USCA4 Appeal: 25-1333 Doc: 37 Filed: 06/17/2026 Pg: 1 of 15
PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 24-1672
MAAN ALJIZZANI,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
MIDDLE EAST BROADCASTING NETWORKS, INC.,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Rossie David Alston, Jr., District Judge. (1:22-cv-01321-RDA-WEF)
No. 25-1333
STEVEN ISAAC,
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District Judge. (1:24-cv-01208-LMB-WEF)
Argued: March 19, 2026 Decided: June 17, 2026 USCA4 Appeal: 25-1333 Doc: 37 Filed: 06/17/2026 Pg: 2 of 15
Before NIEMEYER, QUATTLEBAUM, and RUSHING, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by published opinion. Judge Niemeyer wrote the opinion, in which Judge Quattlebaum and Judge Rushing joined.
ARGUED: Dirk Harris McClanahan, MCCLANAHAN POWERS, PLLC, Falls Church, Virginia, for Appellants. Andrew W. Bagley, Jillian Ambrose, CROWELL & MORING LLP, Washington, D.C., for Appellee. ON BRIEF: Rachel Lesser, CROWELL & MORING LLP, Washington, D.C., for Appellee.
2 USCA4 Appeal: 25-1333 Doc: 37 Filed: 06/17/2026 Pg: 3 of 15
NIEMEYER, Circuit Judge:
Maan Aljizzani and Steven Isaac were journalists employed by Middle East
Broadcasting Networks, Inc. (“MBN”), a Virginia-based corporation that operates Alhurra
TV, an Arabic-language satellite television station, as well as digital media networks,
which broadcast news and current events to audiences in the Middle East and North Africa.
Notwithstanding MBN’s mandatory Code of Ethics and social media policy, which
required its journalists to remain neutral both when reporting and when posting personally,
Aljizzani and Isaac violated the Code and policy, despite individualized orders directing
them not to do so, and MBN then terminated their employment. With the same counsel,
they commenced separate but similar actions against MBN, alleging that it discriminated
against them on the basis of their Iraqi national origin, in violation of Title VII of the Civil
Rights Act of 1964. The district court in each action granted MBN’s motion to dismiss,
concluding that both plaintiffs’ complaints failed to allege facts that were sufficient to state
a plausible claim for discrimination based on national origin.
After carefully reviewing the plaintiffs’ complaints de novo, we agree and affirm
the district courts’ judgments.
I
A
In his amended complaint, Maan Aljizzani alleged that he was employed by MBN
as an investigative journalist for Alhurra TV, which broadcasts in the Arabic language to
audiences in the Middle East, among other places. Aljizzani alleged that “[a]ll MBN
3 USCA4 Appeal: 25-1333 Doc: 37 Filed: 06/17/2026 Pg: 4 of 15
journalists are required to abide by MBN’s Journalistic Code of Ethics,” a copy of which
he attached to his complaint.
The Code of Ethics regulates the journalists’ professional conduct, such as how to
ethically investigate cases and interview individuals, as well as aspects of their personal
conduct, including what they post on their personal social media accounts. It states,
“MBN’s Journalists should not insert their personal opinions in any report on any platform
at any time and should not provide Commentary,” and they “shall maintain the highest
ethical standards in all conduct,” including remaining “free of associations, activities or
conduct that could, or could appear to, compromise their integrity, damage their credibility
or jeopardize their journalistic independence.” The Code also requires journalists to
“adhere to the letter and spirit of MBN’s social media requirements,” which are set forth
in a social media policy that is part of the Code. The social media policy explains that
“[w]hen online, all MBN Journalists are representatives of MBN and should always be
mindful of how their words and links reflect on MBN” and that the “Code of Ethics applies
to all personal social media accounts.” (Emphasis added). The policy warns journalists
that they “are responsible for everything appearing on their personal social media pages;
inflammatory or otherwise inappropriate material from third parties must be deleted
immediately”; and “[v]iolations of this policy may result in disciplinary action, up to and
including termination of employment.”
