WA FOE must admit women
 

Any of our attorneys care to take a stab at the decision in this case? Reading the court's explanation makes me dizzy.

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/4pm/on...gles19ww.shtml

Court: Eagles can't exclude women

By PAUL QUEARY
ASSOCIATED PRESS WRITER

OLYMPIA -- Washington law bars the Fraternal Order of Eagles from excluding women, the state Supreme Court ruled Thursday.

The case stems from a dispute between two Washington chapters of the Eagles that admitted women during the mid-1990s, and the national organization, which reversed a policy allowing women in 1998.

Nine women and two local chapters in Tenino and Whidbey Island, sued under the Washington Law Against Discrimination, which guarantees "full enjoyment of any of the accommodations, advantages, facilities, or privileges of any place of public resort, accommodation, assemblage, or amusement."

A trial court agreed, but the Court of Appeals sided with the 1.6 million-member national organization's argument that it was entitled to an exemption. The law exempts: "any institute, bona fide club, or place of accommodation, which is by its nature distinctly private, including fraternal organizations."

But the high court sided with the local chapters.

"It does not seem logical that the Legislature would exempt only those groups organized for a common purpose which are distinctly private, and at the same time allow a group similarly organized for a common purpose to avoid proving its private status simply by designating itself a 'fraternal organization," Justice Charles Smith wrote in the 9-2 decision. "Interpreting (the law) to unconditionally exempt groups merely designating themselves as 'fraternal organizations' undermines the purpose of the WLAD to prevent and eliminate discrimination in all public settings."

The case is Fraternal Order of Eagles v. Grand Aerie, No. 71786-9.

oh man, i just took my constitutional law test yesterday - part of which was on the 14th amendment and equal protection of the law - as soon as my brain recovers from that - i'll definitely read the case and see if my legal conclusions match the real lawyers of GC ;)

I think we live in an era of reverse sexism. There have been so many male only orgs that have been forced to accept women, but there are so many women only orgs and if a man tried legally to make them admit men he'd get laughed out of court.

Cmon, you have your clubs for women only, why can't we have the same?


And before you chew me out, please know that I'm for equality of the sexes as much as the next guy. I think it's unfair that a woman who does a job just as good as a man gets paid 75 cents to every dollar he makes. But I'm not cool with it going the other way around.

by the way = legal buffs - heres the link to the courts opinion

the main thing i got from what i read (which was very litle since it's sooooo damn long) is that since Eagles meet in "places to which an unselected public is given an open invitation" (ie: public and most likely governmental funded property) in accorance to the Constition that may not discriminate based on gender.