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

1,756 chars

as-applied challenge, imagines an exemption that does not exist—and that was not

applied here. It is undisputed that SUGM claimed, and was granted, the exemption

based on its status as a religious nonprofit, period.

Moreover, the majority’s characterization of Woods’s right to be free from

discrimination as merely a statutory right contradicts its conclusion under the first

part of its privileges and immunities analysis. There, the majority concluded

Woods’s claim implicates the fundamental constitutional rights to marriage and

sexual orientation. Majority at 9. While I disagree with the majority’s grounding of

the relevant rights in the federal due process clause, it is true that Woods has a

fundamental right to be free from discrimination based on sexual orientation. Under

the majority’s own framework, it is Woods’s constitutional rights that we must

balance against the religious employers’ statutory privilege, not the other way

around. The majority’s failure to properly weigh the rights at issue in this case

-14-
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)

undermines its subsequent determination that reasonable grounds support the

religious employer exemption.

“The article I, section 12 reasonable grounds test is more exacting than

rational basis review. Under the reasonable grounds test a court will not hypothesize

facts to justify a legislative distinction.” Schroeder, 179 Wn.2d at 574. Instead, we

“scrutinize the legislative distinction to determine whether it in fact serves the

legislature’s stated goal.” Id. The distinction must depend on “real and substantial