Federal District Court Rules in Favor of the City of Burien and Dismisses King County’s Lawsuit Challenging Local Ordinance 832
The City of Burien has achieved a significant legal victory as the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington granted Burien’s Motion to Dismiss in the lawsuit initiated by King County and King County Sheriff Patricia Cole-Tindall regarding the constitutionality of Ordinance 832 (Case 2:24-cv-00325-RAJ).
King County’s lawsuit challenged Burien’s enacted “Unlawful Public Camping” ordinance (ordinance 832), which prohibits using nonresidential public property as living space. The federal court ruled that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction to hear the case, highlighting that King County did not establish the necessary standing for federal jurisdiction.
The federal court noted while the Plaintiffs argued Burien’s anti-camping ordinance is “repugnant to the Constitution and the law of this circuit,” referencing Ninth Circuit decisions in Martin v. City of Boise and Johnson v. City of Grants Pass on June 28, 2024, the Supreme Court reversed and remanded the Ninth Circuit Johnson v. City of Grants Pass decision in City of Grants Pass, Oregon v. Johnson, 144 S. Ct. 2202, 2204 (2024), determining that enforcing “generally applicable laws regulating camping on public property does not violate the Eighth Amendment. The federal court concluded by noting that the Grants Pass Supreme Court decision “abrogated the Ninth Circuit’s decision in Martin.’”
In its decision, the federal court notes that Sheriff Cole-Tindall’s claims of potential injury, including loss of livelihood and potential financial liability for King County, are based on her “subjective interpretation of the Ordinance as unconstitutional.” Importantly, the federal court affirmed Burien’s position that ordinance enforcement must occur before such claims could be asserted. Additionally, and contrary to King County and its Sheriff’s claims, the Court emphasized that King County faces no financial risk in enforcing Burien’s anti-camping ordinance.
The federal court further agreed with Burien when it found that King County’s claims did not present an actual case or controversy and characterized King County’s request for a declaratory judgment as an “improper advisory opinion,” stating the “legal rights asserted by King County against Burien are nebulous.”
This ruling effectively ends King County’s claims against Burien in federal court and remands Burien’s claim against King County for breach of contract to Snohomish County Superior Court. Burien looks forward to working with King County to learn when and how it will begin enforcement of Burien’s ordinance in light of the district court’s acknowledgment that the reason for King County’s refusal and breach of contract was abrogated by the United States Supreme Court decision in Grants Pass a few months ago.