[diminoten]

What actually happened:

United: "This man is trespassing on private property."

Chicago PD: "We'll be right over."

United breaking their agreement isn't illegal, but remaining on private property after you've been asked to leave by the people in charge is illegal.

[pookeh]

Bad example because in this case United and passenger entered an agreement for the passenger to be on United's property.

That's like saying you leased your house to a tenant for a year but then six months in you find another tenant that you want so you call the cops on the first tenant. Doesn't work like that (well at least where I live).

A contract is a contract and nobody is tresassing here.

[diminoten]

That's a civil matter, they're absolutely allowed to kick you off their plane if they want, regardless of what they told you before.

Sure, they're breaching contract, but that's a civil matter. It's completely unlike residency, as well, because that's got special protections, and as many times as people say this has special protections too, it doesn't.

[arcticbull]

Right, except, like, it does, because airlines are regulated too, by the DoT. Actions here likely constituted a breach of 14 CFR 250.2a

[unscaled]

Unless you paid to remain on said private property, and they are bound by contract to let you stay.

[diminoten]

That's literally not true.

To elaborate just a bit, breaking a contract isn't against the law, being "contractually obligated to let you stay on the plane" doesn't mean they can't kick you off the plane, at all.