\n<\/p>\n
A lawyer sued an upstate New York airport after it rejected a small ad for her sexual harassment law firm. Now she has a massive sign there.<\/p>\n
Megan Thomas signed a contract last summer for the ad at Syracuse Hancock International Airport. She wanted it to read: \u201cWhen HR called it harmless flirting \u2026 we called it exhibit A,\u201d but the airport asked her to soften the \u201charsh\u201d wording.<\/p>\n
Instead, she filed a suit. Now, the ad is finally up, with the wording intact \u2014 and much larger than she originally intended. <\/p>\n
Two walls of the travel hub are emblazoned with the big, pink advertisement, along with a huge photo of Thomas, Syracuse.com first reported<\/a>.<\/p>\n “When the airport told me the First Amendment did not apply and that they could do what they liked, I realized I would need to bring a lawsuit,” Thomas said this week. \u201cI understood that if I won this battle, it would protect not only my rights, but also the rights of other women who come after me.\u201d<\/p>\n Thomas said she intentionally chose to advertise at the airport because many of her clients have reported being sexually harassed on work trips. She also wanted it to be placed in a prominent area.<\/p>\n In her federal lawsuit filed in August, Thomas said the Syracuse Regional Airport Authority, which operates the airport, approved a draft version of her ad. But the following day, she said, the authority told her the ad was not approved and that the slogan was \u201cconsidered to be a bit harsh.”<\/p>\n During a follow-up call, Thomas said she was told the airport authority’s leadership believed the proposed ad might be viewed as \u201cthreatening\u201d or \u201cintimidating\u201d to men. And the following day, an official said the ad would not be displayed due to concerns about negative feedback from community members and that local politicians might find it offensive, according to her suit.<\/p>\n In court documents, lawyers for the SRAA said the authority offered alternate slogans \u201cthat conveyed a similar message in a more professional and less misleading and disparaging manner.”<\/p>\n