An attempt by the attorney for the ARAMCO, Arabian-American Oil Company, to question the impartiality of the members of the State Commission Against Discrimination conducting hearings of charges that the oil firm discriminates against Jews in both domestic and foreign employment, failed today in the second day of the Commission’s deliberations.
Chester Bordeau, counsel for Aramco, asked the three commissioners whether any of them were ever affiliated with members, officers or employees of, or contributors to the American Jewish Congress or any organization affiliated with the World Zionist movement. Citing from the purposes of the American Jewish Congress–which is the complainant against the oil firm in the hearing–Mr. Bordeau noted that it was one of the aims of the AJC to support the establishment of a Jewish National Home in Palestine.
The Aramco attorney said that if any members of the Commission were affiliated with the American Jewish Congress or with a Zionist group, he would ask that they be disqualified from participating in the hearings. Describing Mr. Bordeau’s request as “rare and unusual,” J. Edward Conway, the presiding commissioner, said that he would reject as improper that part of the question dealing with affiliation with the world Zionnist movement since the role of Israel was “extraneous” to the issues of the hearing. Mr. Conway said, however, that he would permit the commissioners to answer the part of Mr. Bordeau’s question dealing with affiliation with the American Jewish Congress.
Both M. Conway and another commissioner, Mrs. Mary Louise Nice, then said that they are not Jewish, and consequently are not members of the American Jewish Congress. They also said that they had never contributed to the organization. The third commissioner, Bernard Katzen, said he was Jewish, but was never affiliated with the AJ Congress and never contributed to it. He challenged the propriety of the question, however, and said that the fact that he was not affiliated with the AJCongress “should not be taken as disparaging” that organization.
SEEKS DISMISSAL OF CHARGES OF ANTI-JEWISH DISCRIMINATION
The Aramco lawyer also failed in an attempt to seek the dismissal by the Commission of the charges of anti-Jewish discrimination brought by the American Jewish Congress against the oil company. Mr. Bordeau, counsel for Aramco, argued that there was no evidence that Aramco had discriminated in its domestic employment practices.
In reply, Shad Polier, vice-president of the American Jewish Congress, who is serving as the organization’s counsel in the case, pointed out that Aramco “uses the possibility of travel to Saudi Arabia as a formula to disguise the fact that it is actually honoring a commitment to its business partner–Saudi Arabia–to exclude Jews from any part of its payroll, foreign or domestic.”
“The State of New York cannot require Saudi Arabia to admit Jews.” Mr. Polier said. “But SCAD can and should bar Aramco from acting as the tool and agent of a foreign power in violating the laws of the State.”
JTA has documented Jewish history in real-time for over a century. Keep our journalism strong by joining us in supporting independent, award-winning reporting.
The Archive of the Jewish Telegraphic Agency includes articles published from 1923 to 2008. Archive stories reflect the journalistic standards and practices of the time they were published.
