Lawyers representing a Christian homeless shelter are set to appear in federal appeals court to contest a Washington state anti-discrimination law. This law mandates that the shelter, Union Gospel Mission in Yakima, must hire LGBTQ individuals and others who do not conform to its religious beliefs, particularly regarding sexuality and marriage.
The Union Gospel Mission is backed by the Alliance Defending Freedom, a global legal organization. Senior counsel Ryan Tucker argues that the mission faces potential prosecution for exercising its “constitutionally protected freedom to hire fellow believers who share the mission’s calling to spread the gospel and care for vulnerable people.” This case aims to revive a lawsuit dismissed by a lower court, which had previously agreed with state attorneys that the mission’s challenge was not valid under existing legal precedents.
Legal Battles and Religious Exemptions
The origins of this legal battle trace back to a 2017 lawsuit by Matt Woods, a bisexual Christian who was denied a position as a staff attorney at the Union Gospel Mission’s legal aid clinic in Seattle. Washington’s Law Against Discrimination does exempt religious nonprofits, but a 2021 state Supreme Court ruling clarified that this exemption should apply only to ministerial roles. Although the trial court was set to determine if the attorney position qualified for the exemption, Woods dismissed his case after achieving a favorable ruling and opted not to seek monetary damages.
Despite this, the Union Gospel Mission maintains its stance on hiring, requiring employees to adhere strictly to its religious beliefs, including abstaining from behaviors deemed sexually immoral, such as adultery, nonmarried cohabitation, and homosexual conduct. The mission has held off hiring for several positions, awaiting the outcome of their legal challenge.
Future Implications
In 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to review Woods’ case, though Justice Samuel Alito noted that the issue of religious organizations’ autonomy in hiring could soon warrant further judicial examination. The current appeal could set significant precedents regarding the balance between religious freedom and anti-discrimination protections, impacting similar cases nationwide.