U.S. District Judge Sidney Fitzwater ruled that the claims of discrimination against two students, one white and one Asian, were not made moot.
DALLAS - A US District Judge has rejected Southwest Airlines (WN) attempt to dismiss a lawsuit claiming the airline’s now-defunct diversity program was racially discriminatory.
The lawsuit was filed by Edward Blum, a prominent affirmative action opponent and founder of the American Alliance for Equal Rights. Blum argued that Southwest’s “¡Lánzate!” program, which provided free flights to Hispanic college students, discriminated against white and Asian students.
Southwest Airlines Free Flights Lawsuit
Despite Southwest’s elimination of the 20-year-old program and an offer to pay Blum’s group one cent in damages, U.S. District Judge Sidney Fitzwater ruled that the claims of discrimination against two students, one white and one Asian, were not made moot.
The judge’s decision allows Blum’s group to move forward with the lawsuit, which alleges Southwest violated a Civil War-era law prohibiting racial bias in contracting. This ruling could have wider implications for future legal challenges to corporate diversity and inclusion initiatives.
In a statement, Blum described the decision as a “powerful tool to prevent case-mooting tactics from discriminators nationwide.”
The lawsuit is the latest in a series of cases Blum has filed challenging diversity programs, including his successful Supreme Court challenge to race-conscious admissions policies in college.
Recent Lawsuit Against Southwest
On October 29, 2024, a federal appeals court ruled that Southwest Airlines must face a lawsuit accusing the carrier of illegally intimidating and disciplining pilots who participate in its more than 9,000-member pilots union.
In a 3-0 decision, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said the Southwest Airlines Pilots Association sufficiently pleaded that the Dallas-based carrier had “anti-union animus” to allow the dispute to proceed in federal court. A lower court had previously ruled the dispute was minor and belonged to arbitration.
The case stemmed from Southwest’s decision to strip Timothy Roebling of his responsibilities and pay as a “check pilot” – a special group of about 300 pilots who work closely with management and train other pilots.
Southwest cited Roebling’s use of a vulgarity to justify the discipline, but the union said it resulted from his decision to join the union’s check pilot committee.
Separately, on June 7, 2024, a different 5th Circuit panel upheld a ruling that required Southwest’s lawyers to undergo “religious liberty training” after a flight attendant won a discrimination lawsuit.
The appeals court said the 2023 order by U.S. District Judge Brantley Starr was likely invalid because it provided no benefit to the plaintiff, Charlene Carter, and was an improper sanction on attorneys not involved in the underlying misconduct.
This story originally appeared on Aviation A2Z.
Comments