Interesting case. What surprises me most is that the lawsuit was filed by Washington's Attorney General which is technically also a part of the government. Probably that is because he was elected rather than appointed.
Something to keep in mind is that the government is not a whole. It's lost of disparate entities all working towards their own interests. This [1] is their AG and his own personal ideological perspective is what you'd expect for the person that filed the lawsuit. And, you'll find this to invariably be the case on government (and private) actions. This is another example of why real diversity, ideological diversity, is absolutely critical. It keeps everybody honest. If their AG was ideologically in support of the consequences of the actions of the Motel, it's much less likely that this case would have been filed.
This reality is something that should never be ignored as it goes all the way to the top. For instance the Supreme Court is the highest voice in our nation on legal matters and they generally only hear cases where the outcome should be complex and difficult to perceive. Yet on most matters you could predict with a pretty good degree of certainty exactly how most the court would vote, on most issues, based on little more than knowledge of their own individual ideologies. This is why I'd never want a 9-0 supreme court (or even a 7-2), even if the majority aligned strongly with my views and values. We're all subject to bias and other issues. And the only really good way to make sure we keep ourselves based and honest is to ensure the presence of dissenting voices.
