Latest news with #WashingtonStateHouse
Yahoo
13-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
No more waiting – Schools must notify parents immediately under reworked House bill
This story was originally published on Parents in Washington just scored a big win in their right to know what's happening with their kids at school. After more than six hours of debate, the Washington State House passed House Bill 1296 at 2:15 a.m. Thursday morning, along party lines, with a 56-47 vote. All Democrats voted in favor, and all Republicans opposed it. Five members were excused from voting. Despite the changes, opponents are still very unhappy about the premise of the bill. A total of 131 amendments were proposed, including a striking amendment — a complete rewrite of the bill. The approved rewrite clarifies a critical change: schools must now notify parents immediately if something serious happens to their child, eliminating the previous 48-hour window. This means that if a student is the victim of a crime at school, is detained for a serious issue or is questioned by law enforcement, parents will be informed right away. This requirement was originally part of the underlying Parent Bill of Rights Initiative 2018, but lawmakers have since narrowed the scope of immediate notification. Related from MyNorthwest: WA lawmakers accuse one another of lying about student privacy Before this bill, schools had up to 48 hours to notify parents in certain situations. Here's what the new law now requires schools to do immediately: Criminal Activity on School Property – If a student is the victim of a crime while at school, their parents must be notified immediately. No more waiting for updates. Student Detentions – If a student is detained at school for a crime, their parents must be informed right away. Police Questioning – If law enforcement conducts a custodial interrogation (meaning they're questioning a student in a serious legal situation), the school must notify the parents immediately—unless the parents themselves are being investigated for abuse or neglect. Student Removal from School – Schools must have clear procedures in place, and students cannot be taken off campus without following these established rules. Republicans have argued that Democratic lawmakers should maintain the original elements of the Parent Bill of Rights, while Democrats claim the initiative contained errors and HB 1296 is intended to correct them. Opponents of the revised bill remain concerned about parental notification in cases where students make independent health care decisions, including transgender care. To avoid legal gray areas, the reworked bill clarifies the following: No changes to health privacy laws – Schools must still comply with state laws governing student health information. If a student has private medical records, HB 1296 does not alter who can access them. Youth shelters and protective custody – The law does not override existing protections for children in crisis, such as those in shelters or host homes due to abuse or neglect. No legal recourse for parents – While HB 1296 establishes clear parental rights, it does not grant parents the ability to sue if schools fail to comply with the notification requirements. More from MyNorthwest: WA among 21 states suing Trump Administration over 'illegal' Education Department firings Beyond emergency notifications, HB 1296 strengthens parents' rights to access school records. The bill expands the definition of 'education records' to include everything in a student's file—attendance records, test scores, disciplinary reports, individualized education plans (IEPs), and more. Parents can now request a copy of their child's records, and schools are legally required to provide them within 45 days, ensuring families stay informed about their child's academic progress. The bill mirrors SB 5181, which passed the state Senate last month. With HB 1296 now heading to the Senate and the Senate bill moving to the House, Democratic leaders said Thursday that both chambers are discussing whether to combine the bills or choose one to advance. This is a developing story — expect updates throughout the day.
Yahoo
09-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Bill requiring permits for gun purchases passes WA State House on party-line vote
Washington State House Democrats voted to require would-be gun owners to obtain a permit before purchase. The vote followed an over three-hour debate that stretched into early Saturday morning. Engrossed Second Substitute House Bill 1163 (E2SHB 1163) passed along party lines, with a vote of 58-38 and two lawmakers excused. The bill, which expands requirements for firearm purchases and transfers, has sparked significant controversy, with Republican lawmakers decrying it as an unconstitutional attack on individual rights. The legislation imposes a series of new regulations on gun buyers, including a requirement to obtain a permit before purchasing a firearm. Prospective gun owners must also complete a state-recognized firearm safety training course within the past five years to qualify for a permit. In addition, the bill mandates enhanced background checks conducted through the Washington State Patrol's firearms background check program, which will consult both state and federal databases to determine an applicant's eligibility. Under the bill, firearm dealers must maintain detailed records of all firearm transfers and report permit and licensing information to state authorities. Law enforcement agencies will be given the ability to delay firearm transfers in cases where additional background verification is deemed necessary. Supporters of the bill argue that these measures are necessary to enhance public safety, reduce gun violence, and ensure that only responsible individuals have access to firearms. They contend that requiring safety training and thorough vetting will help prevent dangerous individuals from obtaining weapons, ultimately saving lives. Republican lawmakers, however, are strongly opposed to the legislation, calling it a direct assault on constitutional freedoms and does nothing but punish law-abiding citizens, not criminals who use firearms illegally. All 27 amendments they offered were rejected by Democrats. Representative Jim Walsh (R-Aberdeen) was particularly vocal in his criticism, warning that the bill undermines fundamental rights protected under the Washington State Constitution. 'First, it violates your due process rights. That's Article 1, Section 3 of the Washington State Constitution. Second, it violates your privacy rights. That's Article 1, Section 7, and third, it violates your rights to defend yourself with a firearm,' Walsh said during a late Friday night hearing on the bill. State Rep. Strom Peterson (D-Edmonds) countered that the bill is about safety, including suicide prevention. 'Veterans are five times more likely to use a firearm and suicide than the rest of the population,' Peterson explained. 'The underlying bill might give some pause when you're able to purchase a firearm. Maybe take just a little bit of time. If you're in a mental health crisis with suicidal ideations to just take a little bit of time before you are able to purchase a firearm.' Now that the bill has cleared the House, it heads to the Washington State Senate, where it will likely face continued debate. Given the partisan nature of the vote in the House, the battle over E2SHB 1163 is expected to intensify as it moves through the Senate. If it passes, the bill will be sent to the governor for final approval, at which point legal challenges from gun rights advocates seem almost certain. The outcome of this legislation could set a precedent for future firearm regulations in Washington State, potentially influencing similar efforts in other states. As lawmakers continue to clash over the balance between public safety and constitutional freedoms, the debate over gun rights remains as contentious as ever.
