Abdul El-Sayed, the Democratic candidate for Michigan's open U.S. Senate seat, is named in a discrimination lawsuit that accuses him of telling an older female colleague he was excited not to be working with "anyone over 40." The allegation is part of a broader complaint filed by eight former female employees against the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai in New York, the Washington Free Beacon reported.
El-Sayed is not a defendant in the case. But the complaint paints a detailed picture of his alleged conduct during a 2015 reorganization at Mount Sinai, and it lands at a politically inconvenient moment. Just weeks ago, El-Sayed launched a "Women for Abdul" campaign initiative, declaring that "incredible women raised me" and "incredible women guide me today."
The lawsuit, filed in 2019, alleges that when Mount Sinai Global Health was reorganized into the Arnhold Institute for Global Health in 2015, the new boss, Prabhjot Singh, systematically demoted the eight women and pushed them out of their roles. Singh, the complaint claims, sought to fill leadership positions with "overwhelmingly young men" in his social circle. His first hire, the plaintiffs say, was El-Sayed.
The complaint's account of El-Sayed's hiring raises pointed questions about merit and process. He was 30 years old, just one year out of medical school, and had not completed a medical residency. Singh did not open the associate director position to existing staff, other Mount Sinai employees, or the public, the suit alleges. He recruited El-Sayed directly.
The salary: $200,000.
El-Sayed and Singh had worked together previously at Columbia University. The complaint describes them as "part of a group of academics who had a tacit agreement to promote each other's reputations and provide each other with prestigious speaking engagements and career opportunities." The suit alleges both men "made numerous statements about how they only wanted to work with young people."
The most specific allegation targets El-Sayed by name. He told a female AIGH employee, who was 41 at the time, "that he was excited to not be working with 'anyone over 40,'" the complaint states. The plaintiffs claim Singh and El-Sayed "wanted to run AIGH like a Silicon Valley start-up and believed, as is common in that world, that effective enterprises should be run by young men."
That framing, young men running the show, older women pushed aside, is the core of the discrimination claim. El-Sayed's alleged remark sits at the center of it.
El-Sayed's actual time at the Arnhold Institute appears to have been minimal. The complaint states he was tapped for the position in April 2015, spent a few months visiting AIGH offices and events and attending strategy meetings, and then moved back to Michigan in the summer of 2015 to take a job as executive director of the Detroit Health Department. It remains unclear whether he ever formally worked a single day in the role. The Free Beacon noted, "It's not clear."
The complaint also alleges El-Sayed "boasted" to one plaintiff about furnishing his AIGH office with "very high-end furniture, using leftover grant money from grants he transferred from Columbia University to Mount Sinai." That allegation, if proven, would suggest he was spending institutional funds on personal office décor during a tenure that barely lasted a season.
El-Sayed left the Detroit Health Department to launch an unsuccessful gubernatorial campaign in 2018. He later directed the Department of Health, Human, and Veterans Services in Wayne County, Michigan. Now he is running for the U.S. Senate, and asking Michigan women to rally behind him.
This is not the first time El-Sayed has faced uncomfortable scrutiny during his political career. He has already drawn questions about dark money ties to his Senate campaign, adding another layer of concern for voters trying to assess his record.
El-Sayed's spokeswoman, Roxie Richner, pushed back firmly on the lawsuit's allegations. She told the Free Beacon:
"Dr. Abdul El-Sayed never worked at Mount Sinai. He had been hired to a role in which he never served. The hearsay allegations in this lawsuit are not based in fact."
That defense is worth examining closely. Richner's claim that El-Sayed "never worked at Mount Sinai" and was "hired to a role in which he never served" does not directly deny the alleged statement about not wanting to work with anyone over 40. It reframes the question as one of employment status. Whether El-Sayed formally worked there or merely visited offices, attended meetings, and allegedly furnished his office with expensive furniture is a distinction the lawsuit's plaintiffs may not find persuasive.
The case is ongoing. A judge dismissed some of the plaintiffs' claims in federal court on statute-of-limitations grounds. Those plaintiffs then refiled in New York state court, while the remaining federal claims moved forward. The case is now in discovery, the phase where documents, emails, and depositions can surface.
El-Sayed has also faced questions about his background on other fronts. The Free Beacon reported in January that he had identified himself as a dual U.S.-Egyptian citizen while working as an assistant professor at Columbia. Richner responded that El-Sayed "is not a dual citizen by any verifiable metric and never has been," explaining he had been "told as a child that his grandfather had pursued Egyptian citizenship on his behalf" but that "he and his family were unable to find any documentation to verify this claim."
The timing of this lawsuit's resurfacing could hardly be worse for El-Sayed's campaign messaging. In mid-March, he stood before supporters and launched "Women for Abdul," positioning himself as a champion of women's advancement. He told the crowd that "incredible women guide me today." He attacked opponents by saying, "You can't say you are truly 'for women' when you are unwilling to recognize that that money ought to be spent to educate our little girls and boys in their schools to grow up to become anything that they want to be."
Strong words. But the complaint tells a different story, one in which El-Sayed allegedly walked into a workplace where experienced women held leadership roles and announced his enthusiasm for a team free of anyone over 40. The woman who heard those words was 41.
El-Sayed is hardly the first politician to build a public brand that clashes with private conduct alleged in court filings. But the gap between the "Women for Abdul" campaign and the allegations in this lawsuit is stark enough to deserve sustained attention from Michigan voters and journalists alike.
The broader pattern of controversy around El-Sayed's candidacy continues to grow. He was previously caught in a leaked call controversy involving his approach to sensitive foreign policy questions, and his subsequent response only deepened concerns about his willingness to deflect rather than answer directly.
Michigan's Democratic politics have been turbulent in recent years. State Democrat Karen Whitsett walked away from the party over what she described as a betrayal of her values, and the state's political class has faced repeated pressure from advocacy groups demanding ideological conformity. El-Sayed's Senate bid sits squarely in that contested landscape.
The lawsuit is now in the discovery phase, meaning both sides will exchange documents and take depositions. If emails, internal communications, or other records corroborate the plaintiffs' allegations, El-Sayed's campaign will face more than a spokeswoman's denial to manage. If the evidence falls short, the campaign can claim vindication. Either way, the process will produce a factual record.
Several questions remain unanswered. What grants were transferred from Columbia to Mount Sinai, and how was that money spent? Did El-Sayed receive any compensation from Mount Sinai for a role his own spokeswoman says he never served in? Which specific claims survived the federal statute-of-limitations challenge, and what do they allege?
El-Sayed is not a defendant. He does not face personal legal liability in this case. But the allegations place him at the scene of what eight women describe as a discriminatory purge, and they quote him saying the quiet part out loud.
Voters can decide for themselves whether a man who allegedly told a 41-year-old woman he was glad to be rid of anyone her age should be the one lecturing Michigan about who is truly "for women."
