Travelers who tried to stop Alaska Airlines from swallowing Hawaiian Airlines just got something almost unheard of in corporate takeovers: a do-over. In a surprise decision this week, a federal appeals court said the lawsuit that tried to block the $1.9 billion takeover can be refiled. The move reopens a fight that most thought was over, a fight that cuts to the heart of Hawaii travel.
What just happened.
The U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Tuesday that the travelers who sued to stop the Alaska-Hawaiian merger should be allowed to amend and refile their complaint. A lower court had thrown it out this summer, saying the passengers did not prove how they would be harmed. The appeals court disagreed, saying the travelers could add specific facts about how the merger affects their travel plans to Hawaii.
While that may sound technical, it gives new life to a case that could again challenge the Alaska-Hawaiian takeover. The court’s ruling does not undo the deal. It merely lets the plaintiffs try again. Still, it is an unusual second chance in a fight most experts believed was finished.
Why this matters to Hawaii travelers.
Since Alaska’s purchase of Hawaiian closed, readers have flooded Beat of Hawaii with comments about loyalty changes, fading identity, and higher prices. For years, Hawaiian Airlines represented more than just another carrier. It was the thread connecting the islands, a familiar tone of service, and a sense of home that stretched 2,500 miles across the Pacific. Now, a handful of everyday travelers are saying once again in court what many have said here for months: this takeover hurts.
If they succeed in getting their case reinstated, the plaintiffs could force deeper scrutiny of the deal, possibly even requiring Alaska to make substantive changes. More likely, though, their effort will focus public attention again on whether Hawaii travelers and employees have actually benefited since the takeover.
The lawsuit that will not go away.
The case, filed in Honolulu federal court last April, claimed that the Alaska takeover of Hawaiian would reduce competition, raise fares, and threaten jobs in Hawaii. The judge dismissed the case for lack of standing, meaning the plaintiffs had not shown legal proof that they were personally harmed. Alaska said at the time that the lawsuit lacked merit and that the takeover would bring more routes, lower fares, and stronger service across the Pacific.
The Ninth Circuit’s new decision changes that situation. The judges said the dismissal was too final and that the travelers should be allowed to revise their claims. The opinion was short and unpublished, but it directly told the district court to let the case proceed.
What could happen next.
Don’t expect immediate changes to your Hawaii travel plans. Alaska and Hawaiian continue to operate under one parent company, and the integration of systems, crews, and frequent flyer programs is moving quickly. But this case could complicate that process if the plaintiffs convince the court they can show specific harm from the takeover.
The plaintiffs will likely file their amended complaint within the next few weeks. It will need to include concrete examples of canceled routes, higher fares, or reduced service tied to the takeover’s effects on their travel, a test that will reveal whether this challenge has real legs or keeps the debate alive a bit longer.
The larger story behind the lawsuit.
Beyond the courtroom, the question remains whether Hawaii travelers are better off today. Some say yes, but many say the opposite. One frequent flyer told us, “I have been loyal to Hawaiian for twenty years. Now my miles are frozen, my status is gone, and the airline I loved feels like a stranger.” Another wrote, “The aloha spirit left with the name on the tail.”
That emotional response runs deeper than any legal motion. It reflects a broader unease about losing a uniquely Hawaii brand and the culture of service that went with it. The takeover was sold as a win for consumers, yet for many, it feels like another piece of Hawaii slipping away.
The stakes for both sides.
While the ruling does not in any way reopen federal antitrust review, it gives the plaintiffs a legal foothold that could pressure Alaska to defend its promises more aggressively than it otherwise would. The Department of Justice, which earlier declined to stop the deal, could in theory revisit its position if new evidence shows meaningful harm to consumers in Hawaii. That outcome would be rare, but not impossible.
If the case proceeds, the plaintiffs might seek measures to preserve competition, although what that would look like is also uncertain.
What readers keep asking.
Can this case actually change anything now that the takeover is done? Realistically, probably not. But symbolically, it keeps the debate alive. It means the Alaska-Hawaiian deal is not yet settled in the minds of travelers, employees, or even the courts.
And that matters. It means Hawaii’s airline story is still being written, and the people who fly here still have a voice in what comes next.
Do you think everyday travelers can actually take on this done deal, or is this lawsuit just symbolic at this point?
Get Breaking Hawaii Travel News
I hope not. I am normally a traveler on Delta and have been Diamond there for 5+ years with 1.7M miles. I just flew transpacific for the first time in First class with Hawaiian on Saturday 10/18. All I can say is that is no wonder that they were ripe for a takeover. While on time, the cabin comfort and service was far below expectations for first class and even what I expected for Hawaiian. I could list all of the poor things that happened but that would take too long. Let me just say that the experience started on takeoff when the attended forgot to latch the containers in the galley and on acceleration two of them fell out from the top shelf and nearly crushed the foot of the passenger in row 1. From there it was just remarkable inattentiveness and malaise. I have always enjoyed the interisland flights but they are generally so short that not much can go wrong. Give these teams 6 hours and it’s another ballgame.
I have been flying with Hawaiian airlines for over 20 years. I came back recently from there from a direct flight from New York. The hospitality of the crew and feeling of Aloha is so welcoming and you feel like you are there. I flew with a friend that has never been there before and loved how she felt the Aloha spirit on this flight. No airline could ever replicate that feeling. I am upset that the take over of Alaska Airlines will not have that same feeling. Hawaii is my 2nd home and I will continue to fly with Hawaiian for that Aloha spirit experience.
Hawaiian Airlines could not continue existing the way it was going, it was in a financial downward spiral. No one else was willing to step in, save it financially, while still allowing it to spiral downward. This may not be perfect, but at least Hawaiian continues to exist, maybe in a slightly different way but it’s still there. The employees need this, please stop trying to make this not happen, when there’s no other viable option. Did I miss something?
These passengers need to stop blocking this merge! Us Hawaiian Airlines employees need this merge to go through for job security! Without Alaska all of us at Hawaiian would be jobless because Hawaiian cannot make survive on its own. I know passengers have good intentions of thinking that they are trying to help, but this doesn’t help the employees who need to keep their jobs.
I couldn’t agree more. The Hawaiian employees need this, no one else was stepping in to help keep this airline from financial ruins, which it was definitely headed towards if you look at all of the evidence. No one’s going to give the airline millions and millions and millions and say here, “here’s all this money now continue heading towards financial ruin”. This was the best way to save the airline and the employees.