Help us improve in just 2 minutes—share your thoughts in our reader survey.

Lucy Lauser recall, Stevenson, Washington (2025)

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Lucy Lauser recall
Ballotpedia Election Coverage Badge.png
Officeholders
Lucy Lauser
Recall status
Underway
Signature requirement
178 signatures
See also
Recall overview
Political recall efforts, 2025
Recalls in Washington
Washington recall laws
City council recalls
Recall reports

An effort to recall City Councilwoman Lucy Lauser is underway in Stevenson, Washington.[1]

Recall supporters

Stevenson resident Kathleen Fitzgerald has filed two recall petitions.[1] The first petition reads:[2][3]

We, the undersigned citizens and legal voters of the state of Washington of the City of Stevenson, respectfully direct that a special election be called to determine whether or not Lucy Lauser, City Council Position #3, be recalled and discharged from her office, for violating her oath of office.

According to a Skamania County Sheriff's report, on March 31, 2025, she openly violated state law RCW 9A.88.010. Deputies visiting the scene wrote in their report Lauser was "sitting down in a chair, with her breasts exposed. Lauser's chair was facing south, making Lauser visible to all vehicles driving west and east on Southwest Second Street, as well as people walking down both sides of the sidewalk surrounding Second Street. Both of Lauser's breasts were completely visible and not blocked or obstructed by any clothing. Additionally, Lauser had the message "MY BODY IS NOT A SIN" written on her skin across her upper chest area." When Deputy Vejar asked Lucy Lauser to cover her exposed breast she refused to do so, telling Sergeant Evans that she'd only accept the word of the "governor" as to whether or not she was violating the law.

Lucy Lauser took an oath of office upon assuming her duties as a Stevenson Washington city council member. This oath stated that she'd follow all state, local and federal laws. The fact Lucy Lauser has not honored this oath amounts to malfeasance and is justified cause for the voters to remove her from office should they so decide.[4]

The second recall petition cites Lauser's arrest for indecent exposure on July 4, 2025, following a protest outside the Skamania County Courthouse during which Lauser was not wearing a shirt.[3]

Recall opponents

In a statement filed with Skamania County Superior Court in response to the first recall petition, Lauser wrote:[5]

Female topless equality is established as law in most of the United States. Courts across the country have ruled that the female chest is not inherently obscene and also that non-sexual nudity as an act of protest is protected under the First Amendment.

RCW 9A 88 010 defines indecent exposure as "open and obscene exposure...knowing it is likely to cause reasonable affront or alarm." It then immediately continues, "The act of breastfeeding or expressing breast milk is not indecent exposure," which necessarily implies that the simple exposure of a female breast is not sufficient to meet the definition of indecent exposure under state law.

The US. Supreme Court's three-part test for obscenity from Miller v. California is:

1. that it "appeals to the prurient interest"
2. that it depicts "patently offensive" sexual content
3. that is "lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value"

The petition does not allege any form of sexual conduct, nor does it provide any evidence of appeal to a prurient interest. The petition describes my alleged actions as a political demonstration. On all three counts, the actions described in the petition clearly fail the Miller test for obscenity.

"My body is not a sin" written on a bare chest is a protest against the claim that the chest is inherently obscene. The date of the demonstration, 3/31, is an international holiday specifically focused on asserting transgender people's existence and equality. It shouldn't matter what my body looks like—I still have the right to equal protection of the law under the Fourteenth Amendment. It would be unconstitutional for the law to treat people differently based on what their bodies look like. Washington indecent exposure law does not—it makes no reference to gender or sex, nor does it define any specific body part as inherently obscene.[4]

Path to the ballot

See also: Laws governing recall in Washington

Washington allows the following grounds for recall: malfeasance or misfeasance while in office or violating the oath of office.[6] Before a recall petition can collect signatures, the grounds for recall must be considered by a superior court judge. If the judge rules that the grounds for recall meet the state requirements, the petition will be approved for circulation. To get the recall on the ballot, supporters must collect signatures equal to 25% or 35% of the votes cast for the office at the last election, depending on the office type.[7] Signatures must be collected within 180 days.[8]

Recall context

See also: Ballotpedia's Recall Report

Ballotpedia covers recall efforts across the country for all state and local elected offices. A recall effort is considered official if the petitioning party has filed an official form, such as a notice of intent to recall, with the relevant election agency.

The chart below shows how many officials were included in recall efforts from 2012 to 2024 as well as how many of them defeated recall elections to stay in office and how many were removed from office in recall elections.


See also

External links

Footnotes