Animal Rights Group Wins Lawsuit Against Southwest Wyoming Regional Airport for Discriminatory Advertising Policy

CHEYENNE, WY – People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) has concluded a dispute with two Wyoming airports, Jackson Hole Airport (JAC) and Southwest Wyoming Regional Airport (SWRA), regarding the rejection of their advertising submissions. In June 2022, PETA submitted ad concepts to both airports aiming to expose animal cruelty within the leather industry and urging travelers to refrain from purchasing travel goods made from animal materials.

However, both airports refused to display PETA's ads. SWRA cited a "policy" prohibiting "controversial" advertisements as their reason for rejection, while JAC provided no specific explanation.

Jackson Hole Airport Capitulates Under PETA Pressure

Backed by pro bono counsel, PETA filed public records requests to ascertain the reasons behind both airports' ad rejections. In October 2022, JAC claimed it lacked an advertising policy and that no space was available for advertisements, suggesting only brochure-style ads were feasible.

However, internal documents submitted by JAC contradicted these claims. One airport employee forwarded PETA’s ad concept to the Assistant Airport Director, expressing her dismay: "This is PETA’s work, of course. I support their cause, but why does it have to look exactly like my bag? ☹" She added, "I have a feeling there might be ad space." Her direct supervisor replied five minutes later, "Just walked past the cowhide chairs to read this email. Not sure if this message is appropriate."

Despite this internal communication, PETA persisted and requested JAC to display the same ad concept in brochure form. Ultimately, JAC reversed its stance within days and agreed to run PETA’s advertisement.

SWRA Faces Legal Action for Blatant Discrimination

The public records response received from SWRA revealed more severe instances of discrimination, leading PETA to file a lawsuit against SWRA in June 2025. In their complaint, PETA argued that SWRA unfairly rejected their ads by invoking a vague and subjective advertising policy.

According to PETA’s filing, SWRA had a history of displaying advertisements promoting industries that involve the killing of animals, such as gun and shooting supply sales, rodeos, and hunting. However, SWRA Airport Director Devon Brubaker stated in a recorded board meeting that PETA’s ad content was "not appropriate for a family environment." Following the ad rejection, Brubaker solicited sample advertising policies from surrounding airports, copying language that prohibited ads addressing "social, political, religious, or rhetorical issues" and simply affixing SWRA’s name. This newly created "policy" was then presented as a retroactive justification for rejecting PETA’s ad. The lawsuit highlighted that the broad prohibitions in this policy granted SWRA unlimited discretion in determining its application and enforcement.

Furthermore, PETA’s public records requests and independent investigation revealed that SWRA had never previously rejected a formally submitted advertisement. On the contrary, the airport had displayed ads for tobacco, alcohol, and cannabis products, firearm advertisements, and religiously themed content – all potentially violating their own newly established policy. Ironically, this included advertisements promoting animal exploitation, such as rodeo events and hunting. SWRA’s media screens also featured controversial content, including Fox News footage covering protests in the Gaza Strip.

Following these revelations, PETA’s counsel attempted to appeal SWRA’s ad rejection. In January 2023, Brubaker informed PETA’s attorney that they were "free to appeal" but claimed there was no available ad space. PETA expressed their willingness to purchase space as soon as it became available, but SWRA largely remained unresponsive to PETA’s appeal attempts.

PETA Secures Favorable Settlement

SWRA did not file a motion to dismiss the lawsuit and submitted an answer in July 2024. During the litigation process, SWRA conceded that the airport’s advertising space constituted a limited public forum.

In February 2025, the SWRA Board of Trustees reached a settlement agreement through mediation, agreeing to display PETA’s anti-leather advertisement under the same terms and conditions as other advertisers. A court order was also agreed upon, mandating that SWRA treat PETA’s future advertisements without discrimination compared to other advertisers. As part of the settlement, PETA received $35,000 in legal fees from the airport.

PETA is scheduled to run the advertisement for six months, beginning in April 2025, to encourage travelers to avoid purchasing travel goods made from animal products.

This case is expected to be a significant precedent, underscoring that public entities cannot operate advertising policies that infringe upon freedom of speech and discriminate against specific viewpoints. PETA’s persistent efforts and legal action are being lauded as an important step forward in the protection of animal rights.