Billboard Controversy: Central New York Attorney Scores Federal Win

A Syracuse attorney’s attempt to place an ad about sexual harassment legal services at Hancock International Airport has turned into a federal court showdown.

A judge made a big ruling this week that could have implications far beyond Central New York.

The Controversial Billboard

Megan Thomas, submitted artwork for a billboard at the Syracuse Regional Airport in the summer of 2025 that read: “When HR called it HARMLESS FLIRTING ... We called it EXHIBIT A,” along with information about the firm’s focus on sexual harassment, discrimination, and retaliation cases.

The tagline “No Fear, No Shame, Just Justice” was designed to grab attention and let travelers know help is available.

Airport Pushback

Airport officials refused to display the ad, calling the language “unprofessional, inflammatory, and unnecessary,” and suggested it might make some travelers uncomfortable.

READ MORE: Syracuse Attorney’s Sexual Harassment Ad Rejected at Airport

Critics argued the ad was relatively mild compared with other airport signage and that asking the firm to “soften” its message sidestepped the real issue.

Get our free mobile app

The Lawsuit

Attorney Thomas sued the Syracuse Regional Airport Authority, alleging the rejection violated her First Amendment rights and breached the advertising agreement.

This week, U.S. District Judge Anthony Brindisi ruled the airport’s refusal was likely unconstitutional, calling it "nonsense.”

The tagline does not claim, suggest, or ‘falsely impl[y]’ any such position—at least, no more than Chick-fil-A’s Authority-approved tagline ‘falsely implies’ that chicken dinners will always make a person happy, or that cows can speak.”

The judge made it clear that blocking the ad just because someone might take offense is not a valid reason under the First Amendment.

Next Steps

The court denied the airport’s motion to dismiss, meaning Thomas’s broader constitutional claims will move forward.

The next step will be for both sides to brief the judge on what remedy is appropriate — whether the ad should go up immediately or the Authority should first revise its policies.