PRIA Logo™
WashingtonHB 17502025-2026 Regular SessionHouse

Creating guidelines for voter suppression and vote dilution claims under the Washington voting rights act.

Sponsored By: Natasha Hill (Democratic)

Signed by Governor

Personalized for You

How does this bill affect your finances?

Personalize government policy and PRIA will tell you what this bill means for your household, plus every other piece of legislation we track. PRIA reads each provision against your financial profile to show you exactly what matters to your wallet.

Free to download

Bill Overview

Analyzed Economic Effects

9 provisions identified: 6 benefits, 2 costs, 1 mixed.

Research reimbursement and legal cost recovery

Qualifying notice submitters get up to $50,000 for reasonable research costs when specified court orders approve vote-dilution remedies or governments implement voter-suppression remedies. The government must receive a written demand with financial records within 30 days after the new election system is adopted. It must pay eligible costs within 60 days after receiving the demand. Courts can also award prevailing plaintiffs reasonable lawyer fees, nonattorney costs, and expert fees, including costs incurred before filing. Plaintiffs other than the state or a local government can qualify without a favorable judgment if their case changes government behavior to fix the claimed harm. Courts decide the fee award; prevailing defendants can recover fees under Washington’s frivolous-action rules.

Fairer election opportunities for minority voters

Local election methods violate the law when polarized voting and vote dilution deny protected groups equal opportunities to elect preferred candidates. Courts assess local voting conditions without requiring proof of intent, geographic concentration, or compactness of the affected group. Primary results, crossover voting, and coalition voting can matter; past wins by minority candidates do not automatically defeat a claim. Different protected groups can sue together when their combined voting preferences are polarized against the remaining voters. The coalition must be cohesive overall, but each group need not prove cohesion separately. The law also repeals the prior election-method provision, RCW 29A.92.020.

More ways to enforce voters’ rights

A resident voter, organization with a resident voter, or tribe located partly in the jurisdiction can give notice of a violation. Notice must identify the violation, affected groups, and a possible remedy; the local government must work in good faith. Usually, the government gets 90 days after notice to adopt a compliant remedy before a lawsuit in county superior court. Notice and waiting are unnecessary for urgent preliminary relief, joining an existing case, or challenging a remedy that fails to fix the noticed violation. Plaintiffs must have legal standing, and trial must occur within one year after filing. Courts must grant temporary relief when success is more likely than not and a fix can reach the upcoming election; no bond is required. Individual votes remain private during discovery, and each governing-body election creates a new claim opportunity. Notices under this chapter cannot predate July 19, 2018.

Stronger protections against local voter suppression

The act takes effect June 11, 2026, but is void unless specific funding is included in the omnibus appropriations act by June 30, 2026. Local election officials cannot adopt, enforce, or leave in place practices that materially burden racial, color, or language-minority groups. The ban covers actual, likely, or intended burdens on voting or political participation, without requiring proof of discriminatory intent. Officials must prove with clear and convincing evidence that a practice serves a compelling, specific state interest. They must also prove it is narrowly tailored, necessary, and has no less burdensome alternative. Historical use, use elsewhere, other available voting methods, or arguments focused solely on fraud or election integrity do not establish a defense.

Clear election schedules after voting remedies

For court remedies, timing depends on the remedy order or district-approval order, whichever comes later. Orders issued from the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November through January 15 trigger the next general election. For orders from January 16 through the first Monday in November, the next scheduled election uses the current system. Elections under the remedy then occur at the general election in the following calendar year. All governing-body seats appear at the remedy-scheduled election; terms can be staggered afterward, and elections can align with regular statewide or federal elections. When a special candidate filing period is required, filings reopen for three business days. The state redistricting commission must forward federal census data within 45 days of receipt. Governing bodies using district-based redistricting must prepare plans by November 15 in each year ending in one.

More election fixes for protected voters

Local governments can change election systems to fix potential violations, and courts can order tailored fixes after a violation or agreement. Fixes include district elections and changes to election policies or practices. Counties can reasonably increase elected commissioners when Indian tribal status is a basis for the vote-dilution claim. Courts must consider the parties’ plans and cannot favor a government’s plan solely because the government submitted it. Districts must have nearly equal populations, be reasonably compact and contiguous, respect natural boundaries and shared communities, and avoid vote dilution. Courts must approve district boundaries before implementation; a protected group need not be a numerical majority if it has equal election opportunity. Coalition district remedies require proof that the groups are politically cohesive.

