This is the fundamentalist Christian nationalist religious majority trying hard to find a reason that violating any religion not christianity was OK. They do not deny that the man’s religious beliefs were violated and ignored even after the courts had ruled to protect them. That shows a bias against the non-Christian religions. The SCOTUS has no qualms lying and using false misleading inform to create ruling in favor of the Christian religion and those that want to push / force it on to everyone else in the country. Hugs
For more than two decades, the Supreme Court has issued a long series of wins for plaintiffs seeking to protect their religious practices. On June 23, 2026, though, the majority delivered an uncommon defeat in this contentious area.
Landor v. Louisiana Department of Public Education and Safety, a 6-3 judgment, rejected the claim of Damon Landor, a Rastafarian whose hair was forcibly shaved in prison. Landor had worn long dreadlocks for almost 20 years as an expression of his beliefs – part of a biblical practice known as the “Nazarite vow.” Like lower court judges, the Supreme Court did not dispute that officials violated Landor’s rights. However, the high court’s majority ruled that he could not sue individual officials at the prison.
The case stands out for at least three other reasons.
First, Landor v. Louisiana underscores the complexity and far-reaching nature of religious freedom laws in the United States and the increasingly diverse faith traditions to which they apply. Christians now represent 62% of the American population, down from 78% in 2007, while 29% have no religious affiliation and 7% belong to other faith traditions.
Second, Landor’s case gained support from many groups typically at odds over how to protect religious freedoms – groups disappointed withthis week’s decision.
Finally, the case highlights the religious rights of the nearly 2 million people in U.S. prisons, jails and detention and correctional facilities – and the challenge of holding their public employees accountable when those rights are violated.
Toward the end of his sentence, Landor was transferred to a different correctional facility in the state. There – with three weeks left for Landor to serve – the warden ignored the judicial order, directing guards to shackle Landor and forcibly shave his head.
After finishing his sentence, Landor filed suit for money damages under the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act. The act forbids the government and its officials from imposing “substantial burden(s)” on incarcerated people’s First Amendment right to the free exercise of religion. It also protects religious groups from discrimination through zoning restrictions.
Journey through the courts
In 2022, a federal trial court in Louisiana condemned Landor’s treatment but rejected his claim, concluding that money damages were not an appropriate remedy under the act.
The following year, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals “emphatically condemn(ed) the treatment that Landor endured.” However, the panel unanimously affirmed the lower court’s decision, based on its earlier ruling that plaintiffs cannot sue government officials in their individual capacities for monetary damages – only the institution.
At issue was not whether Landor’s rights had been violated but whether he could sue an individual official, namely the warden, for monetary damages. During oral arguments on Nov. 10, 2025, the Supreme Court seemed skeptical.
Legal dilemma
That skepticism was reflected in the court’s ultimate ruling. It was essentially a procedural ruling about the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act rather than a judgment on the merits of Landor’s religious freedom claim.
Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote the majority opinion, joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson’s dissent was joined by Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan.
The majority’s argument that Landor could not sue centered on the spending clause of the U.S. Constitution – the source of Congress’ authority to create the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act. The spending clause allows the legislature to spend money to provide for the “general Welfare of the United States.” If a state or institution uses federal funds, their officials agree to certain conditions; if they violate those conditions, Congress can remove funding.
But the spending clause does not give Congress authority to hold individual employees accountable, Gorsuch argued in his 18-page opinion. Prison officials had not “voluntarily and knowingly consented to answer private suits” under the act, and so they could not be held directly liable for monetary damages. Otherwise, Congress would have “effectively unbridled police power.”
Jackson’s 29-page dissent disagreed with the majority’s interpretation of the spending clause. The ruling, she contended, “jettisons ‘a long line of this Court’s precedents’” under which “Congress has been able to use its spending power to reach beyond direct recipients of federal funds.” As such, she worried that the court’s order imposed a “novel consent requirement.”
Jackson also lamented the decision’s potential consequences for inmates. Although the goal of the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act was to protect prisoners’ faith practices, she worried that people “like Landor who suffer violations of their religious freedom in state prisons – no matter how blatant – will often be left remediless.”
Bigger picture
At a glance, the Landor case appears to be a procedural disagreement rather than one over religious freedom.
