Legal Opinion

Protect Pub. Health v. Freed

Washington Supreme Court

Decided December 6, 2018No. 95134-9PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJohnson, J.

¶ 1 This case involves the issue of whether a proposed initiative is beyond the scope of the local initiative power. Proposed Initiative 27 (I-27) would allow King County voters to decide whether to ban public funding for community health engagement location (CHEL) sites, colloquially known as safe injection sites, and to create civil liability for any person or entity who operates a site. King County Superior Court granted respondent Protect Public Health's (PPH) motion for declaratory judgment and injunctive relief and enjoined King County from placing I-27 on the ballot. The court…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. City of Sequim v. MalkasianWashington Supreme Court · 2006
  2. City of Sequim v. MalkasianWashington Supreme Court · 2006
  3. Coppernoll v. ReedWashington Supreme Court · 2005
  4. Coppernoll v. ReedWashington Supreme Court · 2005
  5. Seattle Building & Construction Trades Council v. City of SeattleWashington Supreme Court · 1980

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Jewels Helping Hands v. HansenWashington Supreme Court · 2025
  2. Respect Washington v. Burien Communities For InclusionCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2019

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API