Yahoo
06-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Domestic workers rights bill passes Washington State Senate
A bill to boost the protections of thousands of domestic workers, including housekeepers, nannies, caregivers, and gardeners, passed the Washington State Senate on Wednesday. The Domestic Workers' Bill of Rights would grant domestic workers minimum wage, overtime pay, meal and rest breaks, as well as protection from discrimination and retaliation, according to the Washington State Senate. 'Domestic workers play a vital role in our communities, yet they've long been excluded from basic labor protections,' State Senator Rebecca Saldaña said. 'This bill is an important step in ensuring domestic workers — many of whom are women, immigrants, and people of color — have access to the same labor protections as other Washington workers. It's a step toward justice and dignity for those who provide essential work in our homes,' she continued.' Senate Bill 5023 would also reinforce workers' rights to keep belongings like immigration documents and prohibit employers from asking for or keeping them. In a recent hearing on the bill, State Senator Curtis King spoke against it. 'I think the vast majority of them are very well treated,' he said. 'You're going to do it at the expense of everybody that treats these people the way they should be treated.' The bill will move on to the Washington State House. Two states, Oregon and California, and three cities — Seattle, Philadelphia, and Washington, D.C. — already have a domestic worker bill of rights in place.
Yahoo
07-02-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
WA lawmakers narrowly advance proposal for inmate resentencing
The Brief A proposal to let certain inmates in prison apply for resentencing narrowly passed through the House Committee on Community Safety Thursday morning. The legislation would allow certain inmates to petition a court to review their sentence if they meet criteria on time served, improved behavior and low risk of reoffending. Citing concerns about victims rights and judicial discretion, one Democratic representative joined Republicans in an attempt to block the proposal. OLYMPIA, Wash. - A proposal to let certain inmates in prison apply for resentencing narrowly cleared a hurdle in the Washington State House Thursday. One Democratic representative pushed back on the idea as other members of her party pushed it forward. The House Committee on Community Safety voted 5-4 to advance House Bill 1125. The legislation would allow certain inmates to petition a court to review their sentence if they meet criteria on time served, improved behavior and low risk of reoffending. The bill was also amended to require five years of community custody after resentencing, and to encourage victims to tell the court "what outcome would make them feel safe." What they're saying "The prosecutors can do this for any reason that's in the interest of justice right now," said prime sponsor State Representative Tarra Simmons (D-Bremerton) "I'm asking that defense counsel be able to do this as well, with a lot of eligibility criteria and protection around it. And continued supervision in the community." Simmons argued people who have reformed should get a second look at their sentences, and often are victims of crimes themselves. The other side However, Republicans argued the bill needs more work. They cited circumstances of judges facing no accountability after letting individuals out of jail who go on to commit more crimes. "I have also heard testimony from other families, who have again been on the receiving end of this," said State Representative Jenny Graham (R-Spokane) "Where somebody that was very dangerous should've never been let out or received low bail, ended up getting out. Now their son is dead." State Representative Lauren Davis (D-Shoreline) also expressed concerns about judicial discretion. "Judges are not qualified to run a parole board," she said. "They have neither the tools nor the training, and the legislature can compel neither." Davis offered a sweeping amendment to have the state's Indeterminate Sentence Review Board manage the process, arguing they are best equipped for the task. But it was voted down. Davis acknowledged the only early release option for individuals who have reformed is requesting clemency from the governor, a process that "is like passing through the eye of a needle" and "leaves too many people behind." "The clemency and pardons process is too narrow. But this bill is far too broad," she said. Davis ultimately joined all Republicans in voting against the bill, arguing crime victims are being pushed to the side with the legislation. "The title of this act provides for 'judicial discretion to modify sentences in the interests of justice.' But I must ask, 'justice for whom?'" Davis said. "As currently construed, this bill provides justice only for the person who has caused harm." When House Bill 1125 could be considered by the full House has yet to be announced. The Source Information in this story is from Albert James, a television reporter covering state government as part of the Murrow News Fellowship program – a collaborative effort between news outlets statewide and Washington State University. Seattle principal arrested for DUI and domestic violence after car flips Seattle police Lt. sues city, claims retaliation discrimination Japan Airlines plane impales tail of Delta plane at Sea-Tac Airport More than 1K rally outside Olympia Capitol in '50 states, 50 protests' demonstration Washington Senate passes changes to parental rights in education To get the best local news, weather and sports in Seattle for free, sign up for the daily Fox Seattle Newsletter. Download the free FOX LOCAL app for mobile in the Apple App Store or Google Play Store for live Seattle news, top stories, weather updates and more local and national coverage, plus 24/7 streaming coverage from across the nation.