However, I argue Landor v. Louisiana must be viewed as a setback for religious liberty, raising a serious question about whether minority faiths have as much protection under the First Amendment as larger religions. The decision is also something of a surprise to me, because the Supreme Court has recently upheld free exercise rights in multiple high-profile cases, almost all of which involve Christianity – such as a football coach’s ability to pray on the field after public school games.
Portions of this article originally appeared in a previous article published on Nov. 6, 2025.
Wow. There is a lot of historic information in this video. The author / presenter has quick cuts to other personality characters she plays to highlight the absurdity of some positions held by the hierarchy. She delvesdeeply into the idea of what is proper femininity, who steps outside it, and who thinks they are responsible for judging or enforcing it. She delves into how many fights against change and equality are about fears by men of emasculation. The lowering of men’s status. When she elaborates on suffrage, all the fears seem to be that allowing women to vote would give women the right to be men and force men to be women. Seem familure? She goes into detail on how each repressive opressive responce to equal rights comes down to the same phrases such as save the children, save the family, or the claims that society it self will end. The clips she intersperses go by far too quickly so I had to stop the video to read them but she does describe what is on them. The begining was choppy and it took me a bit to get her style of presentation but once I did I found it very informative fillwed with facts, history, and fun to watch. Hugs
The transgender bathroom ‘debate’ isn’t new (but it is stupid). I’m looking at you TERF’s…
Looking back through history, gender politics is consistently entangled with race, class, misogyny, and disability. Minority groups existing outside the ‘norm’ are attacked as ‘radicals’ or menaces to society…
But what prevails each time we face oppression AND causes real change in our society?
On the first day of the Great American State Fair on the National Mall, there were no butter sculptures, blue-ribbon livestock or prizewinning rutabaga pies to admire. But visitors could take in a gleaming portrait of President Trump, pick up a handbill promoting Turning Point USA and hear a speaker read a poem declaring every teen to be “a conscript in a spiritual world war.”
Volunteers with the River at Tampa Bay Church in Florida approached people asking if they knew that “Jesus loves you and has a plan for you.” Literature was distributed proclaiming that Mr. Trump was leading the “Great American Comeback.” Exhibitors included Hillsdale College, a conservative Christian institution, and the Museum of the Bible. On the edge of the grounds, performers sang hymns in a worship tent.
Under a sweltering sun, attendance was sparse, and power failures did not help — by Thursday night, the Ferris wheel had been out of commission for hours. Across from that ride, visitors could look at a smaller-scale model of Mr. Trump’s proposed 250-foot triumphal arch. Its vinyl covering — stapled over a wood frame and emblazoned with the words “One Nation Under God” — had already started buckling.
Nobody who has been paying attention to the Trump administration’s handling of America’s 250th anniversary should be surprised that a Confederate flag turned up at the Great American State Fair on the National Mall. It was discovered at the North Carolina booth and in its own small way tells you everything you need to know about this whole production.
The controversy erupted after footage circulated showing the North Carolina exhibit featuring altered versions of the state flag with the Confederate battle emblem superimposed over the design. Governor Josh Stein’s office condemned the display, calling it a misrepresentation of North Carolina and demanding that organizers remove it.
North Carolina’s official state flag has never included the Confederate battle symbol in any version of its design. Not in 1861, not in 1885, not ever. Whoever put together that video display didn’t just stumble into Lost Cause territory by accident. They had to go out of their way to attach a symbol that the state itself had never chosen to fly.
Eleven states declined to participate and Freedom 250 chose local groups from each state to fill the booths. Videos on social media show baptisms being performed in a tent.
Of Course a Confederate Flag Showed Up at the Great American State Fair #CivilWarMemory #America250open.substack.com/pub/kevinmle…
Trump's "Great American State Fair" is turning into exactly the kind of disaster you'd expect…empty crowds, melting ice cream, Ferris wheel breakdowns, sky-high prices, and even a public indecency arrest.That and a whole lot more in today's bulletin:
These complete no exception bans have pretend exceptions that no doctor can trust. These paws and the people who push them do not see a woman as a whole real person, just a vessel for a possible offspring. Women are dying when there is no viable fetus to protect because these laws do not see women as people. Only men are human people. Plus these laws are pushed by religious fanatics and not doctors. Hugs
Texas resident Lynn Callaway filed a federal complaint against two Texas area hospitals that denied her treatment while she was having a miscarriage. “It has been a whirlwind, very traumatic,” Callaway said. In order to treat her miscarriage, she needed to receive the same procedure used in abortions. “I was someone who also did not realize that the abortion ban, particularly how it bans the pill, as well as the D&C, could also impact miscarriage care. That just never came to my mind, and that’s why it’s very important to understand these laws and understand how they impact everyone.”
