A Dearborn resident says the city spent thousands of taxpayer dollars lighting up streetlights for Ramadan while brushing off her requests to honor Easter and Passover the same way.
Story Snapshot
- Dearborn resident and journalist Margot Cleveland filed a federal lawsuit against the city and Mayor Abdullah Hammoud on September 17, 2026.
- The complaint claims the city spent public money on Ramadan banners and a lit crescent-moon display while denying similar recognition for Christian and Jewish holidays.
- Dearborn expanded its Ramadan lighting in 2026, calling it “the first of its kind” in the city, according to the lawsuit.
- City officials say Dearborn treats all residents fairly and blame the backlash on the city’s diversity.
What The Lawsuit Actually Claims
Margot Cleveland, a senior legal correspondent for The Federalist, filed her complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan. She brought the case with help from the American Freedom Law Center. The suit names the City of Dearborn and Mayor Abdullah Hammoud as defendants, arguing they violated her First and Fourteenth Amendment rights by favoring one faith over others on public property.
The complaint centers on 2025 records showing Dearborn spent about $1,500 on “Ramadan Kareem” banners and another $5,000 on a large illuminated crescent-moon display in a city park, according to public records obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request. The lawsuit says the police department also sold Ramadan-themed shirts carrying its official emblem, adding to the picture of city resources tied directly to one religious observance.
Requests For Equal Treatment Went Nowhere, Suit Says
Cleveland says she repeatedly asked the city to extend the same recognition to Easter and Passover. Instead of adding those displays, the lawsuit claims Dearborn doubled down. In 2026, the city commissioned new crescent-and-star light displays on municipal streetlights across town, describing the effort as “the first of its kind in Dearborn”. Mayor Hammoud reportedly called the initiative a reflection of “who we are as a city.”
That quote sits at the heart of the legal fight. Plaintiffs argue a mayor’s public statement tying a government-funded display to civic identity looks less like neutral holiday decor and more like the city picking a favorite religion. Robert Muise, the attorney representing Cleveland, put it bluntly: the city lit up its streets for Ramadan while stonewalling a resident who simply wanted equal treatment for other faiths.
The City’s Response And What The Law Actually Says
Dearborn pushed back over the weekend following the filing. The city said it has “a longstanding commitment to serving all residents fairly and equitably, regardless of faith or background,” and suggested the criticism stems from Dearborn’s diversity rather than any real policy of favoritism. That statement addresses the city’s intent but does not directly dispute the dollar figures or the mayor’s quoted remarks cited in the complaint.
@ImtiazMadmood
A federal lawsuit has been filed against the City of Dearborn and Mayor Abdullah Hammoud. The lawsuit alleges that the city used public money and public property to prominently celebrate Ramadan while not giving similar recognition to Christian and Jewish holidays.…— Andy (@jerseypower) September 20, 2026
Courts have wrestled with holiday displays on public property for decades. The Supreme Court ruled in Lynch v. Donnelly that a government display isn’t automatically unconstitutional just because it includes religious imagery, as long as it also serves a secular purpose and doesn’t look like the state is picking a favorite faith. That precedent cuts both ways here. It gives Dearborn room to argue its Ramadan displays served a broader civic purpose, but it also means the city can’t simply skip equal treatment for other faiths without a legitimate secular reason. A mayor publicly tying a taxpayer-funded display to the city’s identity is exactly the kind of statement that could tip a court toward finding favoritism rather than neutral celebration.
For a country built on the idea that government shouldn’t put its thumb on the scale for any one religion, this case lands as a plain test of that principle. If the allegations hold up, taxpayers in a diverse American city funded one faith’s holiday while a neighbor asking for the same courtesy got ignored. That’s not a fringe complaint. It’s the kind of even-handed treatment most Americans, regardless of belief, expect from their local government.
Sources:
algemeiner.com, foxnews.com, pjmedia.com, ynetnews.com, justice.gov, becketfund.org
