First Liberty Institute asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit to reverse a lower court decision that dismissed a lawsuit filed by two flight attendants against Alaska Airlines. The lawsuit alleged the airline terminated them because of their religious beliefs related to the Equality Act. The lawsuit also claims the Association of Flight Attendants union failed to uphold its responsibility to defend the plaintiffs because of their religious beliefs.
You can read the brief here.
“Americans are being fired for their religious beliefs, and it is chilling that a court of law would condone this. We are asking the Ninth Circuit to reverse the lower court’s decision,” said Stephanie Taub, Senior Counsel at First Liberty Institute. “Disregarding federal civil rights laws that protect people of faith from discrimination, Alaska Airlines canceled our clients and the flight attendants’ union betrayed their trust. We will continue to fight for our clients until Alaska Airlines and the Association of Flight Attendants are held accountable, and American employees are safe from discrimination.”
In early 2021, Alaska Airlines announced its support for the Equality Act on an internal employee message board and invited employees to comment. Lacey posted a question, asking, “As a company, do you think it is possible to regulate morality?” In the same forum, the second flight attendant asked, “Does Alaska support: endangering the Church, encouraging suppression of religious freedom, obliterating women rights and parental rights? ….” Both plaintiffs, who had exemplary records as employees, were subsequently investigated, questioned by airline authorities, and fired from their jobs.
When it fired them, the Airline said the flight attendants’ comments were “discriminatory,” “hateful,” and “offensive.” In its notice of discharge to Ms. Smith, Alaska Airlines claimed, “Defining gender identity or sexual orientation as a moral issue” is “a discriminatory statement.”
In the brief, First Liberty attorneys state, “The lower court erred, as a matter of law, by incorrectly defining the scope of religious discrimination and misapplying legal standards to evaluate the evidence. Although Title VII forbids discrimination based upon any aspect of religious belief, practice, or observance, the court excused discrimination based upon religious comments. Plaintiffs presented sufficient evidence for a reasonable jury to find that the Airline fired Plaintiffs (and the Union attempted to get Plaintiffs fired) because of comments that expressed or revealed their religious beliefs.”
