WA House votes to roll back police pursuit laws. Now Senate must consider amendments
A bill to lower the threshold for law enforcement officials to be able to pursue suspects passed the Washington state House chamber with some conflicting votes in the early morning hours Tuesday.
The proposed measure passed the House chamber with a 57-40 vote.
House lawmakers brought Senate Bill 5352 forward late Monday night. Republicans and Democrats were split on their votes, with both parties voting for and against the proposal.
The bill will now head back to the Senate for concurrence. If signed by Gov. Jay Inslee, the bill would go into effect immediately due to an emergency clause.
Under the proposed bill, the evidentiary threshold for officers to engage in vehicular pursuits is lowered to reasonable suspicion in instances such as: violent offenses, sexual offenses, vehicular assault, domestic violence assault in the first, second, third and fourth degrees, escapees and driving under the influence.
The amended legislation also says that officers, or supervisors if available, must notify surrounding jurisdictions if they could be affected by the pursuit. Agencies must also develop plans in real time on how to end the pursuit using other interventions like spike strips.
In 2021, House Bill 1054 was passed by the Legislature and later signed into law by Inslee. The law prevented police officers from engaging in vehicle pursuits in certain instances, but still allowed officers to pursue suspects if they had probable cause to believe a driver was under the influence, they were an escapee, or if there was probable cause that a driver had committed violent or sexual crimes.
Reasonable suspicion comes before probable cause, and means that a police officer has reason to believe a crime has been committed. Reasonable suspicion becomes probable cause when a crime has obviously been committed.
Furthermore, the current law says that officers are not allowed to engage in pursuits unless “vehicular pursuit is necessary for the purpose of identifying or apprehending the person,” the person being pursued is an imminent threat to others, and “the safety risks of failing to apprehend or identify the person are considered to be greater than the safety risks associated with the vehicular pursuit under the circumstances.”
Under the current law, officers must request authorization from a supervisor, and in areas with less than 10 officers the on-call supervisor must be notified. Other alternatives should be considered and requests for vehicular pursuits must be abandoned if requirements aren’t met.
One striking amendment from the House Community Safety, Justice, and Reentry Committee was adopted during the House floor debate Tuesday, which said that jurisdictions with less than 15 officers are able to notify on-call supervisors of pursuits. Additionally, officers must be trained on risk assessment to determine if pursuing individuals poses “a serious risk of harm to others,” and if “safety risks of failing to apprehend or identify the person are considered greater than the safety risks of the pursuit.”
No other amendments were added or introduced to the bill during the House floor debate.
In total, 28 Democrats voted for the measure and 19 voted against, while 19 Republicans voted for the proposal and 21 voted against.
Rep. Julia Reed, D-Seattle, spoke against the proposed bill. She said that lawmakers were not listening to the needs of communities with the legislation and that they were instead telling community members that “promises from this chamber to prioritize their safety that we made less than two years ago are just checks they can’t cash.”
“There’s been an incredible campaign of misinformation about this policy, starting with the argument that all pursuits have been forbidden and this rollback is needed to restore that tool,” said Reed. “That’s simply not true.”
The unamended policy, she said, is that pursuits should be reserved for the “most dangerous cases.”
“And that’s common sense because pursuits are dangerous,” Reed added. “They more often end up in crashes than in arrests.”
Additionally, the cost of those pursuits are high to officers who are killed and injured on the job, and to bystanders who are killed or injured in those pursuits.
Others spoke against the proposal included Rep. Travis Couture, R-Allyn.
He said he disagreed with others’ assertions that the bill would strike a balance and keep people safe.
“This bill would continue to allow an exhaustive list of felonies and misdemeanors including very frustratingly auto thefts and many different kinds of assaults, too many to name off in this speech,” said Couture.
He said that lawmakers had a chance this session to do something more, and that the previous policy had emboldened criminals.
“Our state wants to trust us and what we do tonight will be a big signal as to whether they can trust me and you on this bill,” Couture added.
Other lawmakers such as Rep. Greg Cheney, R-Battle Ground, reluctantly urged his House colleagues to vote yes on the measure.
“This is a bill that has to be worked on in the future even if it is passed tonight,” he said. “So, it’s better than what we have now but it’s not nearly good enough.”
Rep. Monica Stonier, D-Vancouver, also voted in support of the bill.
She said that over the last year and a half since the Legislature last amended the police pursuit policy she has defended the laws that were passed.
“I’m not voting yes because I think there should be more high-speed police chases in our state,” Stonier said.
The police department in her area had already outlined best practices for police pursuits, and they matched the ones being introduced in the proposed policy, she added.
“Reasonable and responsible law enforcement officers choose not to pursue in cases where public safety is at risk,” Stonier said, and noted that the data since the passage of the last police pursuit bill demonstrated that lives had been saved as a result of fewer high-speed chases.
The move to have both chambers vote on the Senate version of the legislation came after a House version of the bill previously failed to be brought forward for a final floor vote.
House Republican lawmakers attempted to bring the House version of the bill that had gone through the committee process for a final debate to the floor last month. House Democrats voted on party lines not to move that version from the Rules Committee after the request, however, despite the bill having several Democrats signed on as sponsors and co-sponsors.
The Senate version of the bill did not go through the usual process of committee hearings and executive sessions, and had not gone further than an introduction in the Legislature prior to lawmakers moving it to the floor last month. Instead, the rules were suspended to suddenly bring the bill to the debate floor for a vote, with Senators voting 26-23 to pass the proposal.
Lawmakers have until Wednesday at 5 p.m. to vote bills out of their opposite house of origin. After that, lawmakers will focus on bills that need to be concurred such as SB 5352.
The last day of the legislative session is April 23.
This story was originally published April 11, 2023 at 7:59 AM with the headline "WA House votes to roll back police pursuit laws. Now Senate must consider amendments."