The former transportation secretary described it as “the ugliest thing that has happened to me since my career in service began.”
Pete Buttigieg, former secretary of transportation, during the National Action Network 35th Anniversary Convention on April 10, 2026, in New York City.Adam Gray / Bloomberg via Getty Images
Former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg said his family has been targeted in a “politically motivated hoax” after someone made what police characterized as a false report to Child Protective Services alleging he committed crimes against his children.
In a Substack post Friday, Buttigieg wrote that an anonymous caller reported to CPS that his 4-year-old twins he shares with his husband, Chasten, were “at risk.”
“The caller said that he had spoken to a woman who claimed to have met me at a conference several years ago in Alabama, where she said I told her that I had committed unspeakable violent crimes, and the caller believed my children were still at risk,” Buttigieg wrote.
Buttigieg, a prominent Democrat and potential 2028 presidential contender, likened the incident to “swatting” — when someone calls 911 to falsely report an immediate threat, often at a public figure’s home — “but with Child Protective Services instead of a SWAT team.”
As a result of the allegation, Buttigieg said a CPS worker told him he could not be around his children unsupervised for 24 hours while the allegation was investigated. He and his husband dropped the children off with their grandparents for the night, beginning what Buttigieg described as “among the darkest hours of my life.”
He said the children were also interviewed by CPS the following day.
The CPS worker assigned to the case did not find anything to substantiate the allegation, Buttigieg said, adding that he doesn’t know the identity of the person who made the accusation.
The police officer on the case “made clear that he believed this was politically motivated, and said it would not be referred to a prosecutor,” Buttigieg wrote. “Nothing in the forensic interview with the children, which was conducted by trained personnel, had led to concerns.”
In a statement provided to MS NOW on Friday afternoon, the Michigan State Police confirmed receiving an “anonymous report” in the case, adding that police and CPS workers determined it was false.
“False reports are dangerous and divert law enforcement officers and Child Protective Services workers from responding to legitimate emergencies and protecting vulnerable children and families,” the state police said.
In his Substack, Buttigieg characterized the incident as part of broader rise in political violence that leaders on both sides of the aisle face. He called it the worst thing he experienced in politics to date.
“Many times over the years, I have been denounced, yelled at, protested, threatened, and heckled,” Buttigieg wrote. “I’ve been through political attacks in office, death threats in public life, and rocket attacks in war. But this is the ugliest thing that has happened to me since my career in service began.”
“For twenty-four deeply distressing hours,” he continued, “we had no idea what I was accused of or what was about to happen. We could not understand someone abusing the system like this in order to hurt me and my family with an absurd and easily refuted allegation of a horrific crime.”
He also suggested homophobia may have motivated the incident, noting that it occurred during Pride month, which conservatives have long attacked , soon after he posted a photo of his family on Instagram to celebrate Father’s Day. Buttigieg has been subject to homophobic remarks from high-profile officials during his time in the public eye, including from former Vice President Mike Pence, who mocked his decision to take parental leave while serving as transportation secretary, and former co-chair of the Michigan Republican Party, Meshawn Maddock, who called him “a weak little girl” in 2022.
As Buttigieg noted on Substack, making a false report of felony child abuse is a crime under Michigan state law, punishable by a fine of up to four years in prison or a fine of up to $2,000, or both.
Buttigieg was slated to campaign in Tucson this Sunday for JoAnna Mendoza, a Democratic candidate for the state’s 6th Congressional District, but he has canceled the trip, Tucson.com reported.
Spokespeople for the Justice Department and the local prosecutor’s office representing the county where Buttigieg lives did not immediately respond to questions from MS NOW on Friday afternoon. The Michigan Attorney General’s Office declined to comment.