On March 6, 2021, when Pope Francis visited and met with the Grand Ayatollah
Ali al-Sistani in Najaf, Iraq, Aljizzani tweeted:
4 USCA4 Appeal: 25-1333 Doc: 37 Filed: 06/17/2026 Pg: 5 of 15
[T]he owner of the house [apparently referring to the Grand Ayatollah] was an emaciated ghost, expressionless and emotionless, as if he were sitting upright in spite [of] his aged body, amid the amazement, astonishment, and pity of the guest [apparently the Pope]! That same day, MBN’s Vice President of Programing, who was also Aljizzani’s supervisor,
“told him to delete his tweet.” Aljizzani admitted, however, that because his supervisor
did not provide a reason, Aljizzani “did not delete the tweet.” MBN then suspended him.
Three days later, when Aljizzani still had not deleted the tweet, explaining that “he would
not delete the tweet because he did not understand what was wrong with its content,” MBN
terminated his employment.
Based on these facts, Aljizzani alleged in his complaint that the Code of Ethics and
social media policy were enforced unevenly, as non-Iraqi journalists rarely, if ever,
received reprimands for violating the Code, and therefore that he had been discriminated
against because he was Iraqi. And while he alleged that MBN’s responses to Code
violations by others were less severe, he did not allege the substance of those other
purported Code violations, let alone allege that others disobeyed a direct order to comply
with the Code. Nonetheless, he alleged that MBN deprived him of “equal employment
opportunities, and otherwise adversely affected his status as an employee on the basis of
[his] national origin, in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(a)(1).”
The district court granted MBN’s motion to dismiss the complaint for failure to
allege a plausible claim for relief. The court concluded that Aljizzani had neither “allege[d]
direct evidence of discrimination” nor “allege[d] facts that sufficiently support[ed] an
inference that his termination was based on national origin discrimination.” Understanding
5 USCA4 Appeal: 25-1333 Doc: 37 Filed: 06/17/2026 Pg: 6 of 15
that Aljizzani sought to prove discrimination by comparing his treatment with the treatment
of others, the court noted that Aljizzani “[did] not allege that the other Iraqi Journalists
were similarly terminated for refusing to comply with their supervisors’ instruction,” such
that “he ha[d] not adequately alleged facts that he was treated differently than similarly
situated employees outside of his protected class.”
From the district court’s order dated June 20, 2024, dismissing his complaint,
Aljizzani filed this appeal.
B
In his amended complaint, Steven Isaac alleged that he too was employed as a
journalist — “a correspondent” — by MBN. And he too alleged that “all MBN Journalists
are required to abide by MBN’s Journalistic Code of Ethics,” a copy of which he also
attached to his complaint.
Issac’s complaint alleged that, in the beginning of March 2021, which was a period
of unrest in Iraq, “MBN gave multiple Iraqi Journalists verbal warnings to stop posting any
political content about Iraq on their personal social media accounts,” and that Isaac was
one of the employees who was given the warning. Nonetheless, Isaac thereafter made at
least four postings on his social media account containing political content about Iraq, in
violation of not only the Code of Ethics but also in rejection of the warning given to him.
Specifically, in an undated tweet, he posted: *
The speech of Qais last night greatly provoked [Muqtada] Al-Sadr.
* The complaint included these certified English translations of the tweets, which were posted in Arabic, and the translations contained the brackets as shown. 6 USCA4 Appeal: 25-1333 Doc: 37 Filed: 06/17/2026 Pg: 7 of 15
Qais could have “bit his tongue” to calm things down, but it seems he couldn’t miss the opportunity to stick it to him and come out looking like “the cousin who’s smarter than you at school.”
On August 28, 2022, he posted:
Is Saad Kambash wanted by the judiciary or are we mistaken? You Sunni members of parliament Talal Al-Zobaie and Khaled Al-Obaidi and Defense Minister Juma Inad, how could you be present with him? Didn’t you ask him how the funds of the Sunni Endowment, which are the funds of the [Sunni] component, ended up being used to purchase a hotel in Erbil?
On August 29, 2022, he posted:
[Grand Ayatollah] Al-Haeri has spilled the blood of many innocent Iraqis through his criminal fatwas (which are available and compiled in the book “Guide for the Mujahid”).
Stick with your Iraqi leader and the most noble city of Najaf. The Iranian Al-Haeri, who wants you to follow Tehran and become chess pieces of Khamenei, is of no avail to you.
