OLYMPIA, WA – Backers of Initiative 2066, which protects natural gas as an energy choice in Washington state, say they will take their case to the Washington Supreme Court after a judge’s ruling last week that I-2066 is unconstitutional.
On Friday, King County Superior Court Judge Sandra Widlan ruled the scope of I-2066, approved by voters in November, was too broad and violated the state Constitution’s single-subject requirement.
Widlan agreed with the plaintiffs – led by Climate Solutions, which sued the state – saying the ballot measure’s title may have confused voters who could have voted “yes” to support the choice of natural gas but did not realize building codes would have to be amended or that there could be climate impacts as a result.
“Would a voter know from I-2066’s title that the initiative limits the ability of the government to regulate air pollution?” Widlan asked in her ruling. “The answer to that is ‘no.’”
BIAW backed the I-2066 effort.
“The title gave people who were interested enough information,” Phillips said. “The act was available to citizens, and they were able to read it, and I think clearly the ability to allow natural gas requires that agencies like the [Washington] State Building Code Council and local air agencies are able to work together to ensure natural gas.”
Washington State Republican Party Chair Jim Walsh, who is also a state representative from Aberdeen, told The Center Square on Monday that there will be a direct appeal to the state Supreme Court. He raised other concerns about the judge and her ruling.
He noted a letter sent by Pacifica Law Group to the state Attorney General’s Office just after the initiative took effect last year. The letter, he said, made the case for why Pacifica, representing a broad coalition of climate advocates in the case, believed the initiative was bad and how it would challenge its constitutionality.
“The fix was in … that one letter essentially is the opinion given by the judge last Friday,” Walsh said. “She basically parroted almost word for word the content of the Pacifica Law Group letter from last December.”
Walsh also brought up that former Gov. Jay Inslee was in the courtroom Friday. Widlan was appointed to her current position by Inslee in 2018.
“From what I heard from people in the courtroom, they [Widlan and Inslee] were kind of nodding at each other,” he said.
Widlan’s donations to the campaigns of Democrats who opposed I-2066 also didn’t go unnoticed by Walsh.
“The ethics cannon is not law, so could she be disbarred over this or somehow punished?” he asked. “I don’t know, maybe. It’s a bad optic, but not illegal.”
A BIAW official also found flaws with the judge’s ruling.
“The decision was based solely on the policy preference of the judge and had no legal basis whatsoever,” BIAW Vice President Greg Lane said in a news release. “Every Washington citizen should be appalled by such an irresponsible ruling.”
Walsh is already looking ahead.
“There will be an immediate appeal to the state Supreme Court, and I hope that the judges on the Supreme Court will take into consideration the tainted nature of this ruling on Friday,” he said. “It was really written by Pacifica Law Group and channeled through a politically partisan judge.”
