Skip to main content

Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 961328.pdf

Citation
Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 961328.pdf
Jurisdiction
Washington (state)
Source verification
official_capture_completeness_unverified

Related Parts of This Source

Full Text

1,751 chars
religious beliefs, and central to this freedom is the messenger of those beliefs. WASH.

CONST. art. I, § 11; Hosanna-Tabor, 565 U.S. at 201 (Alito, J., concurring) (“When it

comes to the expression and inculcation of religious doctrine, there can be no doubt that

the messenger matters.”). The First Amendment “gives special solicitude to the rights of

religious organizations.” Hosanna-Tabor, 565 U.S. at 189. Article I, section 11 of the

Washington State Constitution offers even more robust protections. See First Covenant

Church of Seattle, 120 Wn.2d at 224 (noting article I, section 11 of Washington’s

constitution is “stronger than the federal constitution”). The ministerial exception,

recognized by the United States Supreme Court, every circuit court, and 12 other state

supreme courts, 5 provides a fair and useful approach for determining whether application

of RCW 49.60.040(11) unconstitutionally infringes on Woods’ fundamental right to his

sexual orientation and right to marry.

5
Douglas Laycock, Hosanna-Tabor and the Ministerial Exception, 35 HARV. J.L. & PUB. POL’Y
839, 846 (2012) (noting all 12 geographic circuits and 12 state supreme courts recognize the
existence of the ministerial exception).

19
For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.
No. 96132-8

Whether ministerial responsibilities and functions equivalent to those discussed in

Our Lady of Guadalupe and Hosanna-Tabor are present in Woods’ case that would

similarly render an employment discrimination claim under WLAD unavailable is an

open factual question that the trial court did not decide. While some of the criteria noted

in Our Lady of Guadalupe and Hosanna-Tabor are present here, other criteria are not.