Hearing in ‘legislative privilege’ case May 24

House Speaker resists testifying in ‘legislative privilege’ case

OLYMPIA – Washington House of Representatives Speaker Laurie Jinkins, the leading proponent for a so-called “legislative privilege” that allows legislators to conceal some government records covered by the Public Records Act, is trying to avoid testifying in a lawsuit disputing the existence of any such privilege. 
 
The Washington Coalition for Open Government and government-transparency advocate Jamie Nixon filed the suit in April 2023. A Thurston County Superior Court judge is expected to rule Friday on our motion to depose Jinkins. Attorneys for the Legislature said in a court filing Tuesday that questions our attorney wants to ask Jinkins are “not relevant,” and that submitting Jinkins to a deposition would impose “substantial and unnecessary burdens on a high-ranking state official.” 
 
Superior Court Judge Anne Egeler also is expected to rule on a motion by Nixon and WashCOG that she examine records that already have been withheld by legislators under the purported privilege to see if those instances of withholding comport with her understanding of the privilege.
 
Egeler ruled last November that “legislative privilege” does exist. In this second phase of the case, she is expected to define exactly what kinds of information legislators may withhold. However Egeler rules, the case is expected by all concerned to be appealed. It will likely be ultimately decided by the Washington Supreme Court. 
 
Attorneys for the state oppose a Jinkins deposition as "improper in these circumstances" and added in their response that the intent of the speaker or other lawmakers is irrelevant.
 
The Legislature’s private Seattle attorneys argued in their pleadings that WashCOG’s motives in trying to depose her are “political.” But WashCOG is an independent, nonpartisan organization with members from across the political spectrum. We carefully avoid involvement in electoral politics.
 
The Public Records Act, which Washington voters supported overwhelmingly, states: "The people of this state do not yield their sovereignty to the agencies that serve them. The people, in delegating authority, do not give their public servants the right to decide what is good for the people to know and what is not good for them to know.”
 
If Jinkins truly has information she considers necessary to keep secret for the public welfare, she is the only one qualified based on personal knowledge to testify truthfully.  
 
The Legislature embraced the concept of “legislative privilege” to withhold information requested by the public under the Public Records Act after losing a previous court case on the issue brought by news organizations.
 
After that court ruling, legislators with little debate passed a bill exempting the Legislature from the PRA. But some 20,000 members of the public opposed that 2018 measure, contacting Gov. Jay Inslee to request he veto the measure. And he did. 
 
Lawyers for the state argue that legislators may withhold some information based on a provision in the state Constitution: “No member of the legislature shall be liable in any civil action or criminal prosecution whatever, for words spoken in debate.”
 
Only after Inslee’s veto did legislators start citing “legislative privilege” to withhold information. But notice that the constitutional provision only says legislators can’t be sued or jailed for what they say in legislative debate. It does not authorize secret legislative debate.
 
In a Crosscut/Elway poll released in January 2024, 82% of respondents said they disapproved of the use of “legislative privilege” to circumvent the Public Records Act.
 
The hearing is scheduled at 9 a.m. Friday, May 24, 2024 in Thurston County Superior Court.