DENVER, CO – Liberty Counsel filed a response brief in the U.S. District Court of Colorado against United Airlines opposing the airline’s motion to dismiss a religious discrimination case brought by a former pilot. Former First Officer Christopher P. Gates, a United Airlines pilot for more than 25 years, was terminated in December 2021 after the airline refused to consider his religious accommodation request to its COVID-19 shot mandate despite the company’s obligation under federal law to engage in a good-faith, interactive process with employees who raise religious objections.

Liberty Counsel represents Gates, a practicing Catholic, who objected to receiving any of the COVID-19  shots associated with aborted fetal cell lines. In the lawsuit, Liberty Counsel argues that United Airlines violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act by discriminating against him and firing him for not injecting himself with an experimental drug against his sincerely held religious beliefs. 

While United Airlines claims there was no religious hostility in the denial, the response brief notes the legal standard at this early stage for the case to proceed is a plausible allegation of religious animus. As the lawsuit shows, the airline’s discriminatory actions stemmed from a “company-wide hostility to employees seeking religious accommodations,” as revealed by statements from United’s CEO Scott Kirby. At a United “town hall meeting” in 2021, Kirby stated that “very few” religious exemptions would be granted and warned that “any employee” who decided they are “really religious” would be “putting [their] job on the line,” the lawsuit reads.

United also contends that granting Gates’ accommodation would have created an “undue hardship” regarding safety. However, Liberty Counsel notes that Title VII mandates “an interactive process that requires participation by both the employer and the employee” in the accommodation process.

“United cannot contend that accommodating Gates would have caused an undue hardship because it never even engaged in the required interactive process to determine the feasibility of an accommodation,” states Liberty Counsel.

By denying Gates’ request as an undue hardship without ever discussing what was possible or reasonable, United violated Title VII by failing to properly process Gates’s religious conflict, concludes Liberty Counsel.

Liberty Counsel is seeking a judgment that declares the airline’s religiously discriminatory actions unlawful under federal and state law. The lawsuit also requests a court order for United Airlines to reinstate Gates to a position comparable to his former position with full seniority or, in lieu of reinstatement, award front pay that would cover any future wages and benefits he would have likely lost because of the unlawful firing. In addition, the lawsuit requests back pay, damages for emotional distress, punitive damages, and reasonable attorney’s fees and costs.

This lawsuit, Gates v. United Airlines, is a separate case from the nationwide class action suit Sambrano v. United Airlines. In June 2024, a federal judge in Texas granted class action status to more than 2,200 United employees who had received some form of religious accommodation and who were put on indefinite, unpaid leave for choosing not to get the shot. Sambrano is one of the largest class action cases ever filed against a private employer. However, Gates’ Title VII case falls outside the scope of this class action suit because United Airlines failed to engage at all in the required interactive process under Title VII.

Before flying for United, Gates served 11 years as a Naval aviator earning military Instructor of the Year honors. His record displays thousands of unblemished flight hours.

Liberty Counsel Founder and Chairman Mat Staver said, “United Airlines violated a fundamental principle of employment law: the duty to engage in an interactive process to accommodate sincerely held religious beliefs. Instead of engaging in the interactive process required by Title VII, United ignored a decorated veteran’s unblemished service, and terminated him for refusing to violate his conscience over an experimental injection. Employers cannot force employees to choose between their faith and their livelihood.”

For media interviews, please email [email protected].