Patently offensive is not determined by an individual who is offended
The contract literally says it is determined by the person who's offended. This isn't a statute. Contracts are not interpreted according to rules of statutory construction. Even if they were, all the airline has to do is fall back to F1, which states they can remove anybody whose conduct is "offensive" or is known to be offensive in the past. That leaves the determination of what's offensive to the discretion of the airline. There's zero chance of a successful legal case against the airline for breach of contract.
"The contract literally says it is determined by the person who's offended". No it doesn't. Patently Offensive is a defined term.
What part of
that are deemed patently offensive or obscene by other passengers
is confusing you?
Bad BOT. Other passengers did not complain. It was only the stewardess. She didn't even state that he was removed because of the statement. Only that he did not "follow instructions". Polls prove it is more likely the majority of passengers support Lets Go Brandon. One offended person does not make something patently offensive. BLM is actually racist and patently offensive, but it was defended as free speech. Conservatives understand that free speech means that sometimes you will be offended but in the pursuit if happiness, someones else's right to their own opinion is more important.
“The video in question depicts part of an incident involving a passenger who failed to comply with repeated crew member requests to adhere to the federal face mask policy,” "Allegiant didn’t specify why the passenger was deemed “unruly” or why his inscription violated the rules." Bad BOT. No passengers complained let alone a majority as defined by the adjective "patently".
(post is archived)