Finally, later on the same date, he posted:
The confidant of the faction leaders calls for “amputating the afflicted part.” This is what incitement to bloodshed and killing looks like. For the record, he takes his money and salary from the country’s money, while graduates can’t even find a job. Then the [Coordination] Framework [leaders] ask, why don’t people sympathize with us?
With that particular post, Isaac also included another person’s post that conveyed a similar
message.
Less than a week after Isaac posted these comments, as the complaint alleged,
William Sbatini, an advisor to MBN’s President, and Mohammed Bardawill, MBN’s Head
of the News, advised Isaac that MBN was terminating his employment. The complaint
stated, “The alleged basis was due to a tweet in violation of MBN’s social media policy.”
7 USCA4 Appeal: 25-1333 Doc: 37 Filed: 06/17/2026 Pg: 8 of 15
Based on these facts, Isaac alleged that the Code of Ethics and social media policy
were enforced unevenly and more leniently for non-Iraqi journalists, such that
discrimination against Iraqi journalists could be inferred. The complaint then described
numerous comparators but alleged “specifically [that] the most comparable would be
Khalil Bin Tawila,” an Algerian who had “appeared with his title in a TV Interview with a
Radical Anti-government Chinese network and called for regime change. He was
suspended for two weeks and not let go.” But the complaint made no allegation that Tawila
had been given a prior warning that he disobeyed, nor did it explain how circumstances in
China were analogous to those in Iraq, where MBN was actually broadcasting. The
complaint described other less similar comparators, again never alleging that any had
disobeyed an order or warning or even that the comparator had posted about Iraqi politics.
The district court granted MBN’s motion to dismiss Isaac’s amended complaint for
failure to allege a plausible claim for relief. The court referenced its prior ruling granting
MBN’s motion to dismiss Isaac’s initial complaint, in which it had observed that this case
was “pretty much almost the same case against the same defendant representing a different
journalist [Aljizzani] from the entity also of Iraqi background,” which a different district
judge had already dismissed. The court concluded that Isaac’s complaint was likewise
deficient because it did not “adequately and more specifically [allege] appropriate
comparators that would allow the case to go forward” and therefore “the complaint is really
not sufficient,” especially when the allegations of discrimination were “based solely on
comparators.”
From the district court’s order dated March 7, 2025, Isaac filed this appeal.
8 USCA4 Appeal: 25-1333 Doc: 37 Filed: 06/17/2026 Pg: 9 of 15
II
To survive a motion to dismiss filed under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6),
a plaintiff must “allege facts sufficient to state all the elements of [his] claim.” Bass v. E.I.
DuPont de Nemours & Co., 324 F.3d 761, 765 (4th Cir. 2003). In reviewing such a motion,
a court must “focus on the pleading requirements under the Federal Rules rather than the
proof ultimately required to succeed on the claim.” Bing v. Brivo Sys., LLC, 959 F.3d 605,
616 (4th Cir. 2020). And Rule 8(a)(2) “requires only a short and plain statement of the
claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief, in order to give the defendant fair notice
of what the . . . claim is and the grounds upon which it rests.” Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly,
550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007) (cleaned up). But a plaintiff cannot rely on “labels and
conclusions, and a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action.” Id. Rather,
a complaint must “‘contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to state a claim to
relief that is plausible on its face’ in the sense that the complaint’s factual allegations must
allow a ‘court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the
misconduct alleged.’” McCleary-Evans v. Md. Dep’t of Transp., State Highway Admin.,
780 F.3d 582, 585 (4th Cir. 2015) (emphasis added) (cleaned up) (quoting Ashcroft v. Iqbal,
556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009)). Our review is de novo. See Langford v. Joyner, 62 F.4th 122,
124 (4th Cir. 2023).
As relevant here, each plaintiff, in order to state a plausible Title VII discrimination
claim, was “required to allege facts to satisfy the elements of a cause of action created by
that statute,” McCleary-Evans, 780 F.3d at 585 — here, that MBN “discharge[d]” him
“because of . . . national origin,” 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(a)(1) (emphasis added).
