Two former Alaska Airlines (ALK) flight attendants have won the right to take their religious discrimination case to trial following a significant Ninth Circuit ruling.
Marli Brown and Lacey Smith, both former Alaska Airlines cabin crew members, sued their former employer under Title VII and state anti-discrimination laws.
The pair allege they were terminated after posting comments on the airline’s internal intranet communications network in response to the company’s statement of support for the Equality Act.
The Equality Act was proposed federal legislation that would have extended antidiscrimination protections based on sex, sexual orientation, and gender identity.
Brown posted a facially religious statement claiming the Equality Act would “endanger the Christian church,” while Smith asked: “As a company, do you think it’s possible to regulate morality?”
Alaska Airlines maintained that both employees were dismissed not for their religious beliefs, but for violating the company’s anti-harassment and anti-discrimination policies.
The Ninth Circuit disagreed with the district court’s earlier decision, reversing a summary judgment that had been entered in favour of the airline.
The appellate court found a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether Brown and Smith were terminated specifically because of their religious beliefs.
The Ninth Circuit also held that the plaintiffs’ state law claims against their union were not preempted by the Railway Labor Act, broadening the scope of the case.
The ruling, cited as Brown v. Alaska Airlines, Inc., 2026 WL 1813213, marks a notable development in the ongoing legal debate over how employers balance anti-harassment policies against employees’ rights to express religious viewpoints.
The case highlights the complex legal terrain airlines and other large employers must navigate when their corporate diversity statements intersect with staff members’ personal and religious convictions.
Religious discrimination claims under Title VII require courts to assess whether an employer made sufficient efforts to accommodate an employee’s sincerely held religious beliefs before taking adverse action.
The decision means Brown and Smith will now have the opportunity to present their case before a jury, with the airline required to defend its stated justification for the terminations.