Washington Supreme Court: Privacy Act Doesn’t Reach Hospital’s Meta Pixel Use
Key Takeaways
- On October 8, 2026, in Baker v. Seattle Children’s Hospital, No. 104590-5, a unanimous Washington Supreme Court affirmed dismissal of a Washington Privacy Act (WPA) claim challenging the hospital’s use of Meta Pixel on its public website.
- The WPA covers communications between two or more individuals—user clicks and searches answered by a corporation’s automated website do not qualify.
- The ruling closes merely one avenue under Washington law, not every privacy theory. Providers should still audit trackers and consent disclosures.
The Decision
Plaintiffs sued Seattle Children’s Hospital (SCH) in a proposed class action, claiming SCH’s website used Meta Pixel to send their clicks, searches, and page views to Meta without their knowledge as they looked up symptoms and medical services. The majority held the WPA reaches interception of communications between at least two individuals and specifically excluded corporations. Here, each exchange ran between one user and SCH’s automated website, so the claim failed. The court affirmed dismissal without deciding whether the searches were private communications, which was the ground the Court of Appeals relied on in August 2025.
The Concurrence
Justice Steven C. González concurred in the result, but wrote the Plaintiffs adequately alleged private communications. In his view, those communications went to a server returning stored content rather than to another person. He would also protect communications with a corporation’s employees, such as clinical staff, This issue the majority left open.
Why It Matters
Providers nationwide face suits over Meta Pixel and similar trackers. This decision closes a single WPA route but does not completely eliminate liability for pixel tracking. Notably, SCH’s cookie pop-up didn’t name Meta Pixel or explain how it works. Organizations should audit their trackers, keep them off patient portals and make consent notices specific.
