Religious liberty in Washington state

MYRNA BROWN, HOST: It’s Thursday the 11th of August, 2022.

Glad to have you along for today’s edition of The World and Everything in It. Good morning, I’m Myrna Brown.

PAUL BUTLER, HOST: And I’m Paul Butler.

First up on The World and Everything in It: religious liberty on college campuses in Washington state.

A historic Christian university in the middle of a progressive-leaning city and state hit back last month, suing to stop an investigation by Washington Attorney General Bob Ferguson.

The state started the probe after some students and faculty complained about the school’s adherence to Biblical views of marriage and sexuality.

BROWN: Steve West recently wrote about this case, and he joins us now to fill us in on the details. He is an attorney and writes about religious liberty issues for WORLD Digital. Good morning, Steve!

Well, take us back to the beginning of this case. Some students and faculty complained about the school’s biblical views. What happened there?

WEST: It’s no secret, Myrna, that there’s a mismatch between some faculty and students and the university’s trustees over views on marriage and sexuality. In January 2021 an adjunct nursing professor filed a lawsuit claiming he wasn’t offered a full-time, tenured position because of his sexual orientation. University officials disputed that but pointed to the school’s “religious-based conduct expectations”—referring to standards of conduct for faculty limiting sexual relationships to marriages of one man and one woman. Nothing surprising in that Biblical position.

BROWN: Okay, so how did that turn out?

WEST: By May 2021, the lawsuit was settled, the terms undisclosed, and the university made no further statement on the matter. Yet that was just the tip of the iceberg. Some students and faculty members weren’t willing to let it go, and they filed complaints with Washington Attorney General Bob Ferguson. On that note, Ferguson opened an investigation of the school and requested a load of internal records about the school’s hiring practices and governance, going back five years.

BROWN: Okay, and when did this matter land in the courts?

WEST: Some context is helpful. We have to remember: This is the same state that basically put Baronelle Stutzman, a grandmother in her seventies, out of her florist shop business because she would not design a floral arrangement for a same sex wedding. It’s also the same state that’s in litigation with Seattle’s Union Gospel Mission over the mission’s requirement that employees abide by a similar standard of conduct. So school trustees no doubt sensed where this was heading and wanted to get out in front of it, suing before they were sued, seeking to shut down an investigation that is nothing more than an attempt to press nonBiblical views on marriage and sexuality on the school.

BROWN: We know that the First Amendment protects religious exercise, but what specific legal argument is the school making on its own behalf?

WEST: The lawsuit is rooted in constitutional guarantees of free speech, religious exercise, and religious assembly that arguably protect the school. But at heart, the school is pleading a First Amendment-derived doctrine of religious autonomy: Religious groups have a right to decide what they believe and who should lead them, and this is something the Supreme Court has repeatedly affirmed.

BROWN: I understand that the school has been under pressure to change its standards, but so far, it’s holding firm, correct?

WEST: That’s right. They’re only two weeks into this lawsuit, so not much has happened yet, but surely they face enormous pressure to cave. Back in May, there were student protests, a sit in, and calls in the student-run newspaper for a progressive, affirming Christianity, one that embraces the LGBTQ community. In some students—and faculty’s—minds, conduct is inseparable from status. So if you can’t accept the lifestyle, you can’t accept the person. And then the school is embedded in a local culture that at best doesn’t understand the trustee’s position and, more likely, is hostile to it. This won’t end soon.

BROWN: Steve, have decisions in other cases at the Supreme Court or elsewhere given us any indication of how this case might ultimately play out?

WEST: Legally, I think the school is on good grounds in the lawsuit, as the Supreme Court has been strong in its support of religious liberty. More on point, the court said as recently as 2000 that at very least school decisions in regard to employees who perform vital religious functions are their own to make, free of governmental interference. Time will tell how broad that goes—particularly in a country that is less and less Biblically literate, has less and less belief that religion matters. But then, God majors in great reversals, so we do not lose hope.

BROWN: Steve West writes about religious liberties for WORLD Digital. You can read his work at wng.org. You can also subscribe to his free weekly newsletter on First Amendment issues, called Liberties. Steve, always good to have you on. Thank you!

WORLD Radio transcripts are created on a rush deadline. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of WORLD Radio programming is the audio record.