Musk-Backed ‘Mandalorian’ Actor Firing Suit Likely to Survive

An Elon Musk-backed lawsuit from a former “The Mandalorian” star over her departure from the show appears likely to survive after a Los Angeles federal judge indicated that it isn’t clear that Walt Disney Co. cut ties with the actress solely over her social media posts.

Actress Gina Carano alleges that Disney wrote her character off the “Star Wars” spin-off mainly because of her political views. However, her complaint also includes allegations that her firing was to deflect from criticisms of the company’s streaming business dealings and its controversial reorganization under then-CEO Bob Chapek.

Because her allegations aren’t solely rooted in speech, a First Amendment defense may not be enough to block Carano’s claims, Judge Sherilyn Peace Garnett of the US District Court for the Central District of California said Wednesday during a hearing on the company’s motion to dismiss the suit.

“Wouldn’t that suggest there’s a factual dispute as to why Disney actually terminated her?” Garnett said.

The former mixed martial artist’s case is expected to test the bounds of the California’s unique protection for employees to be politically active outside of their workplace without retaliation from their bosses. It comes as conservative groups target the entertainment giant‘s hiring practices and diversity, equity, and inclusion programs.

Carano alleged in February that Disney Co. and Lucasfilm Ltd. wrongly cut her from the show after she posted content criticized as antisemitic and transphobic on social media. Musk, who offered in 2023 to help people sue their employers if they were fired over posts on his platform X, is financing the lawsuit.

The former mixed martial artist argued that not only was she fired over her political views, she was also subject to discrimination because her male co-stars didn’t face repercussions for their political speech.

Disney argued it has a constitutional right not to associate its artistic expression with Carano’s speech, and that the state law doesn’t extend to companies that create speech products. Forcing Disney to associate with workers who publicly express certain viewpoints would illegally compel the company’s own speech, its lawyers wrote in court filings.

“The messenger is part of the message,” said O’Melveny & Myers LLP attorney Daniel Petrocelli, for Disney, quoting a scholar.

Schaerr Jaffe LLP attorney Gene Schaerr, for Carano, said Disney hasn’t yet formally pleaded a First Amendment defense and asked Garnett not to “let Disney short-circuit the normal litigation process.”

Garnett told Petrocelli from the bench that she doesn’t see “the tight connection” between Disney’s defense and case law it cites, such as Boy Scouts of America v. Dale, because Disney, as a for-profit company, doesn’t have the same concerns over its relationships as a non-profit organization imbued with certain values.

The “last straw” leading up to Carano’s firing was her comparing the treatment of conservative supporters of former President Donald Trump to that of Jews during the Holocaust in a February 2021 Instagram post, according to the company’s court filings. The statements didn’t align with the company’s values, it said.

Before that post, Carano tweeted frequently about Covid vaccines, gender identity, and the 2020 election’s outcome.

Carano argued in her complaint that her “Mandalorian” co-stars, including actor Pedro Pascal, routinely criticize Trump on social media, with Pascal having compared Trump to Hitler.

Garnett took the motion under submission Wednesday and said she will rule soon.

Schaer Jaffe LLP represents Carano. O’Melveny and Myers LLP represents Walt Disney Co., Lucasfilm Ltd. and Huckleberry Industries US Inc.

The case is Carano v. Walt Disney, C.D. Cal., No. 24-cv-1009, 6/12/24.