   Oklahoma  City,  OK  73112    (405)  415-­‐‑6815,  (405)  526-­‐‑0461  (fax)   Email:  vLaizure@cair.com     Daniel  Mach*   Heather  L.  Weaver*   American  Civil  Liberties  Union  Foundation   915  15th  St.,  NW  Ste.  600   Washington,  DC  20005   (202)  675-­‐‑2330,  (202)  546-­‐‑0738   Email:  dmach@aclu.org   hweaver@aclu.org   *Pro  hac  vice  application  forthcoming.         11