This is a very important news article. I hope everyone will read it. This is scary how a small mostly religious minority wants to erase an entire group of people from existence just for a made up moral certainty that they can’t accept that people different from them exist. They simply won’t accept that other people can feel differently than they do and they insist that they have the right to deny all rights to LGBTQ+ kids / people. I remember being a gay teenager hearing these same arguments about people like me in J high school. How gay kids shouldn’t be allowed in locker rooms as we may get excited by the other kids bodies and lose control and have sex with them right there in the locker room. It was a huge fight back then about gay teachers as the moral right felt they shouldn’t be teaching kids who might see being gay as normal. I remember the silly stupid republicans like Sam Nunn claiming no military person wanted to serve with or god forbid shower in the same room as a gay man. At the time I was gay and in the military and having more sex and great times even with straight guys. But the parent pushing the claim that their daughter had to change clothes in front of a trans kid went on right wing TV programs to promote the hate. The school denies that setup existed. Plus a lot of this is funded and pushed by religious hate groups with a lot of donated money behind them in an attempt to keep the country from progressing as their god is stuck with writings from 2,500 years ago and the majority of hate preachers seem to idolize the 1950s. I feel so sorry for the trans kids today. I remember what it was like for me as a gay kid in the public school system. I was not even out, just different but still I was attacked as a queer faggot. Why some people hate so deeply and want to act on it and even pass it on to others hopeing they will agree with them I can not understand. What happened to live and let live? I believe that if what someone else is doing doesn’t involve me, doesn’t harm me, then let that person be them. Qoutes from the article below. Oh and when did executive orders become laws? Did congress get dissolved, or are we now ruled by the whim or the racist bigot hater? Hugs
According to Liz Mikitarian, a retired kindergarten teacher and the founder of STOP Moms for Liberty, the coordinated efforts to undermine the rights of trans students in Illinois mimic a strategy playing out nationwide.
“You realize it’s so much bigger when you see all the communities around the country that have dealt with this exact same pattern,” Castro told Uncloseted Media and the Chicago Sun-Times.
Pat Green, who is still grappling with the bullying his son experienced, shares Lascano’s concerns. “From the time he was born, he had this light,” says Green. “When he was at his old school, it was just gone. … I’m really scared about the way things are right now. I remember the fear of wondering if I was going to lose my son. [These groups] are not protecting children. They are causing so much harm.”
Parents and advocates say coordinated complaints over transgender students are driving legal fees, security costs and emotional strain across Illinois school districts.
$360,000 and Counting: School Districts Are Spending Big Bucks to Fight Anti-Trans Lawsuits
Parents and advocates say coordinated complaints over transgender students are driving legal fees, security costs and emotional strain across Illinois school districts.
Pat Green sits in front of Hinsdale Township High School South, the school his son transferred to after getting bullied for being queer. Photo by Mark Black for the Chicago Sun-Times.
This story was produced in partnership with the Chicago Sun-Times, a nonprofit newspaper.
Editor’s note: This article includes mention of suicide and self-harm. If you are having thoughts of suicide or are concerned that someone you know may be, resources are available here.
As Pat Green took the stage at the Valley View 365U school board meeting on April 14, 2025, he recalled another night years earlier, when he picked up his 13-year-old son from the hospital. His son, who is trans and had recently come out as queer, had been shoved into a locker so hard that he needed four staples in his forehead.
“I hear the families of LGBTQI+ youth like mine,” Green tells the board. “And I just wanted to say thank you, and for God’s sake, don’t go backwards. … I almost lost the most precious gift God ever gave me.”
In the room with Green were also members of Awake Illinois, a Southern Poverty Law Center-designated hate and anti-government extremist group known for fighting against the rights of trans kids. They had filed a federal civil rights complaint against the district for allegedly violating Title IX by allowing transgender students access to bathrooms and locker rooms consistent with their genders.
When Green’s son, now 25, came out over a decade ago in eighth grade, he faced slurs daily and was told to use the faculty bathroom if he didn’t want to use the girls’ restroom.
“By the end of freshman year, the light my son used to have had turned into dread. Soon after came the cutting, the suicidal ideation, the grades slipping from honor student to barely passing,” Green told Uncloseted Media and the Chicago Sun-Times.
Pat Green and his son. Photo by Mark Black for the Chicago Sun-Times.
