4 F.4th 747
9th Cir.2021Background:
- Slidewaters LLC operates a seasonal waterpark in Chelan County, WA and was prohibited from operating in summer 2020 by Governor Inslee’s COVID-19 proclamations; it reopened in 2021 subject to capacity limits.
- Governor issued Proclamation 20-05 (state of emergency under RCW §43.06.010) and L&I adopted an emergency workplace rule (WAC §296-800-14035) tying enforcement to the proclamations.
- Slidewaters opened in violation of the 2020 prohibitions, was cited and fined, then sued state defendants seeking injunctive relief from the proclamations and L&I rule.
- The case was removed to federal court; Slidewaters’ TRO was denied, the district court consolidated the preliminary injunction hearing with the merits, denied relief, dismissed Slidewaters’ claims, and remanded/dismissed the counterclaim.
- On appeal Slidewaters challenged: (1) the legality of Proclamation 20-05, (2) L&I’s rulemaking authority, (3) separation-of-powers and effect on local health officers, and (4) alleged federal substantive due process violations.
- The Ninth Circuit affirmed: the governor’s proclamations and L&I rule were lawful under Washington law and the challenged state and federal constitutional claims failed.
Issues:
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Legality of Proclamation 20-05 (RCW §43.06.010(12)) | Proclamation invalid: pandemic is not a "public disorder, disaster, energy emergency, or riot" | Pandemic qualifies as "public disorder" and "disaster" impacting life and health | Affirmed: governor had statutory authority; pandemic fits "public disorder" and "disaster" definitions |
| L&I emergency rule scope (WAC §296-800-14035) | Rule exceeds L&I’s authority; it regulates beyond workplace safety | Rule regulates workplace safety by preventing employers from exposing employees to prohibited activities | Affirmed: rule falls within L&I’s statutory authority to set safety and health standards for employment |
| Separation of powers / county health authority | Executive proclamations usurp legislative power and override local health officials’ authority; administrative adjudication denies judicial role | Legislature delegated emergency police powers to governor; administrative adjudication with judicial review is statutory and permissible; state law supersedes conflicting local rules | Affirmed: no separation-of-powers violation; state supervision of local health and administrative adjudication are lawful |
| Federal substantive due process (economic/property rights) | Restrictions arbitrarily deprive Slidewaters (and owners/employees) of right to pursue business/use property | Regulations rationally relate to the legitimate state interest of preventing COVID-19 spread; only rational-basis review applies | Affirmed: economic rights are not fundamental; regulations survive rational-basis review as related to public health |
Key Cases Cited
- S. Bay United Pentecostal Church v. Newsom, 140 S. Ct. 1613 (2020) (recognizing governmental COVID-19 public health measures and transmission risks)
- Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn v. Cuomo, 141 S. Ct. 63 (2020) (discussing heightened review for burdens on religious exercise)
- Cougar Bus. Owners Ass’n v. State, 647 P.2d 481 (Wash. 1982) (state decision endorsing broad gubernatorial emergency discretion)
- Giles v. Gen. Motors Acceptance Corp., 494 F.3d 865 (9th Cir. 2007) (federal courts predict state high court on issues of state law)
- Powell’s Books, Inc. v. Kroger, 622 F.3d 1202 (9th Cir. 2010) (standards of review for injunctions and legal questions)
- Jackson Water Works, Inc. v. Pub. Util. Comm’n of Cal., 793 F.2d 1090 (9th Cir. 1986) (rational-basis test for economic regulation)
- Mackey v. Montrym, 443 U.S. 1 (1979) (deference to governmental summary procedures to protect public health and safety)