Women’s Privacy vs. Gender Identity Mandates: Ninth Circuit Takes Up Olympus Spa Case

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

March 9, 2026

Washington family business challenges enforcement of state law requiring transgender access to female-only facilities

SEATTLE, Wash. - Pacific Justice Institute (PJI) is responding to the decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in Olympus Spa v. Armstrong, a case involving a family-operated, Korean-inspired women's spa in Washington that limits admission to women and girls ages 13 and older because its services require full nudity for traditional Korean scrubs, communal bathing, saunas, and massage.

Olympus Spa operates facilities where patrons are unclothed in shared spaces as part of the spa's longstanding practices. The dispute began after a transgender-identifying patron filed a complaint with the Washington State Human Rights Commission, alleging the spa violated the state's public accommodation law, the Washington Law Against Discrimination (WLAD).

The Ninth Circuit held that Washington may enforce WLAD's public accommodation provisions against the spa's sex-based admission policy. The court addressed claims involving freedom of speech, free exercise of religion, freedom of association, and affirmed dismissal of the spa's constitutional challenge.

PJI Chief Legal Counsel Kevin T. Snider said the case underscores the urgent need for courts and lawmakers to protect privacy rights in environments involving involuntary exposure of the body.

"Women and girls are not publicly available goods or services," Snider said. "It is an abuse and perversion of public accommodation laws to give biological males access to the intimate spaces of unconsenting females when in a state of full or partial undress. In a decent society, it is common sense that women and girls require privacy in their intimate spaces."

PJI Founder and President Brad Dacus said the decision will intensify a national legal debate about how public accommodation statutes apply to sex-specific spaces.

"This case is about whether women can retain privacy in the most personal settings," Dacus said. "When the government forces policies that eliminate sex-based privacy protections in nude environments, it raises serious concerns about common-sense safeguards and the constitutional balance between civil rights law and basic human dignity."

The dispute has drawn national attention as similar conflicts arise across the country involving public accommodation laws and sex-specific facilities. The Ninth Circuit's opinion, and the underlying record available through the public docket for Olympus Spa, et al. v. Armstrong, et al., No. 23-4031, will be closely watched by policymakers, advocates, and courts addressing related issues.

Learn more about Pacific Justice Institute's work defending civil liberties and constitutional rights: WWW.PJI.ORG

If your business's constitutional rights are being challenged by a government agency or enforcement action, contact Pacific Justice Institute by completing a GET HELP FORM.

To help support PJI's continued legal advocacy defending religious liberty and constitutional freedoms, we invite you to SUPPORT PJI with a tax-deductible gift today.