Union Gospel Mission of Yakima, Washington, is a nonprofit Christian ministry that operates homeless shelters, recovery programs, meal services, and other outreach efforts. The organization views its religious mission as inseparable from its daily operations and requires all employees, ministerial and non-ministerial alike, to share and live according to its Christian beliefs, including adherence to its teachings on marriage and sexuality. Union Gospel maintains that employees in all roles help model those beliefs and foster a faith-based community essential to its evangelical mission.
Washington’s Law Against Discrimination (WLAD) prohibits employment discrimination on several protected grounds, including sexual orientation. Although WLAD historically exempted nonprofit religious organizations, the Washington Supreme Court narrowed that exemption in 2021, limiting it to apply only to ministers and clergy. As a result, WLAD could be enforced against religious organizations when hiring for non-ministerial positions. In response, Union Gospel brought a pre-enforcement lawsuit against the Washington Attorney General and the Washington State Human Rights Commission, alleging that applying WLAD to its hiring policy would violate the First Amendment. Union Gospel sought a preliminary injunction to bar enforcement of the law against its hiring practices.
The trial court initially dismissed the case for lack of standing, but the Ninth Circuit reversed, holding that Union Gospel faced a credible threat that the law may be enforced against them. On remand, the trial court granted a preliminary injunction. In doing so, the trial court applied the traditional four-factor test, which requires a plaintiff to show (1) a likelihood of success on the merits, (2) a likelihood of irreparable harm absent an injunction, (3) that the balance of equities tips in its favor, and (4) that an injunction is in the public interest. Because the defendants were state actors, the final two factors were analyzed together.
The Ninth Circuit affirmed the injunction. On the first factor, the likelihood of success on the merits, the Court held that Union Gospel was likely to prevail under the church autonomy doctrine, which is a doctrine rooted in the First Amendment that protects religious institutions from government interference in internal decisions that affect faith and mission. The Court emphasized that this doctrine extends beyond the ministerial exception and may apply to non-ministerial employment decisions when those decisions are rooted in sincerely held religious beliefs.
In applying the church autonomy doctrine, the Ninth Circuit relied on undisputed facts showing that Union Gospel’s religious mission permeates all aspects of its operations and that employees in non-ministerial roles are expected to actively support that mission. The Court noted that Union Gospel requires all employees to affirm and live according to its statement of faith, participate in religious practices such as prayer and chapel, and model Christian conduct for both coworkers and program participants. The record also showed that Union Gospel views non-ministerial employees as essential to creating an internal faith community that supports its outward-facing ministry, and that hiring individuals who reject its religious beliefs would, in the organization’s view, undermine its religious message, fellowship, and identity. Based on those facts, the Court concluded that the co-religionist hiring policy was an internal management decision central to Union Gospel’s religious mission and therefore protected from state interference.
The Court was careful to stress the narrow scope of its holding. The church autonomy doctrine does not permit discrimination on grounds unrelated to religion, nor does it provide blanket immunity from generally applicable employment laws. The Court also declined to address whether similar protections would apply to commercial businesses or other entities affiliated with religious organizations.
On the remaining factors, the Court concluded that Union Gospel satisfied the irreparable-harm requirement because the loss of First Amendment freedoms, even temporarily, constitutes irreparable injury. The Court also found that the balance of equities and the public interest favored an injunction, explaining that preventing the enforcement of a law in a manner that violates constitutional protections serves the public interest. In conclusion, the Court held that the Union Gospel may decline to hire as non-ministerial employees those who do not share its religious beliefs about marriage and sexuality.
Accordingly, the Ninth Circuit affirmed the preliminary injunction while the case proceeds.
Union Gospel Mission of Yakima v. Brown, No. 24-7246 (9th Cir. Jan. 6, 2026).
Note: Although this case arose under Washington’s antidiscrimination statute, it was decided by the Ninth Circuit, whose constitutional rulings are binding on federal courts in California. The court’s analysis of the church autonomy doctrine, particularly its conclusion that the doctrine can protect faith-based hiring requirements for non-ministerial roles when rooted in sincerely held religious beliefs, is therefore relevant to California religious schools. While California law already contains statutory exemptions for religious employers, this decision reinforces that constitutional protections may apply even where state law is narrowed or challenged.