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

1,758 chars
currently drafted, WLAD generally applies to all employers except “any religious or

sectarian organization not organized for private profit.” RCW 49.60.040(11).

WLAD does not seek to selectively burden religiously motivated conduct. Holding

the religious nonprofit exemption unconstitutional under our state privileges and

immunities clause does not change the general applicability of the statute. Without

the unconstitutional exemption, WLAD applies to all employers except religious

employers that raise and prove an affirmative defense based on the ministerial

exception. I would therefore construe WLAD as a law of general applicability.

Because I would construe WLAD as a neutral law of general applicability, I

would apply rational basis review. See Arlene’s Flowers, 193 Wn.2d at 519, 523

(“WLAD is a neutral, generally applicable law subject to rational basis review.”).

-24-
For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.
Woods v. Seattle’s Union Gospel Mission, 96132-8
(Stephens, J., dissenting in part and concurring in part)

WLAD easily meets that standard because it is rationally related to the government’s

legitimate interest in the “elimination and prevention of discrimination in

employment.” RCW 49.60.010.

That said, “the Religion Clauses ensure[] that the [government has] . . . no

role in filling ecclesiastical offices.” Hosanna-Tabor, 565 U.S. at 184. “Both

Religion Clauses bar the government from interfering with the decision of a religious

group” on the employment of its “ministers.” Id. at 181. Because “there is a

ministerial exception grounded in the Religion Clauses of the First Amendment,” id.

at 190, WLAD cannot constitutionally apply in the context of ministerial or