³ÉÈËXÕ¾

In two landmark rulings Thursday, the Washington State Supreme Court has upheld the Secretary of State’s signature validation process, reaffirming the legality of the state’s procedures for verifying signatures on initiative petitions.

The first case, , revolved around five initiatives submitted for the 2024 legislative session. Defend Washington, led by Susan Young and Sharon Chen, challenged the adequacy of the Secretary of State’s signature validation process.

Super PACs fuel spending surge: More money spent against Reichert than Ferguson in WA governor’s race

The organization argued that in addition to comparing petition signatures to voter rolls, the secretary should also verify signers’ addresses to ensure they were legal voters residing at their current addresses.

The initiatives in question included measures to grant parents the right to inspect school materials (I-2081), repeal the state’s capital gains tax (I-2109), ban state and local income taxes (I-2111), repeal the 2021 Washington Climate Commitment Act (I-2117) and make the state’s long-term care insurance program optional (I-2124).

The court ruled that Washington’s Constitution and statutes only require signatures to be matched against voter rolls, not addresses.

“There is no statutory basis for requiring the secretary to verify addresses and such an additional requirement would risk disenfranchising voters,” Chief Justice González stated, writing for the majority.

The court also declared challenges to I-2081 and I-2111 moot, as the legislature had already passed those measures. The remaining initiatives will appear on the November 2024 ballot.

In a related case, , the court dismissed a similar challenge to the signature validation process for Initiative 2066 (I-2066), which seeks to repeal legislation aimed at limiting natural gas use in the state.

Get ready to vote! Washington counties are mailing out general election ballots

The petitioners, including the Washington Conservation Action Education Fund, argued the Secretary of State’s method of verifying signatures without address checks was insufficient. However, the court dismissed the case on procedural grounds, ruling that it was filed under the wrong statute and in the wrong court.

Both rulings affirm the Secretary of State’s process of validating signatures using a random sampling of 3% of the total signatures to ensure they match registered voters.

Matt Markovich often covers the state legislature and public policy for ³ÉÈËXÕ¾ Newsradio. You can read more of Matt’s stories here. Follow him on , or email him here.