Opinion ID: 2604613
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Remaining Gunwall factors

Text: The remaining three Gunwall factors (preexisting state law, differences in structure between state and federal constitutions and matters of particular state and local concern) do not shed significant light on our inquiry. The fourth factor, preexisting state law, usually pertains to state law preexisting ratification and for that reason is nondispositive here. We do note, however, various governmentally sanctioned religious practices mentioned in the preceding section preceded constitutional ratification and are, therefore, relevant. The fifth factor, the differences in structure between state and federal governments, always favors an independent state interpretation. Richmond v. Thompson, 130 Wash.2d 368, 922 P.2d 1343, 1350 (1996). This factor is most valuable when the differences between the federal and state government are relevant and can be articulated. Certainly factors of federalism are indicative of different considerations served by the First Amendment than by article I, section 11. [27] The sixth factor reminds us nearly everything is local in nature. [28] Certainly the Court of Appeals correctly concluded that county law enforcement chaplains are no exception. [29] In summary, the significant differences in the texts and purposes of the constitutional provisions in addition to Washington's constitutional history amply support the conclusion that article I, section 11 should be read independently from the establishment clause of the Federal Constitution in the chaplaincy context. However, where that independence leads is a different question. [30]