(The Center Square) – The Washington Supreme Court on Thursday dealt a huge blow to supporters of natural gas.
In a 6-3 decision, the state’s high court struck down Initiative 2066, passed by nearly two million Washington voters in 2024 to protect natural gas as an energy choice and hold down rising energy costs.
The Building Industry Association of Washington, which backed I-2066, joined the Washington Hospitality Association Thursday in expressing deep disappointment.
“I think it’s really distressing for anybody who believes in the right of the people to have the initiative process as a check and balance of the legislature,” said Lane.
“The goal posts keep moving and the court is proving they are just willing to step in and protect government and prohibit the people from having a say in public policy in this state,” said BIAW Vice President Greg Lane.
In the ruling, the majority suggested I-2066 violated the single subject rule for initiatives.
“I-2066 contains four constitutionally distinct subjects and a severability clause. It is impossible for us to assess which of these four subjects, if any, would have received majority support had they been presented alone at the November 2024 general election,” read the ruling.
“I-2066 violates this single-subject rule because it includes several provisions with markedly distinct purposes and regulatory effects, embracing four distinct subjects.”
Opponents of the measure who bought the legal challenge celebrated the ruling.
“Today’s ruling is a huge win for Washingtonians who want to secure a healthy, affordable future,” said Caitlin Krenn, Washington Conservation Action’s Climate and Clean Energy Director, in a press release.
“Initiative 2066 was a deceptive attempt, backed by a megamillionaire, to lock our state into expensive, polluting fossil fuels for decades and undermine the State’s climate policies. By upholding the state’s constitution, the Supreme Court has put us back on track to reap the benefits of cheaper, cleaner renewable energy.”
The Sierra Club also celebrated the ruling in the same release.
“Initiative 2066 was a classic example of logrolling – packing an initiative packaging a host of different issues that confuse voters in order to ram through unpopular reforms that the public would not support ,” said Dylan Plummer, Deputy Director of the Sierra Club’s Clean Heat Campaign.
“The Supreme Court’s ruling is a clear refutation of this cynical tactic by the fossil fuel industry to rollback a host of energy efficiency, clean air and climate policy with this misleading initiative.”
Several others lauded the ruling also, including Climate Solutions and the Seattle City Attorney.
“Seattle voters rejected this industry proposal from the beginning. Today we protected that choice from being overruled by a slender statewide majority vote that was deceptively engineered with special interest dollars,” said Seattle City Attorney Erika Evans.
In a Thursday morning interview shortly after the ruling came down, Lane told The Center Square the people are supposed to have a check and balance through initiative.
BIAW collected more than half a million signatures in just over six weeks to qualify I-2066 for the ballot.
“We’re disappointed in today’s ruling,” said Anthony Anton, President and CEO of the Washington Hospitality Association. “Nearly 2 million Washington voters supported I-2066 because they understood what rising energy mandates mean for the cost of running a restaurant or hotel in this state.”
“This decision doesn’t change the underlying challenge our members face: the cost and feasibility of converting commercial kitchens and building systems away from natural gas,” he said in a news release emailed to The Center Square.
Let’s Go Washington, backing three initiatives to the ballot this November also condemned Thursday’s decision striking down I-2066.
“Today’s decision by the Supreme Court is shameful, not only because it punishes families making heating their homes more expensive, but because it appears to be a coordinated effort by all three branches of the government to annihilate the initiative process itself,” said Brian Heywood, Let’s Go Washington’s founder.
Justice Salvador Mungia authored a 30-page dissent that was sharply critical of the majority discounting the will of the people.
“The first power that the people of this state reserved for themselves was the power to enact laws through the initiative process. CONST. art. II, § 1. The sanctity of this power is not something courts should simply give lip service to or gloss over,” wrote Mungia.
“It is an important, fundamental, and cherished constitutional right that Washingtonians hold. When the people of this state disagree with a law that the legislature has enacted, they have the power to restrict the legislative act so long as the restriction complies with our state constitution.”
Justice Charles Johnson and Justice Gordon McCloud joined Mungia in the dissent.
Justices Montoya Lewis-Jackson, Justice Helen Whitener, Justice Colleen Melody, Justice Barbara Madsen and Justice Steven Gonzales joined Chief Justice Debra Stephens in the majority opinion.
Lane with BIAW said there is no appeal of the decision allowed under state law.
“The Supreme Court is the final word as far as the initiative goes,” said Lane who added BIAW is considering next steps, which could potentially include another citizen initiative however no decision has been made.