The lawsuit from actress Gina Carano against Disney and Lucasfilm appears set to move forward, after a federal judge declined to dismiss the suit.

The move by Judge Sherilyn Peace Garnett will likely mean that the suit goes to trial or Disney and Carano come to terms on a settlement.

Carano had sued Disney earlier this year over her high-profile firing from the Disney+ series The Mandalorian in 2021, in which the company said that her social media posts denigrating people based on their cultural and religious identities are abhorrent and unacceptable. The suit which is being backed by Elon Musk via his company X alleged that Carano was terminated for holding conservative political views.

I think its pretty incredible what he is doing, Carano told The Hollywood Reporter in a March profile. A lot of billionaires put their money into buying islands and building bunkers. Elon Musk is using his money to fight massive injustice battles.

Disney argued that theres a First Amendment right to choose employees who properly convey their values, even when those choices would otherwise violate state anti-discrimination laws. It cited the Supreme Court, inBoy Scouts of America v. Dale,finding that the organizations decision to fire an openly gay assistant scoutmaster is protected under the constitution. That constitutional right, the court concluded, shields the scouts from violations of New Jersey discrimination laws.

As an initial matter, unlike the Boy Scouts or the Jaycees, Defendants are not members-only, nonprofit organizations. Instead, Defendants are for-profit corporations who, as relevant to this lawsuit, employ actors such as Plaintiff, as well as administrative staff, to create television series and films. Judge Garnett wrote Wednesday, adding that Disney had not identified any evidencein the Complaint or otherwiseto substantiate a claim that they employ public-facing actors for the purpose of promoting the values of respect, decency, integrity, or inclusion. Accordingly, Defendants invocation of the supposedly detrimental effects of Plaintiffs mere presence as one of Defendants employees lacks constitutional import.