Court narrows Title VII religious discrimination claims, remands for judgment in favor of airline on belief-based claim
Please “Like,” Share, and Subscribe. It really helps!
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit issued a 63-page decision on May 8, 2025, partially reversing a Texas jury’s verdict in favor of Charlene Carter, a former Southwest Airlines flight attendant who claimed she was fired for her religiously motivated opposition to abortion. The appellate court upheld the jury’s finding that Carter’s religious practices warranted protection under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, but ruled that her claim based on religious beliefs failed as a matter of law.
Carter had sent graphic anti-abortion images and text messages via private Facebook messages to the president of the Transport Workers Union of America Local 556 in response to the union’s participation in the 2017 Women’s March. Southwest terminated her for violating company policies, including those addressing harassment and social media conduct. Carter sued Southwest and the union, alleging they discriminated against her religion and retaliated against her in violation of Title VII and the Railway Labor Act.
A jury awarded Carter damages and reinstatement in 2022. After the jury ruled in Carter’s favor, the district court ordered Southwest to inform all flight attendants of the judgment and their rights under Title VII. Specifically, the court required Southwest to send an email using the exact court-ordered language, which stated that the airline “may not discriminate” against employees for their religious beliefs and practices.
Instead, Southwest sent out an email saying it “does not discriminate” — swapping out “may not” for “does not.” That might sound like splitting hairs, but in a legal enforcement context, it’s like replacing “You must stop speeding” with “We don’t speed.” One is a directive; the other is a PR statement.
Carter argued that the change misrepresented the court’s judgment and showed Southwest wasn’t taking the ruling seriously. The district court agreed and held Southwest in contempt, ordering the airline to send a revised message using the court’s exact words. As an added sanction, it also ordered three of Southwest’s in-house lawyers to attend religious liberty training with Alliance Defending Freedom.
The Fifth Circuit reversed the belief-based discrimination claim, holding that Title VII’s protections for beliefs do not include protections for practices unless the employer failed to accommodate them or acted with discriminatory intent. The court found no sufficient evidence that Southwest fired Carter because of her religious beliefs alone, as opposed to her conduct.
The Fifth Circuit also vacated the contempt order and the associated sanction requiring Southwest\’s lawyers to attend ADF training. It found the requirement to undergo specific ideological training was not justified by the record or the scope of the underlying judgment. The Fifth Circuit remanded the case for the district court to enter judgment in favor of Southwest on Carter’s belief-based Title VII and RLA retaliation claims and to reconsider the scope of any injunction.
Here’s the Deal: The Case Without the Law School
So Charlene Carter, a Southwest Airlines flight attendant and born-again foe of both abortion and unions, gets fired for sending the union president a Greatest Hits compilation of extremely graphic anti-abortion images via Facebook. Not subtle stuff. We\’re talking “viewer discretion advised” meets “HR will see you now.”
Carter sues Southwest and the union, claiming she was canned for her religious beliefs. Jury agrees, says, “Yep, Title VII, religious discrimination, pay her.” The trial judge goes full Old Testament: reinstates her, awards damages, then holds the airline in contempt for not wording an internal email just right — and for good measure, sends three of Southwest’s lawyers to mandatory religious liberty training… with Alliance Defending Freedom. That’s like making Exxon take ethics classes from Greta Thunberg.
Fast forward to May 2025: the Fifth Circuit steps in with a 63-page ruling that says, “Okay, let’s dial it down.” They agree Carter’s practice — sharing her religious views online — deserved protection. But her beliefs alone? Not enough to win the lawsuit unless the company fired her because of those beliefs. And Southwest, while maybe tone-deaf, didn’t say “You’re out because you love Jesus.”
Oh, and the forced ADF training for company lawyers? Gone. You can’t court-order people into political seminars like it’s traffic school for the First Amendment.
The case goes back to the trial court to adjust the verdict. Carter still gets her job back, but the ruling is no longer a full ideological mic drop — it’s more like a TSA-approved carry-on of religious liberty.
Case Name: Charlene Carter v. Local 556, Transport Workers Union of America; Southwest Airlines Company (Filed 5/8/2025).