Politics, Society

Bad Precedent Set By Seattle Mayor And Washington Governor Issuing Orders Prohibiting Government Employees Travelling On Business To Indiana

By Darren Smith, Weekend Contributor

Mayor Ed Murray
Mayor Ed Murray

In the wake of the State of Indiana passing into law the Religious Freedom Restoration Act—a law crafted to allow businesses to curtail services to customers based upon religious objections—Seattle Mayor Ed Murray and later Governor Jay Inslee issued executive orders prohibiting government funded travel of employees to Indiana in protest.

The proffered reasons of these executives is to voice protest in that Indiana’s statute is incompatible with either state anti-discrimination laws or is in alignment with the political values of these local governments.

Orders of this type are actually counter to the idea of sovereignty of each state and interfere with the judicial, executive, and legislative processes that are inherently reserved to the voters and citizens of, in this case, the state of Indiana.

The text of Mayor Murray’s executive order is as follows:

An Executive Order prohibiting the use of City funds for travel by all City employees on City business to the State of Indiana after passage of S.B. 101 until further notice and reaffirming this Administration’s continued commitment to civil rights and ensuring equity for all people in Seattle and beyond and the establishment of an action plan that supports these efforts.

WHEREAS, the Indiana State Legislature passed and Indiana Governor Mike Pence signed into law SB 101, known as the “Religious Freedom Restoration Act”; and

WHEREAS, Indiana’s Religious Freedom Restoration Act provides individuals and any type of business, whether for-profit or non-profit, irrespective of its purpose, the right, based on a religious belief, to discriminate against a person because of his or her sexual orientation or any other protected category; and

WHEREAS, Indiana’s Religious Freedom Restoration Act is inconsistent with the work and values of my Administration to promote equity, to end discrimination, to eliminate institutional racism and to advance social justice for the people of Seattle; and

WHEREAS, Indiana’s Religious Freedom Restoration Act expressly provides that Indiana’s law does not provide a person a right to access the civil justice system if he or she is subjected to a discriminatory act as a result of its enactment;

WHEREAS, in his April 16, 1963, letter from Birmingham Jail, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., wrote, an “injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere;” the City of Seattle will not stand by idly while discriminatory laws like Indiana’s Religious Freedom Restoration Act are enacted because such laws stand to threaten the equity victories in Seattle and elsewhere; and

WHEREAS, the City of Seattle will stand with those who are fighting for equity in Indiana and elsewhere across the county; and

WHEREAS, the use of discretionary public taxpayer dollars should, to the extent possible, reflect the values of the people of our City and should not be used to support the economies of businesses and governments that support and enact discriminatory laws and policies; and

WHEREAS, it is within my authority as the Chief Executive of the City of Seattle to manage, direct and restrict the expenditure of funds appropriated annually through the adopted budget by the Seattle City Council;

Now therefore, I, Edward B. Murray, Mayor of Seattle, hereby affirm the City’s commitment to civil rights and ensuring equity for all people in Seattle and beyond and order the following actions to establish a plan and strategies that support this commitment to equity:

1. All Executive department and office employees are hereby prohibited from using City funds for travel on City business to the State of Indiana in light of the passage of S.B. 101 until further notice.

2. All Executive departments and offices are hereby directed to review and identify existing contracts with any businesses with headquarters in the State of Indiana within 15 days of this Executive Order and report such findings to Deputy Mayor Kate Joncas.

3. The Director of the Office of Intergovernmental Relations (OIR), Nick Harper, is directed to develop and advance a strategy to voice the City’s strong objections to Indiana S.B. 101 in cooperation with other jurisdictions, the National League of Cities and the U.S. Conference of Mayors to identify other cities that share our values on equity and ending discrimination for all.

Washington Governor Inslee’s Executive Order:

Governor Jay Inslee
Governor Jay Inslee

Washington State has a strong history of prohibiting discrimination and promoting diversity and inclusion. Our Washington Law Against Discrimination (WLAD), Ch. 49.60 RCW, guarantees for all Washingtonians the right to be free from discrimination because of race, creed color, national origin, sex, honorably discharged veteran or military status, sexual orientation, or the presence of any sensory, mental, physical disability or the use of a trained dog guide or service animal by a person with a disability.

Recently, Indiana passed legislation that will allow private companies to discriminate against individuals in that state, including but not limited to Washington citizens traveling to Indiana for work related purposes, contrary to the protections of the WLAD.

It is the law of Washington State and the policy of my administration to demand equality for all persons. Consequently, I hereby order that no executive cabinet-level agency or small cabinet agency shall allow publicly funded non-essential travel to the state of Indiana so long as the recently approved Religious Freedom Restoration Act, IC 34-13-9 exists in its current form. I invite all other statewide elected officials, institutions of higher education, agencies, boards and commissions to follow the provisions of this directive.

The text of Indiana’s Religious Freedom Restoration Act, while objectionable to many, is not relevant to the topic as to whether such actions by local officials have the ability to interfere in the affairs of another state’s legislative process. There are worrying trends that are coming into play with these types of actions.

