Clallam County Watchdog
Clallam County Watchdog
Check your state rights at the door
74
0:00
-27:08

Check your state rights at the door

The hidden sovereignty of the Jamestown Family Health Clinic
74

With Olympic Medical Center limiting new patient intake, many Clallam County residents have turned to Jamestown Family Health Clinic—without realizing they are entering a sovereign nation where Washington state laws do not always apply. One disabled woman discovered this the hard way when her legal rights disappeared at the clinic door—and she was banned from returning.

In August 2021, Sequim resident Laura (not her real name) was in a near-fatal, head-on motorcycle collision. Multiple fractures, organ failure, and permanent nerve damage rendered her paralyzed and given a mere 5% chance of walking again. After being bedbound and enduring muscle atrophy, a spinal cord injury, surgical errors, and misdiagnoses, she fought through excruciating pain and PTSD. Despite everything, she walked again, rebuilt her life, and reclaimed mobility. She survived unimaginable odds. Her journey remains ongoing.

The mask exemption incident

In February 2023, Laura visited Jamestown Clinic for the first time. She couldn’t wear a mask safely due to her injuries, a disability recognized by Washington state law—where mask exemptions were formally acknowledged until statewide mandates ended. Individuals didn’t need documentation.

Yet at Jamestown, the receptionist asked her to mask up. Laura declined, citing her lawful exemption. In the exam room she was asked to mask-up repeatedly, and Laura requested a copy the clinic’s mask policy. She was told multiple conflicting explanations:

  • That masks were county-mandated, and providers alone decide exemptions

  • That there was no written clinic policy

  • That she needed to explain her medical condition before care could continue

Laura asked ten times to see any policy or guidance the clinic claimed to follow—but none was produced. Instead, staff repeatedly pressured her to disclose medical details, threatened to cancel her appointment, and said she might never be allowed back. Eventually, Jamestown Clinic issued her a trespass warning, signed by its Chief Medical Officer, Paul Cunningham, stating she would not “abide by facility rules,”

“Won’t abide by facility rules.”

The clinic also formally terminated her care.

She was forced to wait outside for her Clallam County Transit ride, while her taxpayer-funded insurance was charged nearly $1,200 in two bills for that one visit in which she did not receive care.

State law that may not apply

  • RCW 49.60.040 (Law Against Discrimination): prohibits demanding disclosure of medical conditions to deny public accommodations.

  • RCW 9.91.010: protects civil rights regarding medical access.

  • Washington Department of Health guidance: clearly exempted those unable to wear masks, with no proof required.

Jamestown’s Tribal Code incorporates certain Washington State public health policies but does so selectively and retains sovereign immunity. The clinic operates under the authority of the Jamestown S’Klallam Tribe, a federally recognized sovereign nation. Because of this status, Washington State laws—including those related to discrimination, disability accommodations, and patient rights—do not automatically apply unless the Tribe has voluntarily adopted them or federal law explicitly requires it. If the Tribe has not waived its sovereign immunity, patients may be limited in their ability to seek recourse under state law for actions taken by the clinic.

The legal twist: tribal sovereignty

Jamestown S’Klallam Tribe runs the clinic under federal sovereign immunity, a unique legal status that can fully exempt it from state laws.

Section 28.12.04 Tribal Sovereign Immunity and Jurisdiction Preserved: Nothing in this Title shall be construed as a waiver of the sovereign immunity of the Tribe. Nothing in this Title shall be construed as a grant of jurisdiction to the United States or to a State or local government or to another tribal government. — Jamestown Tribe’s public health and safety code

A letter from the clinic formally stated that Laura could never return to the facility for care, underscoring that tribal facilities enforce independent rules.

What patients should understand

  • Look before you go: If directed to Jamestown Clinic—or any tribal-run facility—you are entering a legally distinct jurisdiction.

  • Ask for policies in writing: Don’t accept verbal mandates—seek clarity on applicable rules and appeals channels.

  • Know your rights—and their limits: State protections like mask exemptions, anti-discrimination statutes, and medical privacy may not be honored under tribal authority.

  • Plan alternative care: With OMC at capacity and Jamestown operating under tribal discretion, patients—especially those with disabilities—should research backup care options.

"If there is no law, or if the law is applied arbitrarily, then there is no justice." — Barack Obama

Less than two months later, Jamestown ended its masking policy.

This is not uncommon

When a woman with PTSD and a service dog was ejected from a tribal-run casino, her attempt to sue under the ADA collided with a legal wall: tribal sovereign immunity. In Drake v. Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community, the court ruled that even clear violations of disability rights may be shielded if Congress hasn’t explicitly waived tribal immunity. The article (available for download below) explores how Title III of the ADA technically applies to tribes—but enforcement hinges on federal action, not private lawsuits. It’s a sobering look at the tension between civil rights and tribal autonomy, and what happens when vulnerable individuals fall into the gap.

Indian Tribe Sovereign Immunity And The Ada Understanding The Ada
88KB ∙ PDF file
Download
Download

Leave a comment

Last Sunday, readers were asked if they support revisiting past issues like district-only voting if public opinion has clearly shifted. Of 135 votes:

  • 91% said, “Yes, democracy evolves”

  • 3% said, “No, three strikes is enough”

  • 6% said, “Depends on the issue”

Note: A majority of the Charter Review Commission struck down a proposed amendment that would have allowed voters the option to return to district-only voting.

Loading...

Discussion about this episode

User's avatar