Federal Appeals Court Reinstates Lawsuit by Flight Attendants Fired Over Religious Objections to Equality Act Support
A Ninth Circuit ruling allows two former Alaska Airlines employees to proceed with their religious discrimination claims against the airline and their union.
Media·

A federal appeals court has revived a lawsuit initiated by two former flight attendants against Alaska Airlines, asserting they were terminated due to their religious beliefs. The employees had voiced objections to the airline's endorsement of the Equality Act, leading to their dismissal.
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals issued a ruling on Wednesday, determining there is adequate evidence for a jury to assess whether Lacey Smith and Marli Brown's dismissals were a direct result of their religious convictions. This decision allows their legal challenge against the airline to move forward.
Background of the Dispute
The controversy originated in early 2021 when Alaska Airlines announced its support for the proposed Equality Act on an internal online platform accessible to employees. The Equality Act, championed by then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, aimed to incorporate sexual orientation and gender identity as protected categories under federal civil rights legislation concerning employment, housing, and other areas. The bill successfully passed the House of Representatives in February 2021.
The airline invited employees to share their thoughts and comments on the online forum. During this discussion, Lacey Smith posted a question asking, "As a company, do you think it’s possible to regulate morality?" Concurrently, Marli Brown submitted a comment articulating her deeply held religious convictions, suggesting that the Equality Act could negatively impact women, girls, and individuals of faith.
Following these remarks on the company's internal forum, both Smith and Brown faced investigations and were subsequently fired from their positions. Alaska Airlines characterized their comments as "discriminatory," "hateful," and "offensive."
Legal Challenge Proceeds
Stephanie Taub, senior counsel at First Liberty Institute, which represents Smith and Brown and argued their case before the court in August 2025, expressed satisfaction with the appellate court's decision.
"We are grateful the court recognized the clear evidence of religious discrimination against Marli and Lacey by both Alaska Airlines and the flight attendants’ union," Taub stated. "The Ninth Circuit’s decision today reinforces that federal civil rights laws protect people of faith from discrimination by their employer or their union. You cannot be fired because your employer does not like your religious beliefs."
The ruling underscores the protection afforded to individuals of faith under federal civil rights statutes, ensuring that employment decisions are not based on an employer's disapproval of an employee's religious beliefs.
Related Stories

Activist at Socialism 2026 Conference Labels Diet Industry's Focus on 'Black Fat Flesh' as 'Body Fascism'
An activist at the Socialism 2026 conference in Chicago described the diet industry's focus on 'Black fat flesh' as 'body fascism.' Author Da’Shaun L. Harrison argued that health standards policing Black fatness are
Sep 7

Andrew Garfield's Comments on Billionaires and New Film "The Uprising" Ignite Controversy
During a Los Angeles screening for his film "The Uprising," Andrew Garfield stated he hoped the movie would frighten billionaires. His remarks quickly drew criticism on social media, with many pointing to the actor's
Sep 6

Dr. Phil Reflects on Lindsay Clancy Mistrial, Calls for Learning from "Failure" in Postpartum Psychosis Case
Dr. Phil McGraw commented on the Lindsay Clancy mistrial, emphasizing the seriousness of postpartum psychosis and the importance of understanding mental illness in legal proceedings. He highlighted the need for
Sep 5

Pentagon AI Expert Cautions Against "China-Like Surveillance State" from Unchecked Camera Expansion
A former Pentagon AI policy director warns that widespread AI surveillance tools like Flock cameras risk creating a "China-like surveillance state" without proper guardrails. He advocates for strict rules and judicial
Sep 5