Despite Green’s emotional appeal to the school board, Awake Illinois founder Shannon Adcock told the board that “failure to address the Title IX violations will invite severe repercussions, including the termination of federal funding for noncompliant institutions, which would mean $20 million in this district’s case.”
Voices like Adcock’s prompted Green to start attending school board meetings. He noticed an increasing number of complaints and lawsuits from conservative parent groups targeting transgender-inclusive school policies in Illinois that were resulting in legal and financial strain for school districts.
Documents obtained by Uncloseted Media and the Chicago Sun-Times under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) found that Deerfield School District 109 has paid nearly $360,000—the equivalent of four average teachers’ salaries—to fend off an ongoing lawsuit and pay for security costs spawned from complaints about trans-affirming bathroom and locker room policies.
A breakdown of costs Deerfield District 109 faces to fend off an ongoing lawsuit and pay for security costs spawned from complaints about trans-affirming bathroom and locker room policies, which was obtained via FOIA.
That amount is the equivalent of 37% of all federal funds the district received last year. It included more than $255,000 for legal defense, over $30,000 in school security upgrades and $4,000 for extra staff to screen threats.
Moms for Liberty supporters attend a Deerfield District 109 board meeting at Caruso Middle School on April 10, 2025. Photo by Tyler Pasciak LaRiviere for the Chicago Sun-Times.
“When schools are forced to fight lawsuits over issues that aren’t a problem for the vast majority of people, it’s a waste of taxpayer dollars. Straight up monetarily, why are we spending so much time prosecuting and persecuting a minuscule part of the population? Why do you want your tax dollars doing that?” Allaina Humphreys, founder of Bolingbrook Pride, told Uncloseted Media and the Chicago Sun-Times.
While these suits are playing out across the state, school officials say they are following policies that align with the Illinois Human Rights Act, which state regulators and courts say require schools to allow transgender students to use facilities consistent with their gender identity. That interpretation was reinforced by the Illinois Human Rights Commission ruling in 2019 and subsequent state guidance issued in 2021.
But none of this is stopping parents like Adcock. “Federal law reigns supreme,” she said at a Naperville district meeting three months after filing the first of her complaints. “Only recently have trans cultists tried to contest [Title IX].” Adcock did not respond to requests for comment.
“I think the muddying of it comes from all of [Trump’s] executive orders,” says Humphreys. “This administration has used them … to dictate policy that it has no right to dictate. But that doesn’t mean people aren’t using it as a basis for legal action.”
Why Deerfield Had to Pay Nearly $360,000
Last spring, during a series of fiery school board meetings, Deerfield parent Nicole Georgas said her cisgender daughter refused to change for gym class after seeing a trans girl in the locker room. Georgas says administrators made her daughter change in front of them and the other student.
The school district denies the allegations and says they are committed to obeying state law.
Despite this, Georgas—who declined to comment for this story—filed a federal civil rights complaint in March 2025 with the Department of Justice. Conservative legal groups Defense of Freedom Institute for Policy Studies and Liberty Justice Center then cited Georgas’ story in complaints to the Department of Education.
America First Legal—a conservative legal group cofounded by Trump adviser Stephen Miller that has waged a litany of legal attacks against the LGBTQ community—then got in the mix. They urged the U.S. Department of Justice to investigate Deerfield Schools District employees, asking federal prosecutors to look at whether school administrators coordinated enforcement of district policy in a way that violated students’ rights. Though no charges are identified in the referral itself, the letter invokes federal civil rights criminal statutes, which can carry penalties ranging from fines and probation to multi-year prison sentences.
In the Deerfield referral and accompanying press materials, America First Legal repeatedly referred to the transgender student as a “male” or a “boy ‘identifying’ as a girl,” and described school policies recognizing students’ gender identities as “radical gender ideology” and “transgender madness.”
Following this, Georgas sued the district seeking an injunction, punitive damages and money for emotional distress. The U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights repeated Georgas’ claim that students were “allegedly forced” to change in front of the transgender student, and cited previous Trump administration executive orders regarding gender.
Georgas’ message gained even more attention when she appeared on Laura Ingraham’s and the late Charlie Kirk’s shows, where she used transphobic dog whistles to describe the trans student.
