I always feel like I need to take a shower after even looking in the Cloak Room especially since both major political parties long ago diverged from my beliefs. Nonetheless ...
First, court orders, especially on sanctions are always crafted by the Court.
Second, on page 13 - 14, the following language appears: "Carter seeks four sanctions—attorney fees, a flat fine, a revised notice, and religious-liberty training. The Court considers each in turn." So, without looking at the Motion for Sanctions, it appears as if the plaintiff did seek that type of sanction.
Third, I don't know much about ADF and don't particularly care. But, the following language indicates why this judge chose ADF: "For instance, ADF recently agreed to “conduct a First Amendment training session” for three professors who allegedly discriminated against a student for posting “materials to her social media accounts” and sending “messages to fellow students” containing, among other things, religious views.78 And, in that case, the defendants allegedly cited their school policies as a reason to curtail religious speech.79 Because this case also involves an entity’s citation to its policies in an apparent attempt to end-run legal protections against religious discrimination based on online activities, ADF is particularly well-suited to train Southwest’s employees who are most responsible for the communications at issue here."
Magistrate Judge Starr also cited ADF as follows: "See, e.g., Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd. v. Colo. Civil Rights Comm’n, 138 S. Ct. 1719, 1722 (2018) (recognizing that ADF was counsel on a successful Supreme Court appeal)."
The 29 page Order entered by the Court outlines some egregious conduct by Southwest Airlines and its inside counsel.
Now, I know this is the "Cloak Room" where all reason, logic, professionalism and mutual respect are not welcome.
As such, proceed with the usual ... "YOU'RE STUPID! NO, YOU'RE STUPID! NUH UH! HUH UH! WELL FUCK YOU! WELL FUCK YOU TOO!