RULING-DENYING MOTION FOR EVIDENTIARY HEARING

 

In this case, the best indicator of how to resolve the request for an evidentiary hearing is found in Southwest Airlines Co’s (“SWA”) Reply in Support of Motion for Evidentiary Hearing (“Reply”) filed January 5, 2026. It argues an evidentiary hearing is necessary “to resolve the issues raised in the Notice of Appeal”¹(“NOA”). Reply at 2:21-22. That may well be true statement of fact. As to the Constitutional issues raised in the NOA for the first time however, it is an incorrect statement of the role of this Court. This Court’s review is limited to resolving the issues raised in the administrative proceedings; not those newly raised in a NOA. Having considered SWA’s Motion for Evidentiary Hearing (“Motion”) filed December 5, 2025, Claimant’s Opposition to Appellee Request for Evidentiary Hearing (“Response”) and Declaration filed December 19, 2025, and the accompanying Exhibits thereto, the Reply, and the documents provided in the certificate of record, the Motion is denied. (read more)