“They have continued to have the biological male student present in the locker room with the girls, and they are absolutely in violation with President Trump’s executive order,” Georgas said on Kirk’s show.
Shortly after her appearance on Fox News, a reporter asked White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt about Georgas’ case. “We are not going to tolerate such behavior by men pretending to be women. The president will continue to strongly stand for the rights of women and girls, not just in sports and on athletic fields, but also private spaces like locker rooms and bathrooms,” Leavitt told the reporter.
Georgas is moving to make her ongoing lawsuit a class action before her daughter graduates from middle school, which would void the case entirely.
Parallel Efforts Across the Country
According to Liz Mikitarian, a retired kindergarten teacher and the founder of STOP Moms for Liberty, the coordinated efforts to undermine the rights of trans students in Illinois mimic a strategy playing out nationwide.
“They feed these outlets that produce more hate,” Mikitarian told Uncloseted Media and the Chicago Sun-Times. “It’s a model of misinforming people and making them afraid of something, and that works, especially when it’s people’s children. … [But] it’s a grift and people are catching on.”
Financial Burdens
All of these complaints are costing significant time and money and frustrating many parents who see them as a waste of school resources.
Deerfield parent Elizabeth Castro attended the meetings in her child’s district last year and says it was shocking to look around the country and see the same “manufactured controversy.”
“You realize it’s so much bigger when you see all the communities around the country that have dealt with this exact same pattern,” Castro told Uncloseted Media and the Chicago Sun-Times.
Hundreds of community members and trans-rights supporters applaud and cheer during a Deerfield District 109 board meeting at Caruso Middle School in Deerfield, IL, on April 10, 2025. Photo by Tyler Pasciak LaRiviere for the Chicago Sun-Times.
The Deerfield school district still hasn’t heard from the federal government, school officials say. And the Department of Education didn’t respond to a request for updates on the investigations.
“Schools should not be forced to divert hundreds of thousands of dollars away from classrooms, student services, mental health supports, accessibility accommodations and educational programming simply to defend their efforts to support vulnerable students,” Asher McMaher, the executive director of Trans Up Front IL, told Uncloseted Media and the Chicago Sun-Times. “These are vital public resources that should be invested in children, not spent responding to coordinated attacks on transgender youth and the institutions working to protect them.”
Policy Matters
Beyond the lost money and the chaos, the lawsuits and complaints have affected the trans kids who are at the center of these debates.
“The human cost is even greater than the financial one,” says McMaher. “These actions create fear, uncertainty and instability for transgender students and their families, many of whom are already navigating significant challenges. … The greatest tragedy is that these costs are entirely avoidable, yet they continue to grow as attacks on transgender youth are increasingly normalized and encouraged at the national level.”
According to Corey Lascano, LGBTQ coordinator for the Chicago Teachers Union, policies inform school culture, which is concerning especially when school is “the only place where [some trans youth] can feel safe to be themselves.”
Corey Lascano, a board member with Trans Up Front IL. Photo by Anthony Vazquez for the Chicago Sun-Times.
Pat Green, who is still grappling with the bullying his son experienced, shares Lascano’s concerns. “From the time he was born, he had this light,” says Green. “When he was at his old school, it was just gone. … I’m really scared about the way things are right now. I remember the fear of wondering if I was going to lose my son. [These groups] are not protecting children. They are causing so much harm.”
If objective, nonpartisan, rigorous, LGBTQ-focused journalism is important to you, please consider making a tax-deductible donation in the U.S. through our 501(c)(3) fiscal sponsor, Resource Impact, by clicking this button:
The short version is the company came out supporting the LGBTQ+ workers and community. The two fired workers went on the company intranet and made a point to question it and declare how they felt about the LGBTQ+ people. Lets just say they were not fans. So the company investigated and decided they would create a hostile work place. The first court agreed, but the appeals court said the employee lawsuit could go forward because the airline did not make an effort to accommodate the fired workers religious rights. So the fact that you are a Christian means you can treat LGBTQ+ co-workers like shit and disregard their very existence based on a mistaken understanding of what their god wants. Christian belief tRump’s an LGBTQ+ person’s right to exist equally with out discrimination. Hugs
An Alaska Airlines commercial airliner takes-off from Los Angeles International Airport in Los Angeles, California, U.S., November 6, 2025. REUTERS/Mike Blake/File Photo Purchase Licensing Rights
Flight attendants fired over intranet posts
Lower court said comments were not overtly religious, and dismissed case
But there was enough to let a jury decide, appeals court panel says
June 26 (Reuters) – A U.S. appeals court has revived a lawsuit claiming Alaska Airlines (ALKAIR.UL) engaged in religious discrimination by firing two flight attendants who criticized the company’s support for expanding legal protections for LGBTQ people.