Yahoo
06-02-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Republicans, Democrats debate wording on schools notifying parents of abuse
Feb. 5—A viral post on social media regarding when state agencies are required to notify parents of suspected child abuse is an example of "politics at its worst," a Democratic legislator said Tuesday. But Republicans say Democrats are gutting the Parental Bill of Rights, which the Legislature approved last year. Part of that law says that schools must give parents "immediate notification if a criminal action is deemed to have been committed against their child or by their child." A Democratic proposal would requires schools to inform parents "at the first opportunity but in all cases within forty-eight hours of receiving a report alleging sexual misconduct or abuse by an agency employee, notify the parents or guardian of a child alleged to be the victim, target, or recipient of the misconduct or abuse." Republicans say that weakens the provision in the Parental Bill of Rights which was approved by the legislature last year following a successful signature gathering campaign. "House Democrats on the Education Committee voted against an amendment to House Bill 1296 that would have required school districts to immediately notify parents if a student is the victim of sexual misconduct by an employee," Washington State House Republicans wrote in a Facebook post that has been shared more than 1,100 times as of Tuesday. During a media availability Tuesday, House Majority Floor Leader Rep. Monica Stonier, D-Vancouver, said that "the question that's being raised around whether Democrats care to make sure parents are immediately notified is unbecoming of an elected official, I believe, to be causing that kind of confusion to the public." "As a person who has been directly asked why I intend to keep information from parents, as a teacher and as a parent, I find that claim unprofessional," Stonier said. By the time Stonier spoke, the post had been shared widely on social media, first from the Washington State House Republicans and later amplified by state Rep. and GOP chairman Jim Walsh. Texas Sen. Ted Cruz jumped in last week and further elevated the post, calling the vote "insane" in a post on the social media platform X. As of 4:30 Tuesday, Cruz's post had been shared more than 13,000 times and liked more than 49,000 times on X. Republican leadership seemed pleased with the increased visibility during a media availability Tuesday, with Deputy Minority Leader Rep. Chris Corry, R-Yakima, saying Democrats "had made the national news for all of the wrong reasons." "Claiming that it's not important for a school to notify parents if a child has been assaulted on campus," Corry said. The post also lacks context around what's required under Washington law, Democrat leadership said Tuesday, as they pointed to a provision of state law that's been on the books for 20 years. Under the Revised Code of Washington, the Department of Children, Youth and Families is required "at the first opportunity but in all cases within forty-eight hours of receiving a report alleging sexual misconduct or abuse by an agency employee, notify the parents or guardian of a child alleged to be the victim, target, or recipient of the misconduct or abuse." During a House Education Committee hearing last week, Rep. Travis Couture, R-Allyn, introduced an amendment that would have required immediate parental notification in such instances, which he said comes after the state has seen "a stunning amount of sexual misconduct and sexual assaults from educators in our schools." "As a parent myself, I would be disgusted and sickened to know if my kids had some kind of sexual abuse put upon them by staff, and I wasn't notified immediately of those things," Couture said. Corry said Tuesday that he "can't say he's got a personal story" from a constituent about a school delaying notification, though he's "seen stories in the news from various places." "But I think the bigger question is: Why wouldn't we notify parents if something happened to their kids at school?" Corry said. "My gut tells me that it's a pretty easy answer: We should notify them." Senate Majority Leader Jaimie Pedersen, D-Seattle, said the timeline in the existing statute comes from a bipartisan bill, which was previously passed by the legislature unanimously. Pedersen added that "schools are going to notify as soon as they practically can." "It allows for schools to do exactly what the Republicans saw the Democrats are trying to stop, which is to immediately notify parents," Stonier said. "So that claim is untrue and irresponsible, in my opinion, to cause confusion to the public." The 48-hour window, Stonier said, allows schools and officials "to get the facts clear so that accurate information is provided to the right adults who are responsible for that child." State Rep. Lillian Ortiz-Self, D-Mukilteo, made a similar argument as she asked her seatmates to vote against an amendment during the Jan. 30 House Education Committee hearing. "As a school counselor, one of the first things we're trained in is how to deal with these situations, and it's very clear that we take direction from law enforcement and the Department of Children, Youth and Families whenever there is a crime that has taken place," Ortiz-Self said. "And that we must adhere, and give them the time to do the investigation so that justice can be served." S-R reporter Elena Perry contributed to this article. Editor's note: This article was changed on February 5, 2025 to add context related to the Parental Bill of Rights.