Several problems are inherent:

First, Governor Inslee asserts by implication that Washington State has jurisdiction what would be considered a discriminatory practice to refuse an accommodation based upon religious objections. Washington’s Supreme Court and statutes specifically provide that the state has the ability to regulate this type of commerce. However, Washington has almost no jurisdiction (per RCW 9A.04.030) over any such act for which the Religious Freedom Restoration Act permits in Indiana. The only means for which Washington could assert jurisdiction would be if a person within Washington telephoned or otherwise communicated with a person in Indiana in a commercial transaction and was refused contrary to WLAD. If such a communication was in fact prohibited as interpreted by the courts the remedy would not be a general prohibition of commerce between the states by the executive.  The state executive’s only statutory authority in that matter would be to, ironically, pardon the Indianan if convicted.

The orders exercise an undue influence upon voters.

If executives of one state declare that if a law of another state is passed there will be economic consequences exacted for the decision of the voters, it can unduly influence the voters to vote according to another state politician’s wishes. No matter how noble the goal is proffered by the out of state executive, it is for that state’s electorate and courts to decide.

The orders violate the spirit of interstate commerce

The governor and mayor are in effect regulating interstate commerce by declaring that the State / City will not participate in transactions or other business with Indiana if it involves a state employee to travel to that state. There are several agencies that encourage trade and investment with the state as well as general government operations that necessitate travel to accomplish. These activities are curtailed by the prohibition on travel.

The review of government contracts as mentioned in the Seattle proclamation is tantamount to collective punishment.

The implication of the possibility of refusing to do business between the government and businesses headquartered in Indiana is an irresponsible and likely unconstitutional act. Businesses that were headquartered in Indiana long prior to the Religious Freedom Restoration Act now face the possibility of discrimination strictly on account of their location.

States do not have a constitutional authority to engage in embargoes against other states or foreign nations. That authority is reserved to Congress. It also gives illegal preference to businesses that are either in-state or from the several other states not having law that the executives find objectionable.

Consequently, such prohibitions can interfere with the commerce of other 3rd party in-state businesses that transact with the proscribed businesses the executives could target.

It is not the role of outside political executives to collectively punish the residents of an entire state for the actions of its legislature. Those who voice concern of the influence of big money in state or federal politics should be concerned when a state government is acting with coercive means against the citizens of another.

While individual citizens are certainly within their rights to impose their own economic boycotts against U.S. states or cities, it should not be a right available to governors, mayors, or other politicians.

By Darren Smith

Sources:

The Olympian
City of Seattle

The views expressed in this posting are the author’s alone and not those of the blog, the host, or other weekend bloggers. As an open forum, weekend bloggers post independently without pre-approval or review. Content and any displays or art are solely their decision and responsibility.

307 thoughts on “Bad Precedent Set By Seattle Mayor And Washington Governor Issuing Orders Prohibiting Government Employees Travelling On Business To Indiana”

  2. FIRST AMENDMENT –

    “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

    ******************

    “CIVIL – of citizens in their ordinary capacity, or of the ordinary life and affairs of citizens, as distinguished from military and ecclesiastical life and affairs.”

    ******************

    “Civil rights” confers rights related to “citizens” of a city, state or nation, such as a right to occupy a public park or library, NOT to voluntary and discretionary personal matters and commerce of personal choice involving private and personal transactions. Government shall not compel a CUSTOMER to patronize and it shall not compel a BUSINESS to serve.

    It is completely disingenuous to ascribe “civil rights” to a customer in a private business – the proprietor of which has the right to the freedom of thought, speech, press, assembly, etc. The customer does not have the right to dictate to the private business owner exercising his freedom to assembly.

    PARTIES TO A TRANSACTION ARE TWO CONSENTING ADULTS.

  3. Amazing, isn’t it.

    The brilliant Mike Pence says this law was not passed in order to discriminate against homosexuals.

    I guess the howling crowd over here might disagree with the brilliant Mike Pence.

  4. Seattle and Washington are going to keep their government doob heads away form Indiana?

    If I was Indiana, I’d want that promise in writing.

    Microsoft, on the other hand, will send their worker bees anywhere in search of the last nickel in town.

  6. Religious conscience is the choice of each individual. The interpretation of Christs teachings is shaped by the denomination he chooses. I am sure there are many that will be happy to celebrate sodomy.

    The government doesn’t get to decide what a religious person believes or what he can do in his daily life. It can not force Jews to eat Ham or Muslims to forgo Halal meats. It can not force a Hindu to eat a cheeseburger. These examples seem ludicrous but are no more ridiculous than forcing some to join in an activity
    that they feel violates their religious scruples in the same way.

    Leave them alone. Why do you have to force your beliefs on them?

  7. But Lott and his two daughters are Holy… ?
    And their offspring are blessed?
    And the city he offered his daughters to is evil?
    Yet the man is ‘chosen’ by God…

    Religion.

