The Federal Aviation Administration is investigating two airports after complaints that plans to add Chick-fil-A restaurants were changed because of the company’s perceived stance on LGBTQ+ rights.
San Antonio International Airport and Buffalo Niagara International Airport are both the subject of FAA inquiries focusing on potential religious discrimination.
“The Department of Transportation has received complaints alleging discrimination by two airport operators against a private company due to the expression of the owner’s religious beliefs,” an FAA statement said. “FAA’s Office of Civil Rights has notified the San Antonio International Airport (SAT) and Buffalo Niagara International Airport (BUF) that it has opened investigations into these complaints. The FAA notes that Federal requirements prohibit airport operators from excluding persons on the basis of religious creed from participating in airport activities that receive or benefit from FAA grant funding.”
Chick-fil-A, a well-known restaurant chain, has faced criticism for past statements and donations tied to socially conservative causes. Company president Dan Cathy has been quoted expressing support for “the biblical definition of the family unit,” and reports indicate the company or its associated foundations made donations in the past to organizations criticized for anti-LGBTQ+ positions.
In response to the FAA inquiry and public scrutiny, Chick-fil-A told CNN that it is focused on food service rather than politics. The company said, “We are a restaurant company … and we have no social or political stance. We welcome and embrace all people, regardless of religion, race, gender, ethnicity, sexual orientation or gender identity.”
The FAA’s investigations will determine whether airport operators violated federal rules by excluding a business based on the owner’s religious beliefs. Airports that receive FAA grants must comply with nondiscrimination requirements, and the outcome of these inquiries could affect how airports evaluate tenant selection and concession agreements going forward.
Both airports and Chick-fil-A may provide additional statements as the investigations proceed. The cases underscore ongoing tensions between public entities’ nondiscrimination obligations and private companies’ histories or perceived beliefs, and they highlight the complex legal and public relations issues that can arise when commercial decisions intersect with social and religious concerns.