EDITORIAL: Washington judge tosses Seattle’s toxic landlord regulations

The Northwest is home to many threatened species. On Thursday, legal observers caught a rare glimpse of one such creature: a judge in progressive Seattle who casts a skeptical eye on the regulatory state and harbors a healthy respect for property rights.

Writing on the The Volokh Conspiracy blog, Ilya Somin reported last week that Judge Suzanne Parisien had struck down “a Seattle law that requires landlords to accept all ‘qualified’ tenants on a first-come, first-served basis.”

In other words, the city determined who was “qualified” and then made it illegal for landlords to exercise any discretion about to whom they let their own property.

Federal law already prohibits housing discrimination. But the Seattle ordinance, passed in 2016, went much further in an effort to address “implicit bias.” It prohibited landlords from making any decisions about potential tenants once city bureaucrats had judged a leasee worthy.

As Mr. Somin points out, such restrictions are likely to be counterproductive, leading to higher rents and fewer available properties. But economic reality has never been a strong suit for the social justice police.

Judge Parisien, however, held that the law violates the takings clause of Washington’s constitution because it limits the right of landlords to make financial use of their property without compensating them for the loss. The judge also sided with the plaintiffs on the issues of due process and free speech, holding that the law’s restrictions on advertising were unconstitutional.

“Choosing a tenant is a fundamental attribute of property ownership,” the judge wrote.

Chris Benis, a plaintiff in the case whose family owns a small apartment building, told the Seattle Times that getting to know a tenant is a vital part of the process. “The idea of the city preventing us from making a judgment call to protect our property and other tenants,” he said, “is just wrong.”

The idea that the government may strip individuals of their rights in an effort to correct perceived subconscious wrongs is dangerous and authoritarian at its core. Judge Parisien deserves applause.