A three-judge panel of the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said, opens new tab on Wednesday that there was enough proof that the airline was motivated by the workers’ Christian beliefs when it fired them to let a jury decide whether it broke the law.
The flight attendants in 2021 made separate posts on Alaska Airlines’ employee intranet critical of the company’s backing of the Equality Act, a bill in Congress to prohibit discrimination against gay and transgender people in employment, housing, public accommodations and other areas.
The posts were not overtly religious, leading a judge to dismiss the case last year. But Circuit Judge Daniel Bress, who was appointed by Republican President Donald Trump, as were the other judges on the panel, wrote for the 9th Circuit that the workers’ comments and the airline’s response to the posts were enough to show it may have been motivated by their religious beliefs.
“It did not matter whether [one of the plaintiffs] could support her post with chapter and verse from an authoritative religious text,” Bress wrote.
The plaintiffs also claim their union, the Association of Flight Attendants, discriminated against them and breached its legal duty to represent them by not fighting their termination.
The 9th Circuit on Wednesday revived those claims, and joined two other appeals courts in ruling that federal labor law does not preempt such claims against unions brought under state laws.
Alaska Airlines and the union did not immediately respond to requests for comment on Thursday.
The plaintiffs are represented by the First Liberty Institute, which says it is the largest legal organization in the country dedicated exclusively to defending religious liberty. Stephanie Taub, the group’s senior counsel, said the 9th Circuit ruling reinforces legal protections from religious discrimination.
“You cannot be fired because your employer does not like your religious beliefs,” she said.
According to court filings, after Alaska Airlines posted online about its support for the Equality Act, plaintiff Lacey Smith wrote in response: “As a company, do you think it’s possible to regulate morality?”
Another flight attendant, Marli Brown, made a separate, longer post claiming the Equality Act would infringe on women’s rights, enable sexual predators, and was “endangering the Church [and] encouraging suppression of religious freedom.”
Alaska Airlines deleted the posts and issued a statement in response, saying the company supported protecting LGBTQ people against discrimination and that “we also expect our employees to live by these same values.” Smith and Brown were then fired after an investigation for violating the airline’s anti-discrimination and harassment policy, court filings showed.
The women sued in 2022, accusing Alaska Airlines and the union of discriminating against them because of their Christian beliefs.
U.S. District Judge Barbara Rothstein in Seattle had dismissed the case, saying the firings were not discriminatory because the flight attendants’ posts were not religious in nature. She also said the federal Railway Labor Act, which regulates the rail and airline industries, preempted the plaintiffs’ claims that the union violated Washington and Oregon law.
The 9th Circuit reversed Rothstein’s order. Brown’s post specifically mentioned “the Church,” Bress wrote for the court, and the airline investigated her and Smith together. Both women also cited their religious beliefs in the course of the airline’s investigation, he said.
Bress was joined by Circuit Judge Kenneth Lee in his opinion. Circuit Judge Morgan Christen mostly agreed, but in a partial dissent said she would not have revived Smith’s discrimination claim.
“Alaska would have had to be clairvoyant to know that Smith considered the statement she posted on the company’s internal website to be an expression of her faith,” wrote Christen.
The case is Brown v. Alaska Airlines, 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, No. 24-3789.
For the plaintiffs: Stephanie Taub and others from First Liberty Institute; Andrew Gould of Holtzman Vogel Baran Torchinsky & Josefiak
For Alaska Airlines: Lauren Watts and others from Seyfarth Shaw
For the union: Benjamin Berger and others from Barnard Iglitzin & Lavitt
Pete Buttigieg, former secretary of transportation, during the National Action Network 35th Anniversary Convention on April 10, 2026, in New York City.Adam Gray / Bloomberg via Getty Images
Scottie's Playtime 