A Michigan woman is taking legal action against Lyft after a driver refused to give her a ride, claiming she was “too big” to fit in his car. The woman, rapper Dajua Blanding, also known as Dank Demoss, recorded the incident and later shared it on social media, sparking a heated debate about discrimination in ride-sharing services.

This case has now evolved into a legal battle, raising serious concerns about weight discrimination, passenger rights, and accountability in the ride-hailing industry.

The Incident: Lyft Driver Cancels Ride Over Passenger’s Size

The confrontation happened earlier this month when Blanding requested a Lyft ride. However, when the driver arrived, he refused to transport her, claiming his car was too small to accommodate her.

In the recorded video, the driver can be heard saying:

“I got no space at all, my car is small.”

Blanding, confident she could fit, pushed back, but the driver stood firm:

“No, believe me, you can’t. So… I’m sorry.”

Things escalated when Blanding asked if the cancellation was due to her size, to which the driver directly confirmed:

“Yeah, you need to order a bigger car.”

Feeling humiliated and discriminated against, Blanding took to social media to express her frustration.

Social Media Backlash: The Internet Reacts

Blanding shared the video online, along with a powerful statement:

“I JUST FEEL LIKE Y’ALL TREAT BIG PEOPLE LIKE WE DON’T BELONG HERE.”

The post immediately gained traction, with many users rallying behind her, calling out the blatant discrimination. Others, however, defended the driver, arguing that some cars genuinely cannot accommodate all passengers comfortably.

Reactions were mixed:

✔️ Supporters of Blanding:

• “This is 100% discrimination. Lyft drivers don’t get to pick and choose passengers based on body size.”
• “If he refused someone because of their race or religion, it would be illegal. How is this different?”

❌ Defenders of the Driver:

• “He wasn’t rude. He just told her the car was too small. Some people won’t fit in all vehicles.”
• “This is being blown out of proportion. If she needs a bigger ride, she should request one.”

The debate highlights a growing tension between personal rights and service limitations in ride-sharing platforms.

Legal Action: Blanding Sues for Discrimination

Feeling that her civil rights were violated, Blanding hired two attorneys to take legal action against Lyft.

Michigan has some of the strictest weight discrimination laws in the U.S., making this a case with significant legal weight.

Attorney Jonathan Marko, who represents Blanding, compared the situation to racial or religious discrimination, stating:

“It would be no different than a driver pulling up and saying, ‘I don’t want to have Black people in my car or I don’t want to have Christians in my car.’”

Blanding also emphasized the emotional toll, explaining that she has ridden in smaller cars before and believes this incident was more about bias than practicality.

Michigan’s Laws on Weight Discrimination: Does Blanding Have a Case?

Unlike many states, Michigan has specific laws prohibiting weight-based discrimination.

🔹 Michigan’s Elliott-Larsen Civil Rights Act protects individuals from discrimination based on weight, height, race, and religion in areas such as employment, housing, and public accommodations.

🔹 Ride-hailing companies like Lyft and Uber operate as public accommodations, meaning they cannot deny service based on discriminatory reasons.

🔹 If a court determines that the driver’s decision was based on prejudice rather than legitimate vehicle limitations, Blanding may have a strong legal case.

This lawsuit could set a legal precedent for how ride-sharing companies handle size discrimination in the future.

Lyft Responds: Where Does the Company Stand?

Lyft issued a statement following the backlash, making it clear that the company does not condone discrimination in any form.

A spokesperson stated:

“We believe in a community where everyone is treated with equal respect and mutual kindness.”

Additionally, Lyft’s terms of service prohibit harassment and discrimination by drivers. However, they did not directly state whether the driver faced consequences or if the company planned to revise its policies.

The Bigger Debate: Passenger Rights vs. Driver Discretion

This case raises bigger questions about how ride-sharing platforms handle size inclusivity and driver discretion.

💡 Should passengers have the right to demand a ride in any car, regardless of their size?
💡 Do drivers have the right to decline passengers based on vehicle space limitations?
💡 Should ride-sharing companies create clearer policies for size inclusivity?

While some believe drivers should have the final say on who they accept, others argue that denying someone a ride based on body size is discriminatory.

One potential solution is for companies like Lyft and Uber to implement better sizing guidelines, allowing riders to know which cars will comfortably accommodate them before booking.

Final Thoughts: A Case That Could Change Ride-Sharing Policies

Blanding’s lawsuit against Lyft is more than just a personal dispute—it’s about establishing legal boundaries for discrimination in the ride-sharing industry.

If she wins, this case could force ride-hailing platforms to introduce new policies that protect passengers from size-based discrimination. On the other hand, if the court rules in favor of the driver’s discretion, it could reinforce the idea that ride-sharing drivers have the right to deny service based on vehicle limitations.

Regardless of the outcome, one thing is certain: this lawsuit will spark further discussions on inclusivity, discrimination, and passenger rights in the gig economy.