Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 961328.pdf

Related Parts of This Source

1,718 chars

Woods, a professed Christian, signed SUGM’s statement of faith when he began

volunteering at the ODLS clinic as a law student. Later, as a lawyer, Woods inquired

about the ODLS staff attorney position that became available in October 2016, disclosing

that he was in a same-sex relationship. SUGM informed Woods that it was contrary to

biblical teaching for him to engage in a same-sex relationship. Woods challenged this

interpretation and applied for the position. The ODLS director notified Woods there

would be no change to its policy. SUGM did not hire Woods for the staff attorney

position.

3
For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.
No. 96132-8

In November 2017, Woods filed a complaint against SUGM, alleging it had

violated his right to be free from discriminatory employment under WLAD. Clerk’s

Papers (CP) at 1-7. Woods claimed that RCW 49.60.040(11)’s exemption is

unconstitutional as applied to him because the staff attorney job duties were “wholly

unrelated to [SUGM’s] religious practices or activities.” CP at 6. SUGM argued that the

religious exemption to WLAD applied under RCW 49.60.040(11), which excludes

religious and sectarian nonprofit organizations from the definition of “employer.”

SUGM successfully moved for summary judgment, and Woods sought direct review,

which this court granted.

ANALYSIS

Standard of review

At issue is whether RCW 49.60.040(11) validly exempts SUGM from WLAD

provisions under the facts of this case. This court reviews questions of statutory

interpretation and constitutionality de novo. State v. Evergreen Freedom Found., 192

Wn.2d 782, 789, 432 P.3d 805, cert. denied, 139 S. Ct. 2647 (2019). Our primary