In Washington state, transgender prison policies have sparked intense debate, with the case of Christian Scott Williams serving as a stark example. Williams, a 6-foot-4 biological male, violent criminal, and repeated sex offender, was transferred to the Washington Corrections Center for Women (WCCW) in 2021 because he identified as a woman (even though he continued to go by the same name). By June 2025, however, he was moved back to a men’s facility following serious allegations and a federal lawsuit.

The transfer to WCCW was enabled by the Washington Department of Corrections’ (WADOC) 2020 gender-inclusion policy, which prioritizes housing inmates based on so-called gender identity rather than biological sex. Prior to his transfer, Williams “reportedly assaulted a male corrections officer so violently that the guard required facial reconstructive surgery,” according to The Post Millennial. And his time in the women’s facility only escalated concerns. 

Williams faced accusations of sexually assaulting his cellmate, Mozzy Clark-Sanchez, and targeting other female inmates. Clark-Sanchez filed a complaint under the Prison Rape Elimination Act (PREA), alleging Williams engaged in inappropriate sexual behavior, non-consensual groping, and threats of rape. The Post Millennial emphasized that “prison staff ignored her warnings and even discouraged her from filing official complaints, cautioning her about potential retaliation.” Although Williams was temporarily removed from Clark-Sanchez’s cell, he remained in the facility. Clark-Sanchez’s was later released and filed a federal lawsuit, which may have ultimately prompted his official — and quiet — transfer back to a men’s prison.

Williams’s criminal history is extensive. Beginning in 2005, he was convicted of child molestation after admitting he repeatedly groped his nine-year-old sister. Additional charges include first-degree assaults — such as brutally attacking his girlfriend with a pipe — and years of walking around as an unregistered sex offender. All such convictions came prior to the incidents at WCCW between 2021 and 2025. So, what’s being done to curb such occurrences?

The Trump administration, for one, has taken federal action. On his first day in office, President Donald Trump signed an executive order designed to keep biological men out of women’s prison facilities. This order also aimed to protect taxpayers from being forced to fund in-prison gender procedures. Since its signing, a federal judge blocked the EO, effectively placing men back in women’s prisons and allowing American tax dollars to continue fueling controversial practices. But within Washington state? It appears little has been done to protect women’s prison spaces — even prison cells.

Reportedly, “Court filings reveal that Williams was one of dozens of trans-identifying male inmates housed in Washington’s women’s prisons under policies implemented in 2020 by Democratic Governor Jay Inslee’s administration.” Until January 2025, WADOC even advertised a six-figure “Gender Affirming Medical Specialist” position, despite a hiring freeze at the time.

Earlier this year, another high-profile case involving WCCW concerned the trans-identifying inmate named Amber FayeFox Kim, formerly known as Bryan Kim, who was convicted of murdering his parents in 2006. After being caught having sex with a female inmate, Kim was transferred back to the men’s facility — a move he claimed classified as “cruel and unusual punishment.” He did so by filing a court petition through the American Civil Liberties Union of Washington. This case represents just one in a series of troubling complaints regarding the sexual exploitation of female inmates by trans-identifying individuals in Washington’s prison system.

While acknowledging that these women are also convicted criminals, biblical scholars contend it is unjust to compel them to share facilities and cells with violent, biologically male offenders. David Closson, director of Family Research Council’s Center for Biblical Worldview, told The Washington Stand, “In the case of Mozzy Clark-Sanchez and other incarcerated women, it is a tragic miscarriage of justice that they are being forced to share intimate and vulnerable spaces with biological males, especially those with a history of violence like Christian Williams.”

As he went on to explain, “Regardless of how someone identifies, it is both morally and biologically incoherent to disregard biological sex when determining prison placement, especially when that decision leads to sexual trauma, fear, and further victimization.” According to Closson, the biblical perspective establishes that “government is ordained by God to restrain evil and promote justice.” As such, “When the state prioritizes ideological commitments to gender identity over the real, measurable safety of women, it ceases to function justly. This is not just a policy failure; it’s a moral failure.”

Closson further contended that justice demands protecting women, even those in prison, from additional harm in the name of inclusivity. He declared, “Justice requires that women — even those in prison — are not subjected to further harm in the name of inclusivity,” adding that “justice is impossible when truth is ignored or forsaken. Any policy that denies a biological reality, such as treating males as females based on their self-expression or identity, undermines justice, which must be rooted in truth.”

Beyond this, Closson highlighted a second critical principle: the biblical mandate to protect the vulnerable. He noted, “We need to protect the vulnerable. The Bible commands us to defend the weak, and I think we would say incarcerated women, many of whom have histories of abuse and trauma, are vulnerable. They do deserve safety.”

Despite their criminal records, Closson concluded, “Any policy that puts vulnerable women at further risk is unjust. The government has a God-given responsibility to punish wrongdoers and protect its citizens, and that includes the incarcerated. So, when the state imposes experimental, social ideologies at the cost of real human suffering, I would argue that it has overstepped its rightful authority.”