9 USCA4 Appeal: 25-1333 Doc: 37 Filed: 06/17/2026 Pg: 10 of 15
While both plaintiffs alleged an adverse action — that MBN terminated their
employment — they failed nonetheless to allege facts sufficient for a court to infer that
their termination was because of their national origin rather than their insubordination with
respect to MBN’s Code and social media policy. We address each complaint in turn.
In his complaint, Aljizzani alleged that he was subject to MBN’s Code of Ethics and
social media policy, which limited what its journalists could post on their social media
accounts. He also acknowledged that MBN could terminate employees for violations of
the Code and policy.
As to his termination, the complaint alleged that Aljizzani made a social media post
on March 6, 2021, apparently critiquing the Grand Ayatollah in Iraq as he was meeting
with Pope Francis. Aljizzani’s supervisor immediately called him “and told him to delete
his tweet.” When Aljizzani refused to delete the tweet, MBN suspended him. Three days
later, when he still had not deleted the tweet, MBN convened a meeting between Aljizzani
and two corporate executives, and Aljizzani again refused to remove the tweet. At that
point, MBN terminated him “for violating [its] Code,” as the complaint alleged. In short,
the complaint alleged that Aljizzani was terminated for insubordination.
To be sure, Aljizzani argues that, although he was terminated for insubordination,
his firing was nonetheless discriminatory because he was treated differently from non-Iraqi
employees. But the complaint did not identify a single non-Iraqi employee who engaged
in similar conduct — i.e., who made a social media post about Iraqi politics, in violation
10 USCA4 Appeal: 25-1333 Doc: 37 Filed: 06/17/2026 Pg: 11 of 15
of MBN’s Code of Ethics and social media policy, and who subsequently defied MBN’s
direct order to remove the offending post — and who was not likewise terminated. Rather,
the complaint alleged only that two non-Iraqi employees, Randa Jebai and Ghalia Bdewi,
“regularly post[ed] on social media” and “have never received reprimands for violating
MBN’s Code” and that three other non-Iraqi employees, Pedro Ghanem, Joe Khawly, and
Tamara Abou Dehen, “frequently tweet[ed] political opinions that should constitute
violations” of the Code but have not been reprimanded. Such highly generalized
comparisons based simply on allegations that other individuals posted on social media
without reprimand lack the particularity necessary to permit a court to “draw the reasonable
inference” that Aljizzani was terminated because of his national origin rather than his
conduct. McCleary-Evans, 780 F.3d at 585 (cleaned up). Without any suggestion that any
other employee engaged in the same conduct and was not terminated, an inference of
discrimination is unwarranted and implausible, particularly “in light of the ‘obvious
alternative explanation’” that Aljizzani was fired for insubordination. Id. at 588 (quoting
Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 682); see also Kelley v. United Parcel Serv., Inc., 528 F. App’x 285,
286–87 (4th Cir. 2013) (per curiam).
For these reasons, we affirm the district court’s order dismissing Aljizzani’s
complaint for failure to state a claim of Title VII discrimination.
11 USCA4 Appeal: 25-1333 Doc: 37 Filed: 06/17/2026 Pg: 12 of 15
Isaac’s complaint falls short for the same reason. He too alleged that he was subject
to MBN’s Code of Ethics and social media policy, which regulated his activity on personal
social media accounts and allowed MBN to terminate employees for violations.
As for his circumstances, he alleged that in March 2021, MBN sent him a “verbal
warning[] to stop posting any political content about Iraq on [his] personal social media
accounts.” But, notwithstanding this warning, the complaint described how he posted at
least four tweets about Iraqi politics. He acknowledged in his complaint that less than one
week later, MBN terminated his employment “due to a tweet in violation of MBN’s social
media policy.” Thus, like Aljizzani’s, Isaac’s complaint alleged that his employment was
terminated for repeated insubordination and violation of the Code and social media policy.
Like Aljizzani’s, Issac’s main argument for alleging discrimination again rests on
facts in the complaint alleging that he was treated less favorably than non-Iraqi employees.
In particular, he points to the allegations that Jebai and Bdewi “regularly posted similar
content to the Iraqi journalists on social media” without reprimand; that Ghanem, Khawly,
and Dehen “frequently tweeted their political opinions without reprimand”; and that a sixth
employee, Tawila, discussed Chinese politics on television but was only suspended.
