females are forced to live every waking moment at a dangerous disadvantage
In the confined world of incarceration, where individuals cannot simply walk away from danger, a Washington state woman named Faith Booher-Smith found herself at the intersection of two competing claims about justice and safety. Attacked in August 2025 by a convicted sex offender who had been transferred to her women's facility under a gender-identity housing policy, she now brings a federal lawsuit that asks courts to weigh whether the state's approach to gender-affirming placement adequately protects those who are most vulnerable and least free. The case arrives at a moment when corrections systems across the country are grappling with how to honor identity without abandoning the duty of care owed to all inmates — a question that, once abstract, has become painfully concrete.
- A brutal, unprovoked attack in a prison common area left Faith Booher-Smith with visible injuries and lasting trauma — and a corrections officer present at the scene reportedly did not intervene.
- The man who attacked her, Christopher Williams, stood six-foot-four, carried a documented history of violence, and had been flagged by officials at his prior facility as an unsuitable transfer candidate — yet the move was approved anyway.
- Washington's gender-affirming housing policy, which allows placement requests based on self-identified gender with limited objective review, is now the central target of a federal lawsuit arguing it creates unconstitutional danger for female inmates.
- Booher-Smith's complaint alleges her assault was not an anomaly but part of a pattern — with other women at the facility reporting harassment, intimidation, and sexual misconduct by male-born inmates housed alongside them.
- Williams was quietly transferred out of the women's facility in October 2025, but the lawsuit presses forward, seeking both damages and a court order to block the policy itself, ensuring the case will shape the national conversation on prison safety and gender identity.
On an August afternoon in 2025, Faith Booher-Smith was heating food in a common area of the Washington Corrections Center for Women when she was struck from behind without warning. She was hit in the face, thrown to the ground, and kicked repeatedly, leaving with bruising, swelling, and a laceration inside her mouth. The attacker was Christopher Williams — a six-foot-four convicted sex offender who had been transferred to the women's facility after identifying as female.
According to Booher-Smith's federal complaint, Williams had a documented history of violence, and officials at his previous facility had warned against the transfer. He was moved anyway, under Washington's gender-affirming housing policy, which allows inmates to request placement based on gender identity with limited objective requirements. The policy can permit shared cells, bathrooms, and showers. Booher-Smith says she had noticed Williams watching her in the weeks before the attack and tried to avoid him. When the assault came, a corrections officer was present but allegedly did not step in.
The physical injuries were only the beginning. Booher-Smith reported persistent pain, anxiety, and trauma serious enough to require treatment. She is now suing corrections officials for damages and asking a court to block the policy, arguing it violates the Constitution by placing female inmates in conditions of predictable danger.
Backed by the Foundation Against Intolerance & Racism and the America First Policy Institute, the lawsuit frames the assault not as a random failure but as the foreseeable result of a structurally flawed system. The complaint alleges that women at the facility have been assaulted, threatened, and sexually harassed by male-born inmates, and that state officials had prior notice of the risks. Reports indicate Williams had been accused of sexually harassing female inmates, and that a complaint filed under the Prison Rape Elimination Act against him was partially substantiated by prison officials.
The state Department of Corrections has declined to comment on the litigation. It confirmed that Williams was transferred out of the women's facility in October 2025 and is now held at a separate institution. The lawsuit remains active, and the case is poised to become a defining test of how corrections systems can — or cannot — reconcile gender identity policy with the safety of those who have nowhere else to go.
Faith Booher-Smith was heating food in a common area of the Washington Corrections Center for Women on an August afternoon in 2025 when she was attacked from behind. The assault was sudden and brutal—struck in the face, hair grabbed, thrown to the ground, kicked repeatedly. She left with facial bruising, swelling, and a laceration inside her mouth. What followed was not just physical recovery but a federal lawsuit challenging the state policy that had placed her attacker in the women's facility in the first place.
The inmate who attacked her was Christopher Williams, a six-foot-four convicted sex offender who had been transferred to the women's prison after identifying as female. According to Booher-Smith's complaint, Williams had a documented history of violence and prior warnings against transfer from corrections officials at his previous facility. Yet he was moved anyway, under Washington's gender-affirming housing policy—a system that allows inmates to request placement based on gender identity rather than biological sex, with limited objective requirements for approval. The policy permits transfers into women's facilities and, in some cases, shared cells, bathrooms, and showers.
Booher-Smith says she had noticed Williams watching her in the weeks before the attack and tried to keep her distance. When the assault happened, a corrections officer was present but, according to the lawsuit, froze and did not intervene. The aftermath extended far beyond the visible injuries. Booher-Smith reported ongoing pain, anxiety, and trauma severe enough to require treatment. She is now suing corrections officials for damages and seeking a court order to block the policy itself, arguing it violates the Constitution by exposing female inmates to unsafe conditions.
The lawsuit, backed by the Foundation Against Intolerance & Racism and supported by the America First Policy Institute, frames this incident not as an isolated event but as a predictable consequence of a flawed policy. The complaint alleges that women at the facility have been "physically assaulted, threatened, intimidated, or sexually harassed by male inmates housed with them." It points to prior complaints and legal filings involving other inmates as evidence that state officials were aware of potential risks. National Review reported that Williams had been accused of sexually harassing female inmates and that another inmate had filed a complaint under the Prison Rape Elimination Act alleging misconduct by him—claims that prison officials said were partially substantiated.
The core argument in the lawsuit is structural: Washington's policy relies heavily on self-identification, with inmates able to request transfer based on their stated gender identity. The complaint describes this as insufficient safeguard, particularly in a prison setting where inmates cannot leave and where, as the filing states, "females are forced to live every waking moment at a dangerous disadvantage." The state Department of Corrections has declined to comment on the pending litigation. It did confirm that Williams was transferred out of the women's facility in October 2025 and is now incarcerated at Stafford Creek Corrections Center. The lawsuit remains active, and the case will likely become a focal point in the broader debate over how corrections systems balance gender identity policies with inmate safety.
Citações Notáveis
The housing of these male inmates with females has led to multiple instances of violence and sexual abuse against the female inmates— From Booher-Smith's lawsuit complaint
A Conversa do Hearth Outra perspectiva sobre a história
What made Booher-Smith decide to sue rather than just move forward?
She couldn't move forward. The trauma was ongoing—anxiety, physical pain, the need for treatment. But more than that, she saw a pattern. She wasn't the only woman in that facility who'd been hurt. The lawsuit became a way to name what she believed was a systemic failure.
The policy itself—what exactly does it allow?
Inmates can request to be housed based on their gender identity. There's no requirement for medical transition, no waiting period, no independent verification. Just the request. And once approved, they can share cells, bathrooms, showers with women. That's what troubles the lawsuit most—the lack of objective criteria.
But Williams had warnings attached to him. Why was he transferred anyway?
That's the question at the heart of this. A corrections official at his previous facility said no—warned against the move because of his violence history. The warning was ignored. The system moved him anyway.
What does the state say about all this?
They're not saying much. They won't comment on pending litigation. They did move Williams out eventually, but only after the assault, after the complaint, after the damage was done.
Is this about the policy itself, or about how it was implemented?
Both. The lawsuit argues the policy is unconstitutional because it creates unsafe conditions. But it also shows how implementation matters—how warnings get ignored, how officers freeze during assaults, how the system fails even within its own rules.
What happens next?
The court will decide whether the policy violates the Constitution. But regardless of the legal outcome, the women in that facility still have to live there. That's what the complaint keeps returning to—the inescapable reality of their situation.