Disney Is Still Trying To Dismiss Gina Carano's Lawsuit, But She's Not Backing Down

Gina Carano was fired by Disney for criticizing political authoritarianism during the pandemic.

The same day she shared an image highlighting the similarities between the tactics of progressive politicians and historical fascists, Lucasfilm announced: "Gina Carano is not currently employed by Lucasfilm and there are no plans for her to be in the future. Nevertheless, her social media posts denigrating people based on their cultural and religious identities are abhorrent and unacceptable."

A month later, Disney’s former CEO explained that Carano’s views ‘didn’t align with Company values,’ including its ‘values of respect, values of decency, values of integrity, and values of inclusion.’” 

In response, Carano announced in February that she was filing a case against them for wrongful discharge, sex discrimination, and refusing to hire her for roles already promised, including Season 3 of The Mandalorian, the new series Rangers of the New Republic, and planned future Stars Wars full-length feature films (which have recently been announced).

Disney's lawyers also claimed in April that Disney cut ties with Carano because she chose to "[compare] criticism of political conservatives to the annihilation of millions of Jewish people—notably, not ‘thousands,'" and that this was "the final straw for Disney.” 

However, Carano didn't make that comparison. Stating that governments have used tactics to make people hate one another is a historical fact, and comparing the coercive, divisive ways that many politicians acted during the pandemic to the ways the Nazi government spread propaganda does not "trivialize" the Holocaust. It simply points to the smaller, daily actions that made such large-scale violence and devastation possible.

Carano's lawyers also pointed out the blatant hypocrisy in how Carano was treated compared to her castmate, Pedro Pascal, who also made a political comparison that referenced the Holocaust. However, since Pascal is a left-wing activist, he seems to have gotten a pass for the supposedly "grotesque trivialization" from his employers at Disney.

Now, Disney is still attempting to dismiss her case by insisting that "as an “expressive entity,” it is protected by the First Amendment to “control its own message” and, therefore, choose to exclude anyone deemed to “impair its message," claiming that Carano “misconstrues the allegations in her own complaint” by giving the impression that the studio invented “the conflict between Carano’s public comments and Disney’s artistic values.”

"Carano says her statements were inoffensive and did not impair Disney’s art. But for purposes of this lawsuit, that judgment is not hers to make,” Disney’s lawyers wrote. “As the Supreme Court has explicitly held, litigants and courts must defer to an expressive entity’s own view of what associations may impair its speech. Carano’s suit should be dismissed.”

Carano’s lawyers argued that her statements didn’t have “anything to do with” Disney, Star Wars, or The Mandalorian and that she didn’t seek to “impose any message” on Disney or change its speech “in any fashion.” “Rather, Carano seeks relief for Defendants’ violation of laws of general applicability that do not, as applied here, inhibit or affect Defendants’ speech."

Carano’s lawyers claim Disney violated the California Labor Code provisions on political activity, engaged in "adverse actions against protected activity," and sex discrimination, particularly when compared to her male co-stars who posted “offensive and denigrating posts on social media directed towards Republicans and conservatives.”

Carano’s attorneys claim Disney tried to bully her into conforming to their views, and when that failed, they fired her. Ms. Carano asserts her social media posts were mischaracterized, resulting in lost representation and job opportunities.

In response, Disney's lawyers claim that Carano “seriously misunderstands the scope of the First Amendment and the protections it affords to speech by private persons and entities. The sole government restriction at issue is the liability Carano seeks to impose on Disney because it did not want to associate its own artistic expression with Carano and her offensive comments,” Disney’s lawyers wrote.

That could've been a compelling argument if Disney hadn't blatantly engaged in discrimination towards Carano for sharing her political opinions while allowing other employees with "offensive" political opinions to speak openly without consequence.

A hearing in the case is set for June 12 in California.

Evie deserves to be heard. Support our cause and help women reclaim their femininity by subscribing today.