The Southwest Airlines Pilots Association’s lawsuit against Boeing is a fraud and misrepresentation case seeking more than $100 million in wages that roughly 8,000 pilots lost when the 737 MAX was grounded for about 20 months in 2019 and 2020. SWAPA sued Boeing in Dallas County, Texas in October 2019, arguing the manufacturer lied about the MAX’s safety and design during 2016 contract negotiations. After six years of jurisdictional fights, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear Boeing’s appeal in February 2026, and the case is now proceeding toward trial in the Texas Business Court.
What SWAPA Says Boeing Did
The complaint focuses on Boeing’s conduct during negotiations over the union’s 2016 collective bargaining agreement with Southwest Airlines. SWAPA alleges Boeing represented that the 737 MAX was safe, airworthy, and “essentially the same” as the 737 NG its pilots already flew, while concealing two things: the repositioning of larger LEAP1-B engines that shifted the aircraft’s center of gravity and reduced stability, and the existence and behavior of the Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System (MCAS), which relied on a single angle-of-attack sensor.
According to the complaint, Boeing’s strategy was to convince regulators and customers that the MAX was merely an update to the NG so that expensive simulator training would not be required. A Boeing engineer quoted in the pleadings said designs “could not drive any new training that required a simulator.” Boeing also agreed to rebate Southwest $1 million per MAX aircraft if the FAA ended up requiring simulator training. SWAPA says these representations induced the union to approve inclusion of the MAX in the 2016 CBA despite initial reluctance, and that had the truth been known, the union “never would have approved the inclusion” of the aircraft.
Two 737 MAX crashes — Lion Air Flight 610 in October 2018 and Ethiopian Airlines Flight 302 in March 2019 — killed 346 people and led regulators to ground the fleet worldwide on March 13, 2019. Southwest was the largest U.S. operator of the MAX, with 34 of the jets in its fleet at the time of the grounding. The airline canceled more than 30,000 flights and cut passenger service by about 8% through the end of 2019. Because pilot pay is tied in part to hours flown, the reduced schedule cut into earnings for the nearly 10,000 SWAPA members.
What the Lawsuit Claims and How the Union Got Standing
SWAPA filed suit on October 7, 2019 in the 160th District Court of Dallas County. The complaint asserts fraudulent and negligent misrepresentation, tortious interference with business relations, and negligence. The union seeks more than $100 million in lost pilot compensation, along with lost membership dues and legal fees.
Boeing challenged the union’s right to sue on behalf of its members. In response, more than 8,000 SWAPA pilots individually assigned their claims to the union. Any damages recovered will be distributed to pilots in proportion to each pilot’s gross W-2 earnings during the grounding period.
The Railway Labor Act Preemption Fight
For six years, the case has turned less on whether Boeing defrauded the union than on whether the union can sue at all. Boeing’s central defense is that the Railway Labor Act of 1926, which governs labor disputes in the airline and railroad industries, preempts SWAPA’s state-law claims because resolving them would require a court to interpret the pilots’ collective bargaining agreement.
Boeing first removed the case to federal court on preemption grounds. The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas remanded it to state court in 2020. The Dallas trial court then granted Boeing’s jurisdictional plea and dismissed the case. In March 2022, the Texas Fifth District Court of Appeals reversed, holding that the RLA does not preempt SWAPA’s claims because Boeing is a third party, not an airline or a signatory to the CBA. Judge David Schenck dissented, arguing that federal precedent requires preemption whenever a claim depends on interpreting a CBA, regardless of who the defendant is.
Boeing petitioned the Texas Supreme Court for review. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce filed an amicus brief in October 2022 supporting Boeing, arguing preemption was necessary to “ensure the uniform and predictable interpretation of collective bargaining agreements.”
The Texas Supreme Court Ruling
On June 20, 2025, the Texas Supreme Court issued its decision in Case No. 22-0631. Justice Boyd wrote the majority opinion, joined by Chief Justice Blacklock and Justices Lehrmann, Devine, Busby, Young, and Sullivan.
On preemption, the court ruled unanimously that the RLA does not bar SWAPA’s claims. Applying the “substantially dependent” test from the U.S. Supreme Court’s 1994 decision in Hawaiian Airlines, Inc. v. Norris, the court found that SWAPA’s fraud and misrepresentation claims could be resolved without interpreting the collective bargaining agreement. Whether Boeing made false statements about the MAX and whether those statements induced SWAPA to approve the 2016 CBA were “purely factual questions” about motive and reliance, not questions about what contract terms mean.
On standing, the court split 7-2. The majority held that while SWAPA lacked associational standing to sue for its members’ individual damages under the Texas Business Organizations Code, the individual claim assignments from 8,794 pilots were valid. The assignments were “property-based and remedial” rather than an improper workaround of the statute’s limits on associational litigation. Justice Jane Bland, joined by Justice Rebeca Huddle, dissented, arguing that allowing assignments “hollows out” the statutory limits and “jeopardizes” the court’s own preemption holding by letting a party to an RLA-governed agreement sue for damages under it.
The case was remanded to the trial court for SWAPA to proceed as an assignee of its members’ claims.
Supreme Court Cert Denial
Boeing petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court for certiorari on October 20, 2025. The company argued the Texas ruling created a “sharp split” with federal circuit courts, including the Fifth Circuit, over whether RLA preemption turns on the subject matter of the dispute or the identity of the parties. Boeing warned that “forum shopping… [would be] inevitable” if the decision stood.
On February 23, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court denied review in a brief order with no noted dissents. The Texas Supreme Court’s ruling remains in place, and Boeing has exhausted its appeals on the preemption question.
Where the Case Stands Now
The case has been transferred to the Texas Business Court (First Division) under Judge Bouressa with a new case number, 25-BC01A-0040. The Texas Business Court was established in September 2024 for high-stakes commercial disputes, and House Bill 40, signed by Governor Abbott in June 2025, expanded its jurisdiction to allow pre-existing cases to transfer in.
On June 9, 2026, the Business Court denied Boeing’s motion for summary judgment on the pleadings, without prejudice. The court acknowledged that some of SWAPA’s damage allegations might face proximate-causation problems but ruled that the union could amend its complaint. SWAPA was ordered to file an amended pleading by June 19, 2026. No trial date has been set.