    1. Max-1 – if you read the Bible you will remember that Lot was blind drunk and it was supposed to be a one time thing to get the daughters pregnant. The world had ended, don’t cha’ know.

  8. Who’s inviting the baker to be ‘besties’ at the alter?
    Who’s inviting the caterer to be the ring bearer?
    Who’s inviting the photographer to officiate?

    Um… aren’t these listed above willing to exchange what is Caesar’s (MONEY) for a service that is taxed (EARTHLY GOODS)? So, why are in the business of doing Caesar’s bidding if they seek to claim the cloak of Christ as a defense?

  10. Hmmm. Well, speaking of leaving a state, in today’s other big important news which is right up there with Compulsory Baking, is the sad tale of Wyoming’s Sissy Goodwin. . .

    After nearly seven decades in Wyoming, for much of that time facing heartbreak, discrimination and even physical violence, the cross-dresser has finally decided to leave the Cowboy State.

    Goodwin wants people to understand this: He isn’t gay; he’s been married for 46 years and has two adult children. As a young man, he competed in rodeo. He got in fistfights, drank beer out of a can. The former aircraft mechanic still loves to play golf, throw steaks on the grill (albeit in a dress of his choosing).

    He’ll also miss the open vistas of Wyoming, where the plains run like ocean waves, framed by mountains in the distance.

    “But Oregon has trees, and you can still get a glimpse of the mountains,” he said. “And the waterfalls fall straight down there. In Wyoming, they fall sideways because a strong wind is always blowing.” [I just bet that ain’t the only thing that blowing. . .

    http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-wyoming-cross-dresser-20150404-story.html

    http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/10/07/article-2448152-189297FD00000578-511_210x160.jpg

    Of course it goes without saying that anybody who thinks Sissy is some kind of a nut is both homophobic and bigoted. Yeah, sure.

    Squeeky Fromm
    Girl Reporter

  11. ” It must be particularly difficult when shaving.”

    LoL. Although that is a bit inflammatory.

  12. Dear Christians,
    Who did Jesus refuse to serve?

    Trading denaros for dandelions is nothing but trading Caesar money for what is Caesar’s (EARTHLY GOODS). What did Jesus say about this?

    Stop holding Jesus hostage.

  13. ” I ate at Chick-fil-A for the first time in my life when the boycott was announced.”

    LoL -so did I. Its actually pretty good fast food. The sincerity of the CEO is shown by his closing down on Sunday. He’s thrown away a lot of money by doing that. The Apple CEO hasn’t lost a dime by attacking Indiana. Lets see Apple pull out of countries that stone Gays to death, then I’ll know he’s sincere.

    1. rcocean – Apple can show its sincerity by opening a store side-by-side with Starbucks in Ferguson.

  14. Darren,
    Is there a reason you omitted the other States banning State employees?
    Is it ‘just’ Washington and Ed Murray that are bad for business?

  15. rafflaw
    Don’t these mayors and governors have the right to prevent their city and state funds from supporting a state that discriminates?
    = = =
    On the contrary… it appears that many on this blog believe that people should be forced to participate in discriminatory actions.

  16. Corporations are cowards. But even when they knuckle under they will get screwed. Witness Modzilla. Many will never support Walmart the way they used to when they saw how they pandered in this instance. I know I will never defend them again when they are attacked.

    It is a joke that you talk about “choice.” How about letting people choose not to join in celebrations of sodomy? Is that too much to ask? There are plenty of other people who will be happy to service these events.

    The end game is that that forces of progressive liberal fascists is to force churches to perform the sacrament of marriage to same sex couples. That is what this is building up to as they chip away at the ability of believers to opt out due to their religious conscience.

    These libertines will enforce their beliefs on you. You will not have a choice. You will comply or they will try to destroy you.

  17. Nick

    Face it. There is no end of things that disgust you. It must be particularly difficult when shaving.

    1. Wade ‘always wrong’ williams’ – I read a lot of sources, that is just one. When you cannot attack the message, attack the messenger.

  19. Steven. How magnanimous! You were just GIVEN permission to pick your team. LOL! Like yourself, I had never eaten @ a Chick Fil-A. But, when the teeny tiny Gestapo Mayor of Chicago tried to run them outta town, I gave them a try. Good food. I don’t eat much fast food, but I will now choose Chick Fil-A if I need a quick sandwich. Their biz increased w/ the controversy, just like Memories Pizza. Again, I don’t like organized religion. But I am disgusted by these PC Nazi’s.

    1. Nick – Chick-Fil-A is out of my way but I did eat there once when they were giving away free sandwiches. They were pretty good. If they were more convenient, I would go more often.

  20. I wonder how those fundamentalist Christians who won’t seek medical help for their dying children feel after their child is dead and their religious convictions obviously were wrong? There are some misguided Believers out there. People have misinterpreted the Bible for hundreds of years.

    Morals don’t come only from religion. The sense of right and wrong is not contingent on religious belief.

    1. Inga – I wonder how those parents feel whose children die under the care of a doctor?

    2. Inga – a sense of right or wrong is not contingent on religion but can be.

Comments are closed.