New Elections Laws Passed in 2026

This year the Washington State Legislature continued to consider and pass new laws intended to strengthen and protect our state’s election systems. These changes address access to elections services, protection of voter registration records, and expansion of the Washington Voting Rights Act (WVRA).

This blog summarizes five new laws related to elections.

SB 6035: Requires Outreach to Tribes and Access to Voting Services

SB 6035, codified in Chapter 29A.96 RCW, requires county auditors, to the extent practicable, to meet with each federally recognized Indian tribe located in their county on a regular basis to discuss details of upcoming elections, related deadlines, voting centers, and ballot drop boxes (see RCW 29A.96.020).

If a county auditor is unable to make these contacts, then the auditor is required to contact the Washington Secretary of State (SOS). Alternatively, a representative of a tribe not contacted directly by an auditor may contact the SOS to facilitate contact. In addition, a tribal liaison designated by the SOS may assist counties and tribes to facilitate contact between tribes and county auditors.

The SOS is now required by RCW 29A.96.030 to meet each biennium with Washington-based federally recognized Indian tribes to provide a forum for discussing and addressing barriers to voting.

SB 6035 also provides authority and direction to the SOS regarding the option to study electronic ballot portals. RCW 29A.96.800(1) directs that the SOS “may, within existing resources, study the feasibility of employing an electronic ballot portal that enables covered voters to return a voted ballot.” The definition of “covered voters” includes service members, overseas voters, disabled voters, and voters who are members of a federally recognized tribe and reside on an Indian reservation.

While this new law allows the SOS to study electronic ballot portals, it includes a provision that “[n]othing in this section may be construed to authorize the use of an electronic ballot portal to return a voted ballot in this state.” See RCW 29A.96.800(4).

HB 1916: Places Requirements on Voter Registration Challenges

HB 1916 includes several changes to the handling of challenges to voter registrations. Moving forward, complaints challenging a voter’s right to vote must be made by a registered voter from the same county as the challenged voter.

There is a new requirement for challenges involving a voter not living at the address listed in their voter registration. A letter to a challenged voter must be sent certified mail with return receipt requested using a specialized form that provides the reason(s) for the challenge. Required forms can be found on the SOS webpage: Voter Registration Challenges.

Anyone who wishes to challenge a voter registration must use the forms provided by the SOS, which must be signed in ink and under penalty of perjury.

Challenges must be dismissed if they are filed improperly or if the stated factual basis does not meet the legal grounds. Previously, auditors were allowed but not required to dismiss insufficient challenges (See RCW 29A.08.840).

HB 1916 also requires a county auditor cancel a voter's Washington State registration if the auditor can verify the individual has another more recent voter registration in a different state and the information in that voter registration record matches what is in the Washington record. See RCW 29A.08.135.

SB 5892: Protects the Voter Registration Database

SB 5892 protects private information about voters by making it a class C felony for any state or local election officer or their designee to disclose private voter information such as numbers associated with a driver’s license or social security card, or full birthdates.

Although previously exempt from disclosure under RCW 42.56.425(4), county elections offices are now prohibited from voluntarily disclosing elections security information, including private voter information, from the statewide voter registration database to a public records requestor. A knowing violation of this prohibition is now a class C felony.

Previously a county elections office was obligated to direct any public records requests for data from the state voter database to the SOS; SB 5892 maintains this requirement by clarifying that the SOS is the only agency legally allowed to respond to requests for data from the state’s voter database.

HB 1750: Expands the WVRA

HB 1750 amends and expands the WVRA (Chapter 29A.92 RCW) to create a new standard for WVRA violations. Two new definitions are added to RCW 29A.92.010, including:

(4) "Election policy or practice" means any voting qualification, prerequisite to voting, or method of election, and any law, ordinance, resolution, charter or code provision, regulation, rule, policy, practice, procedure, standard, or action with respect to voting or the administration of elections, including the time or date of elections.

(5) "Electoral system" means the method of electing the governing body of a political subdivision or any election policy or practice administered by the political subdivision.

A new section, RCW 29A.92.021(1), now prohibits disparate treatment of a protected class in all aspects of elections administration, including in the ability or opportunity to vote or participate in any stage of the political process. As noted in the legislation:

(1) Except as provided in subsection (2) of this section, no political subdivision responsible for election administration may abridge the rights of voters who are members of a protected class or classes by implementing, imposing, or enforcing any election policy or practice, or taking any action or failing to take any action, that results in, is likely to result in, or is intended to result in a material disparate burden on the ability or opportunity of members of a protected class to vote or participate in any stage of the political process.

The referenced subsection (2) sets forth what is essentially a strict scrutiny standard that a political subdivision must meet by “clear and convincing evidence” to avoid a potential violation of the WVRA in RCW 29A.92.021(1).

Many of the existing WVRA provisions remain in place, including those regarding voluntary changes, notice, good faith collaboration, court review of changes in electoral systems because of an alleged WVRA violation, public hearings, and safe harbor.

It should be noted that since its enactment in 2018, the provisions of the WVRA do not apply to “cities and towns with populations under 1,000 or to school districts with K-12 full-time equivalent enrollments of less than 250.” See RCW 29A.92.700.

HB 1710: Adds Pre-Clearance to the WVRA

Codified as Chapter 29A.93 RCW rather than as part of the WVRA, HB 1710 adds pre-clearance requirements to the WVRA.

Pre-clearance means gaining advance approval from the Washington State Attorney General’s Office (AGO) before enacting a policy change. In this case, certain ‘covered jurisdictions’ must get pre-clearance for any changes to their local voting system or other local elections policies or practices. (As of this writing, covered jurisdictions include Pasco, Yakima, and Yakima County.)

Covered jurisdictions must submit certain policy changes to their voting system or elections policies or practices for AGO review to determine whether these changes comply with requirements in the WVRA. If the policy complies with the law, then the AGO issues a “certificate of no objection.” Any proposed policy changes cannot go into effect until the AGO provides this certificate.

For more information see AGO’s webpage: WA Voting Rights Act Preclearance - Covered Jurisdictions and Policies.

Conclusion and Resources

As always, we recommend you consult with your agency’s legal counsel for legal advice about these new laws. For general legal guidance, feel free to use Ask MRSC.

You may also want to review our elections-related blogs and webpages, including:

• Explore Topics - Elections
• New Elections Laws Passed in 2025
• New Elections Laws Passed in 2024
• New Elections Laws Passed in 2023