Christian group reignites fight against Seattle’s event permit process

The group held an anti-LGBTQ+ and anti-abortion worship rally in Seattle last year.SEATTLE (CN) — A Christian revival group urged the Ninth Circuit on Monday to find Seattle’s public event permitting scheme unconstitutional, but the panel appeared skeptical the group was entitled to relief.“The district court should be reversed and the matter remanded for entry of a preliminary injunction because plaintiffs plainly established Article III standing to challenge a permitting scheme that grants unbridled discretion not only to government officials, but to non-government actors,” said Daniel Schmid, attorney with Liberty Counsel. “Since its inception, the MayDay group has been focused on and solely dedicated to speaking out on issues of the day.”The Christian group received a parks department permit to hold a “worship and prayer” event at Cal Anderson Park in May 2025 after the city denied its request to hold the event on Pike Street, a hub of Seattle’s LGBTQ+ community.Protesters opposed the group’s anti-LGBTQ+ and anti-abortion messages. Police told organizers to shut down the event, and then-Seattle Mayor Bruce Harrell issued a press release that day calling it an “extreme right-wing rally.”The MayDay USA organizers, including a Washington state pastor and leaders of the Christian Her Voice Movement, also known as Tetelestial Ministries, sued Seattle in September 2025. They claimed violations of their First Amendment rights to free speech, peaceable assembly and free religious exercise, as well as equal protection under the 14th Amendment.The group sought a preliminary injunction blocking the city from enforcing its permitting scheme, claiming the city denied its preferred location because of the religious content and viewpoint of its expression.U.S. District Judge Barbara Rothstein, a Jimmy Carter appointee, issued a mixed ruling in February, finding the group lacked standing to seek a preliminary injunction because it had not shown a credible risk of future enforcement.A three-judge Ninth Circuit panel likewise seemed unconvinced the group had established standing.“In the absence of some intention to have another demonstration in Seattle, then the Seattle permitting scheme doesn’t injure you,” said U.S. Circuit Judge Eric Miller, a Donald Trump appointee. “How do we fill in what appears to be a gap in the complaint?”The group conceded it had no concrete plans to host another rally in Seattle but argued its history of holding events shows it will likely return.“Since their inception, they have been focused on speaking out on issues of the day,” Schmid said.“Right, but there are a lot of forums in which one can speak out on the issues of the day, and a lot of those are not public demonstrations within the city of Seattle,” Miller responded.Schmid argued the plaintiffs believe their souls will be eternally condemned if they do not speak out about their beliefs.“Thirteen times in a two-year existence, this group has gone out and spoken on events of the day, and they’ve proved their fervor in speaking out against it,” Schmid said. “After they were in Seattle and had urine-filled water balloons thrown at them, and their children had full water bottles thrown at their heads, they still spoke out in Los Angeles a week later.”The Ninth Circuit said the group must prove they intend to speak out again in Seattle to qualify for the injunction it seeks.“We don’t doubt the sincerity of any of these beliefs, but there’s this requirement for prospective injunctive relief, and that’s what we’re looking for,” said U.S. Circuit Judge Morgan Christen, a Barack Obama appointee.The city argued that, even if the group proved it could pursue its claim, the permitting process is constitutional.“At its core, this appeal turned us on a single question: whether the city’s permitting ordinance vests unbridled discretion in the special events committee,” said Jessica Leiser with the Seattle City Attorney’s Office. “It does not.”The city said the group’s permit was denied based on a variety of factors related to public health, safety and welfare regulations rather than viewpoint.Seattle said it denied the permit because the event was too large to be safely accommodated at the requested Pike Street location.“I think it’s pretty axiomatic that we don’t want porta potties next to food, and that’s not about the message or a heckler’s veto,” Leiser said.The Ninth Circuit panel, which also included U.S. Circuit Judge Milan Smith, a George W. Bush appointee, did not indicate when it would rule.Subscribe to our free newslettersOur weekly newsletter Closing Arguments offers the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world, while the monthly Under the Lights dishes the legal dirt from Hollywood, sports, Big Tech and the arts.Additional Reads