Four-year limits on repeat voting lawsuits

A qualifying court-approved or court-ordered remedy generally protects a local government from another voting-rights action for four years after adoption. That protection applies only while the government makes no change or departure that otherwise supports a new action. For voter-suppression claims, the bar covers only the same election policy or practice the court found compliant. A separate historical bar covered certain federal voting-rights remedies adopted during the decade before June 7, 2018. That bar ended after redistricting for the 2020 census.

Small jurisdictions remain outside voting protections

Most specified voting-rights provisions, including the voter-suppression rule, do not cover cities or towns with fewer than 1,000 residents. They also do not cover school districts with fewer than 250 K–12 full-time equivalent students. Residents of those jurisdictions lack access to those protections for the exempt local government’s elections.

Public input and tougher remedy review

Local governments must notify residents and hold a public hearing at least one week before adopting a voting-rights remedy. Extra written and spoken notices, plus radio or television announcements, are required in languages identified by demographic data. The language requirement applies when residents with limited English proficiency who speak another language reach 5% or 500 residents, whichever is fewer. When at least two notices propose materially different vote-dilution remedies, the government must work with the submitters and seek court approval of its adopted remedy. At that stage, courts start with a rebuttable presumption against approval and view facts and reasonable inferences favorably to opponents. Governments must use relevant election and demographic data and disclose the analyses and data used when seeking court acknowledgment of compliance. Within 30 days after a case ends, they must post its outcome, summary, and legal costs on their website, or the county website if needed.

Sponsors & Cosponsors

Sponsor

  • Natasha Hill

    Democratic • House

Cosponsors

  • Alex Ramel

    Democratic • House

  • Chipalo Street

    Democratic • House

  • Cindy Ryu

    Democratic • House

  • Darya Farivar

    Democratic • House

  • Edwin Obras

    Democratic • House

  • Gerry Pollet

    Democratic • House

  • Greg Nance

    Democratic • House

  • Julia Reed

    Democratic • House

  • Lisa Parshley

    Democratic • House

  • Mary Fosse

    Democratic • House

  • Mia Gregerson

    Democratic • House

  • Nicole Macri

    Democratic • House

  • Sharlett Mena

    Democratic • House

  • Shaun Scott

    Democratic • House

  • Tarra Simmons

    Democratic • House

  • Timm Ormsby

    Democratic • House

Roll Call Votes

All Roll Calls

Yes: 145 • No: 94

House vote • 3/11/2026

Final Passage as Amended by the Senate

Yes: 58 • No: 38 • Other: 2

Senate vote • 2/28/2026

3rd Reading & Final Passage as Amended by the Senate

Yes: 30 • No: 19

House vote • 2/12/2026

3rd Reading & Final Passage

Yes: 57 • No: 37 • Other: 4

Actions Timeline

  1. Effective date 6/11/2026.

    3/25/2026House

  2. Chapter 215, 2026 Laws.

    3/25/2026House

  3. Governor signed.

    3/25/2026legislature

  4. Speaker signed.

    3/12/2026legislature

  5. President signed.

    3/12/2026legislature

  6. Delivered to Governor.

    3/12/2026legislature

  7. Passed final passage; yeas, 58; nays, 38; absent, 0; excused, 2.

    3/11/2026House

  8. House concurred in Senate amendments.

    3/11/2026House

  9. Third reading, passed; yeas, 30; nays, 19; absent, 0; excused, 0.

    2/28/2026House

  10. Rules suspended. Placed on Third Reading.

    2/28/2026House

  11. Committee amendment(s) adopted with no other amendments.

    2/28/2026House

  12. Placed on second reading by Rules Committee.

    2/27/2026House

  13. Passed to Rules Committee for second reading.

    2/25/2026House

  14. Minority; without recommendation.

    2/24/2026House

  15. Minority; do not pass.

    2/24/2026House

  16. SGTE - Majority; do pass with amendment(s).

    2/24/2026House

  17. First reading, referred to State Government, Tribal Affairs & Elections.

    2/16/2026House

  18. Third reading, passed; yeas, 57; nays, 37; absent, 0; excused, 4.

    2/12/2026House

  19. Rules suspended. Placed on Third Reading.

    2/12/2026House

  20. Floor amendment(s) adopted.

    2/12/2026House

  21. 2nd substitute bill substituted.

    2/12/2026House

  22. Rules Committee relieved of further consideration. Placed on second reading.

    2/11/2026House

  23. Referred to Rules 2 Review.

    2/4/2026House

  24. APP - Executive action taken by committee.

    2/2/2026House

  25. Minority; do not pass.

    2/2/2026House

Bill Text

Related Bills

Back to State Legislation