The Seattle/King County Coalition on Homelessness (SKCCH) and co-plaintiffs have filed an appeal in their ongoing legal challenge to a City of Burien ordinance that prohibits people from sleeping in any public place at any time.
The appeal, filed Friday, June 13, 2025 with the Washington State Court of Appeals, comes in response to a King County Superior Court decision last month that upheld the controversial law.
Represented by the Northwest Justice Project, the plaintiffs argue that the ordinance violates protections guaranteed under the Washington State Constitution.
As we previously reported, the legal challenge was originally brought in January 2024. Since then, the City of Burien has amended the ordinance several times, including an emergency revision just four days before a February 2025 summary judgment hearing.
“In filing this appeal, we seek to affirm that all Washingtonians are protected by our state constitution,” said Alison Eisinger, Director of the Coalition on Homelessness. “We also pay respect to our co-plaintiffs Beth and Alex Hale and Carlo Paz, who, despite living in extremely difficult circumstances, continue to seek justice through the long process of legal advocacy.”
Beth Hale, a named plaintiff in the lawsuit and a longtime Burien resident experiencing homelessness, died on May 30. Her death was noted by advocates as a tragic reminder of the human impact of policies criminalizing homelessness.
“Beth’s untimely death reminds us that real human beings bear the brutal costs of collective failure to respond to homelessness with urgency and enough resources,” Eisinger said.
In his May 15 ruling, Superior Court Judge Michael Ryan acknowledged the complexity of the case, writing that “nothing in this ruling should be construed as endorsement of the wisdom or efficacy of [Burien’s] chosen method of regulation.”
Scott Crain, lead attorney for the plaintiffs with the Northwest Justice Project, said, “How municipalities attempt to address the problems of affordable housing and provide services to residents who are homeless are matters of policy—but those policies cannot override the constitutional rights of every Washington resident. This is where the courts must step in.”
The plaintiffs hope the appellate court will reverse the lower court’s decision and affirm the rights of all Washingtonians, regardless of housing status.
This is getting convoluted and lacks common sense, although a death has happened to a plaintiff there is no information that homelessness had anything to do with it. Additionally after all this time how has the Homeless Industrial Complex not solved the housing needs of those individuals? And, why would anyone shun offered help due to location if it is your way up and out of Homelessness, and the demon of possible addiction and/or mental illness. Why isn’t the Coalition putting this effort and financial expenditures into actually helping those they claim to represent by getting them housed and treated? This is political grandstanding and why this case is nothing more than using helpless pawns to push an agenda instead of actually helping them.
@Louis G, Ditto, ditto, ditto! I couldn’t have said it any better.
The appeal filed by the Northwest Justice Project and supported by the Coalition on Homelessness is not a courageous stand for constitutional rights—it’s a dangerous distraction from real solutions. Rather than helping people off the streets and into housing, these organizations continue to waste time and public sympathy on legal battles that do nothing to address the root causes of homelessness: lack of treatment, lack of transitional services, and lack of accountability.
Let’s be honest: Burien’s ordinance wasn’t passed in a vacuum. It came in response to persistent public health hazards, crime concerns, and deteriorating safety in public spaces. Communities—especially working-class and minority ones—have borne the brunt of unchecked encampments. They, too, have rights.
The Real Problem: Advocacy Without Accountability
The Coalition on Homelessness claims to speak for the voiceless, but their actions tell a different story. Instead of focusing on expanding shelter capacity, mental health services, or substance abuse treatment programs, they funnel money and energy into performative lawsuits aimed at blocking enforcement of any policy that imposes structure, standards, or public order.
And let’s talk about Beth Hale—not to politicize her tragic death, but to acknowledge a deeper failure: How did the Coalition materially help her while she was alive? Did they offer her housing? Treatment? Or just use her name in court filings to make a point?
Constitutional Rights vs. Common Sense
The idea that anti-camping ordinances are “unconstitutional” is a distortion of what civil rights actually mean. The Washington State Constitution does not give anyone the right to camp indefinitely in parks or on sidewalks. It protects due process and equal treatment under the law—not the right to occupy public space indefinitely with no plan for stability or safety.
By equating enforcement with “criminalization,” these advocates conflate accountability with oppression, which does a disservice to the public and to the homeless themselves.
What Should the Coalition Be Doing?
If the Coalition on Homelessness were serious about solutions, it would:
– Partner with transitional housing providers and mental health agencies
– Support navigation centers that help people move toward stability
– Advocate for zoning reform to increase housing stock
-Push for increased funding of addiction and psychiatric treatment
Instead, they’re choosing to litigate cities into paralysis—ensuring that nothing gets better, and everyone suffers more.