Washington Church Challenges Permit Rule for Outdoor Homeless Shelter

The city of Burien, Washington, has become the center of a legal dispute over its permit requirements for outdoor homeless shelters, with a local church challenging the policy as a violation of religious freedom. The city passed a law in 2023 that prohibits camping and sleeping on nonresidential public property, prompting the Burien Free Methodist Church to open an outdoor shelter on its own property shortly after the law took effect. The shelter housed approximately 100 individuals for three months, providing a temporary safe space during the colder months.

The city required the church to obtain a permit to operate the encampment, a condition the church argues infringes on its religious mission. Attorney James Lobsenz, representing the church, claimed the city’s demands amount to an unconstitutional attempt to regulate religious activity. “They can’t tell us ‘if you do this again, we’re gonna fine you again,’ they can’t tell us that ‘we might prosecute you criminally,’” Lobsenz argued, expressing concern that the city’s actions have discouraged other churches from engaging in similar efforts.

In 2024, the church and its pastor filed a lawsuit, asserting that the permit requirement violates their right to practice religion. The church emphasized the urgent need to provide shelter for the vulnerable, particularly during the winter months when hypothermia poses a significant risk. “Winter kills unhoused people. They die of hypothermia, and it’s November,” Lobsenz stated, highlighting the critical timing of the dispute.

A federal judge dismissed the church’s complaint in 2024, ruling that the city’s law was a neutral and generally applicable land-use policy. However, the church has appealed the decision, arguing that the permit process effectively blocks its ability to serve its religious purpose. The church contends that applying for a permit would imply recognition of the city’s authority to deny the encampment, thereby undermining its mission to care for the homeless.

During the appeal, U.S. Circuit Judge William Fletcher questioned the church’s claim, noting that there was no evidence the city would use the permit process to block the encampment. “It seems to me what you’re saying is speculative and, at least on the records, probably wrong,” Fletcher remarked, suggesting the church’s argument lacks concrete support.

The church maintains that it has already complied with the city’s regulations without formally applying for a permit. The permit process required answering three questions, which the church claims it addressed in its operations. This stance underscores the church’s belief that the city’s policy is not merely a regulatory measure but a tool to suppress religious expression and aid to the vulnerable.

The case raises broader questions about the intersection of religious freedom, public policy, and the responsibility of communities to care for those in need. As the legal battle continues, the outcome may have significant implications for how cities balance land-use regulations with the rights of religious organizations to serve their communities. Proverbs 31:8-9 reminds us to speak up for those who cannot speak for themselves, a call that resonates deeply in this ongoing struggle for justice and mercy.

Source: Read the original report