Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 961328.pdf

Citation: Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 961328.pdf
Jurisdiction: Washington (state)
Source verification: official_capture_completeness_unverified
Original Source: https://www.courts.wa.gov/opinions/pdf/961328.pdf ↗

Related Parts of This Source

Full Text

1,132 chars

-10-
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)

a statute grants a privilege or immunity. The majority’s analysis is plainly built on

the wrong constitutional foundation. 5

Worse, after positing fundamental due process rights to open the door to a

privileges and immunities analysis, the majority promptly abandons them and

minimizes the import of WLAD. I would hold WLAD implicates a right we have

long recognized as a fundamental right of state citizenship—the civil right to seek

redress for discrimination. Ockletree, 179 Wn.2d at 794-97 (Stephens, J.,

dissenting) (recognizing that protection from discrimination is a “personal,” civil

right redressable at common law), see id. at 806 (Wiggins, J., concurring in part in

dissent) (“I agree with the dissent that the exemption of religious and sectarian

organizations in RCW 49.60.040(11) is subject to scrutiny under the privileges and

immunities clause of article I, section 12 of the Washington Constitution.”); see also