Maybe, but only other USA-based airlines flying exactly the same routes (which there aren't in many cases), only if space is available (which it probably won't be in many cases), and only until 30 November 2006.
Under provisions of current USA Federal law, other airlines based in the USA are required to provide transportation to holders of tickets on other USA-based airlines that have ceased operations due to insolvency or bankruptcy, "to the extent practicable", provided that the passenger made arrangements with another airline within 60 days of the shutdown of the ticketed airline.
This law was first enacted in 2001, and has been extended three times, as follows:
Aviation and Transportation Security Act of 2001, Section 145 (Public Law 107-71, 19 November 2001)
Century of Aviation Reauthorization Act of 2003 (P.L. 108-176, 12 December 2003)
Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 (P.L. 108-458, 17 December 2004)
Transportation, Treasury, Housing and Urban Development, the Judiciary, and Independent Agencies Appropriations Act, 2006 (P.L. 109-115, 30 November 2005)
The USA Department of Transportation has interpreted this law in a series of guidance letters (administrative rulings) to mean that other USA-based airlines flying the exact same route are required to honor tickets of a USA-based airline that shut down, on a space-available (standby) basis, for no more than US$50 (originally $25, increased to $50 in June 2005) per person per flight, one-way, in most cases.
Other airlines filed a federal lawsuit (Delta Air Lines, Inc. and American Airlines, Inc. vs. U.S. Department of Transportation, Case No. 02-1309 (U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, filed October 8, 2002) challenging the $25 per flight limit as exceeding DOT's authority: they argued that they should be allowed to charge at least their regular $100 per person minimum re-ticketing fee, and that they have no way to verify whether someone had an electronic ticket in the reservation system of an airline whose reservation system has been shut down. That lawsuit was withdrawn by the airlines, but without any decision on the merits, and could be re-filed.
The latest notice from the DOT, issued 1 June 2005 raised the amount that other airlines could charge to US$50 per flight (one way) within the USA. The DOT also indicated in its latest notice that it might allow other airlines to charge more than $50 per person for international flights, if necessary to cover taxes (which can be more than $100 per person on some international flights) or to recover the airlines' actual costs of providing transportation. But the airlines still could -- and probably would if the potential costs were substantial -- challenge any attempt by the DOT to enforce its interpretation, prevent them from charging more, or force them to accommodate passengers without positive written proof of having had tickets on the bankrupt airline.
This law provides no protection at all to many ticket holders, and only very limited protection to the rest. It was intended to reassure travellers, not really to protect them. Its main effect was (and still is) to give travellers a false sense of protection. It applies only to other airlines based in the USA flying the same route, and only if they have space available after selling as many tickets as they could to their own paying passengers. If a major airline went out of business, many passengers would have to wait weeks for seats to be available, especially at that airline's hubs. Particularly on international routes, there is often no other USA-based airline flying the same route.
This law requiring airlines to accommodate passengers holding ticket on insolvent airlines was originally scheduled to expire on 18 May 2003. Congress has extended it three times, most recently through 30 November 2006, but each time with a "sunset" provision that will cause it to expire automatically unless Congress takes further action. Since it does more to mislead travellers than to protect them, consumers would probably be better off if it were allowed to expire than if it were extended again in its present form.
