(The Center Square) – A day after the Washington State Supreme Court unanimously rejected an appeal seeking a referendum on the state’s new income tax, one of the key players in the legal challenge to come is expressing encouragement from language in the ruling.
On Monday, the court said the law – which taxes households with income above $1 million at a rate of 9.9% – is necessary to support the state government, and as such is not subject to a vote of the people.
Washington lawmakers backing the legislation attached a “necessity” clause to preclude a referendum. That attachment came at the suggestion of Washington Solicitor General Noah Purcell, as reported in emails obtained exclusively by The Center Square.
In a Tuesday interview with The Center Square, former Washington Attorney General Rob McKenna, who has joined the legal challenge led by Citizen Action Defense Fund against the income tax, said language in Monday’s ruling from Washington’s high court indicates they will rely on legal precedent.
McKenna was referring to the court citing “an unbroken line of precedent” when it comes to a “necessity” or emergency clause being attached to legislation deemed essential for the state budget.
“I trust the court will follow the unbroken line of rulings which have held that income is property under our states very expansive definition of property, which is everything tangible and intangible, subject to ownership. So that part was good to see,” said McKenna.
McKenna said Let’s Go Washington, which brought the challenge for the referendum, made a strong case for the income tax not being a “necessity” for the budget.
“I think the plaintiffs here made a good case that this tax measure will not produce any revenue for the state budget until 2029,” he said.
“And therefore, they can argue that this bill is not necessary to support the state budget, because it’s not going to produce revenue in the state budget for several years.”
The court did not agree.
McKenna said Washingtonians should be concerned about lawmakers increasing reliance of attaching an emergency or necessity clause to bills they don’t want the public to have a voice on.
“It is systematically undermining the checks and balances which our voters built into the Constitution. It was the voters who said, ‘we want the power of initiative, and we want the power of referendum,"” McKenna said.
“And when they make wider and wider use of the emergency clause in particular, it systematically undermines voters of power to act as the legislature themselves and take a vote on the bill,” he added.
“This is a great concern. It is undermining the various systems that our voters put in place many years ago.”
Those opposed to the tax can still move forward with an initiative to override it, but an initiative requires twice as many voter signatures to quality for the ballot than a referendum.
More than 400,000 signatures would be required to get a measure certified for the 2026 ballot.
Let’s Go Washington told The Center Square on Monday they are consulting with supporters to determine if that effort will be launched this year or held off until 2027.
