Southwest Airlines is seeking a judgment that orders it to pay damages, but that doesn’t make it liable for violating federal law, and a judge should decide the case on its merits, the American Alliance for Equal Rights, which is suing the Dallas-based airline, argued in a brief filed Tuesday.
Lawyers for Southwest Airlines last month asked Senior U.S. District Judge Sidney Fitzwater to enter a judgment ordering the airline to pay one cent and reasonable attorneys’ fees to end the lawsuit over a defunct program that offered free flights to low-income Hispanic students traveling to visit their parents.
Southwest Airlines ended the program called “¡Lánzate!” — meaning “Take off!” — after political conservative activist Edward Blum’s AAER sued Southwest on behalf of a white student and an Asian student who claimed they were illegally denied the program’s benefits. The AAER sought one cent in damages from Southwest and argued the program violated the Civil Rights Act of 1866 and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
Southwest previously argued, and the judge agreed, that the AAER’s demand for injunctive relief was moot since the airline ended the program unconditionally in response to the litigation.
“But if Southwest still opposes the Alliance’s motion for summary judgment, then its current “motion for entry of judgment” should be denied,” the AAER argued in its opposition brief Tuesday. Southwest still has until May 22 to file its response to AAER’s motion for summary judgment.
“What Southwest really wants is not a default judgment, but a “judgment” ordering it to pay damages without making it liable for violating federal law,” lawyers for the AAER wrote. “That request is understandable: Southwest probably has to report adverse judgments (even default ones) to its insurers, shareholders, and regulators. But Southwest’s request is improper.”
Southwest is trying to “take advantage” of an amicus curiae brief for the United States in the free speech case Uzuegbunam et. al. v. Preczewski et. al. and a concurrence from U.S. Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh, the AAER argued.
But Southwest has not invoked Rule 55 of the federal rules of civil procedure on default judgments or tried to apply the legal standard, and the airline would not be entitled to a default judgment even if it sought one, AAER’s lawyers wrote.
In the event Southwest were entitled to a default judgment, the judge should exercise his discretion to deny one, AAER argued, because Southwest has “fiercely” litigated the case and depriving Alliance a win on the merits would prejudice the organization, its lawyers said.
“If Southwest no longer wants to litigate, then this Court should simply grant the Alliance’s pending motion for summary judgment,” they said.
Blum, who took down affirmative action in college admissions, has recently targeted diversity programs in corporations and law firms. This year, the AAER sued Fort Worth-based American Airlines and its supplier, Qurium Solutions, alleging the airline’s diversity policy for awarding certain contracts violates civil rights law. That case is before U.S. District Judge Mark Pittman.
The case against Southwest is American Alliance for Equal Rights v. Southwest Airlines, Northern District of Texas, Case No. 3:24-CV-1209.
The AAER is represented by Cameron T. Norris, Thomas R. McCarthy, Steven D. Begakis and R. Gabriel Anderson of Consovoy McCarthy and Adam K. Mortara of Lawfair.
Southwest is represented by Tristan Morales, Kimberly Williams and Anton Metlitsky of O’Melveny & Myers.