Washington defends religious hiring law before full Ninth Circuit

Washington state defends its anti-discrimination law against religious hiring exemption claims before the full Ninth Circuit.

Washington state's statute, the Washington Law Against Discrimination (WLAD), bans employment discrimination based on sexual orientation and other protected characteristics. The law was interpreted by the Washington Supreme Court in 2021 to apply strict limits on religious exemptions, confining them largely to ministerial roles.

The Yakima Union Gospel Mission, a Christian nonprofit, mandates that all employees adhere to its religious beliefs, including abstaining from sexual conduct outside a biblical marriage between one man and one woman. In January 2026, a three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit unanimously ruled that under the First Amendment’s church autonomy doctrine, the Mission could require employees to share and live out these beliefs. The panel decision explains this protects religious mission-based hiring.

However, in June 2026, the full Ninth Circuit vacated that ruling and agreed to rehear the case en banc, signaling a critical reassessment of religious hiring exemptions under the intersection of state anti-discrimination law and federal constitutional protections. The court’s en banc rehearing will clarify the tension between the WLAD's anti-discrimination provisions and the religious freedom claimed by the Yakima Union Gospel Mission.

Earlier, in February 2025, a coalition of 20 state attorneys general filed an amicus brief supporting the Mission’s right to religious-based hiring, arguing the government should not dictate the internal affairs or employment decisions of religious organizations. Idaho Attorney General Raúl Labrador said, "The government should have no role in dictating the affairs, management, or mission of any religious organization." Washington State Representative Chris Corry also praised the initial ruling, stating, "This ruling rightly recognizes that the government doesn't get to decide who a religious ministry must hire or what beliefs it must compromise." These positions bring national attention to how courts balance employment non-discrimination with religious autonomy.

The case is a significant test of religious exemptions to public accommodation and anti-discrimination laws. Given the en banc rehearing, the Ninth Circuit’s forthcoming decision will have wide-reaching implications for churches, religious nonprofits, and the scope of protected employment rights under both state and federal law.

What's next: No clear timeline for the Ninth Circuit en banc decision is available yet, but the ruling will be closely watched for its impact on religious hiring exemptions and anti-discrimination laws.