(Cleaned up). But here, too, Isaac’s complaint provided insufficient detail from which to
conclude that the comparators’ circumstances were sufficiently similar to his so as to give
rise to a reasonable inference that Isaac was terminated because of his national origin rather
than his repeated policy violations. See, e.g., Swaso v. Onslow Cnty. Bd. of Educ., 698 F.
App’x 745, 749 (4th Cir. 2017) (per curiam); Squire v. Identity, Inc., No. 21-2410, 2022
12 USCA4 Appeal: 25-1333 Doc: 37 Filed: 06/17/2026 Pg: 13 of 15
WL 17038958, at *2 (4th Cir. Nov. 17, 2022) (cleaned up) (“The inferential gap is
especially yawning when an obvious alternative explanation could explain [the
employer’s] decision”); McCleary-Evans, 780 F.3d at 588 (similar).
For these reasons, we also affirm the district court’s order dismissing Isaac’s
complaint for failure to state a claim of Title VII discrimination.
* * *
Aljizzani and Isaac alleged detailed facts demonstrating that MBN terminated their
employment only after each had violated a company policy and had been warned or ordered
to comply. Aljizzani’s complaint alleged that he twice refused orders to remove a social
media post that MBN had concluded violated its Code of Ethics and social media policy.
And Isaac’s complaint alleged that he violated MBN’s social media policy at least four
times, in direct violation of a warning not to post about Iraqi politics. Neither complaint
alleged facts that could give rise to a plausible inference of discrimination. Thus, both
complaints “stopped short of the line between possibility and plausibility of entitlement to
relief.” McCleary-Evans, 780 F.3d at 586 (cleaned up). Without more, a court could “only
speculate” that the plaintiffs were terminated because of their national origin rather than
on account of their admitted policy violations and insubordination. Id. We therefore affirm
the judgments in both cases.
13 USCA4 Appeal: 25-1333 Doc: 37 Filed: 06/17/2026 Pg: 14 of 15
III
Aljizzani also argues that the district court abused its discretion in dismissing his
amended complaint with prejudice, thus precluding him from amending it for a second
time. We cannot agree, however, as he never requested leave to amend it.
To be sure, Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15 instructs district courts to “freely
give leave [to amend a pleading] when justice so requires.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(2). And
“[t]he law is well settled ‘that leave to amend a pleading should be denied only when the
amendment would be prejudicial to the opposing party, there has been bad faith on the part
of the moving party, or the amendment would be futile.’” Edwards v. City of Goldsboro,
178 F.3d 231, 242 (4th Cir. 1999) (emphasis omitted) (quoting Johnson v. Oroweat Foods
Co., 785 F.2d 503, 509 (4th Cir. 1986)). But “[r]egardless of the merits of the desired
amendment, a district court does not abuse its discretion by declining to grant a motion that
was never properly made.” Drager v. PLIVA USA, Inc., 741 F.3d 470, 474 (4th Cir. 2014)
(cleaned up); see also Cozzarelli v. Inspire Pharms. Inc., 549 F.3d 618, 630–31 (4th Cir.
2008) (same); United States ex rel. Carson v. Manor Care, Inc., 851 F.3d 293, 305 n.6 (4th
Cir. 2017).
Moreover, in this case, it would appear that any further amendment would be “futile
in light of the fundamental deficiencies in [Aljizzani’s] theory of liability.” Cozzarelli, 549
F.3d at 630. By Aljizzani’s representation, if given leave to amend, he would provide
“detailed descriptions of the various jobs of comparators and exact [social media] postings
14 USCA4 Appeal: 25-1333 Doc: 37 Filed: 06/17/2026 Pg: 15 of 15
for comparison.” But additional information regarding non-Iraqi employees’ social media
posts that Aljizzani does not claim were about Iraqi politics would not move the needle,
especially in the absence of a proffer that he could also allege that those non-Iraqi
employees had been similarly insubordinate.
The judgments entered on June 20, 2024 (in No. 24-1672) and March 7, 2025 (in
No. 25-1333) are accordingly
AFFIRMED.