Seattle Female-Only Spa Must Allow Transgender Customers After New Court Ruling
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals rejects the religious freedom claims by the owners of Olympus Spa.

A traditional Korean women-only spa in Seattle, Washington, will be forced to allow men who have transitioned to female as customers after a new ruling from the U.S. Court of Appeals.
The Ninth Circuit upheld a 2023 decision from a lower court after the state’s Human Rights Commission filed a complaint against Olympus Spa, claiming that its denial of entry to transgender women was a violation of the Washington Law Against Discrimination, a state law that bars businesses and other public facilities from restricting customers based on gender identity.
The owners, who identify as devout Christians, did not take issue with the anti-discrimination law itself but rather said their First Amendment rights to free speech and free exercise of religion were being violated when they were forced to admit transgender customers. The appellate court said that their rights were not violated.
“We first conclude that the Spa’s religious expression is only incidentally burdened,” the court’s decision says. “Though we recognize that the Spa’s desire to perform acts that contravene WLAD’s mandate is motivated in part by religious belief, the HRC’s action under WLAD does not prohibit the Spa from expressing its religious beliefs.”
The court stated that because the WLAD’s definition of “sexual orientation” includes “gender expression or identity,” the spa violated the law with its policy barring biological men from the facility.
“The Spa’s conduct discriminates based on gender identity; therefore, under state law, it discriminates based on sexual orientation and falls within WLAD’s ambit,” the ruling says. “The same would have been true had the Spa singled out heterosexual, homosexual, or bisexual individuals instead.”
The human rights commission first filed its complaint against the owners of Olympus Spa in late 2020 after a biological male who had not had sex reassignment surgery was denied service. The spa maintained that its nudity requirement for specific treatments was consistent with state laws and codes.