
The state Supreme Court unanimously rejected voter advocacy group’s demands and dismissed the case
Brett Davis
The Center Square Washington
Representatives of the Let’s Go Washington voter advocacy group say they were blindsided Friday afternoon at learning the state Supreme Court was about to decide whether to invalidate all voter-backed initiatives on the Nov. 5 ballot. The court unanimously rejected their demands and dismissed the case.
This November, voters will decide on initiatives repealing the capital gains tax, prohibiting carbon tax credit trading and repealing provisions of the 2021 Climate Commitment Act, and allowing people to opt out of the state’s WA Cares long-term care program. A fourth initiative, sponsored by the Business Industry Association of Washington, would prohibit state and local governments from restricting access to natural gas.
The situation that came to a head on Friday afternoon involves two cases.
Earlier this year, the anti-initiatives organization, Defend Washington, filed a lawsuit against Secretary of State Steve Hobbs, claiming signatures to qualify the initiatives for the ballot were gathered illegally. This would mean the measures would need to re-qualify for the ballot. Attorney General Bob Ferguson represented the secretary of state in the case.
In another case, the Washington Conservation Action Defense Fund sued Hobbs in an attempt to invalidate the secretary of state’s certification of the initiative to prevent the government from restricting natural gas.
“These frivolous attempts to keep the voters from having a voice when it comes to energy choice are undemocratic and nothing short of voter suppression,” Greg Lane, BIAW executive vice president, said in a news release. “In essence, they are conceding through these desperate tactics that they know Washingtonians want energy choice.”
He concluded, “We’re pleased the over half a million people who signed our petition to stop gas bans in Washington will have the opportunity to vote on this in November.”
Jackson Maynard, executive director and counsel of the Citizen Action Defense fund, offered his legal opinion on behalf of himself.
“In 22 years of legal practice, I’ve never seen a case progress this far without all necessary parties being before the court or at least being given the courtesy of a phone call about litigation as important as this,” he told The Center Square. “Participation in the initiative process is a fundamental right, and the idea that the state Supreme Court with the stroke of a pen could’ve eliminated the voices of the millions who signed the petitions in this case without even hearing from all impacted parties is really troubling.”
The Attorney General’s Office and Secretary of State’s Office weren’t immediately available for comment Friday night.
This is a developing story.
This report was first published by The Center Square Washington.
Also read:
- Fort Vancouver athletics improving under partnership with Trico LeagueFort Vancouver High School athletics are showing measurable gains in competition and participation during the second year of a partnership competing in the Class 1A Trico League.
- Opinion: Inviting courts into health care policy discussionElizabeth New (Hovde) warns that Senate Joint Resolution 8206 could invite lawsuits by placing vague health care mandates into Washington’s Constitution.
- Opinion: 24 States In. Washington Out? $732 Million Lost?Vicki Murray argues Washington risks forfeiting $732 million in federal education funding if state leaders do not opt into the federal tax-credit scholarship program.
- C-TRAN offering free service on Transit Equity Day, Feb. 4C-TRAN will offer free service across its entire system on February 4 in observance of Transit Equity Day, honoring the legacy of Rosa Parks.
- City of Battle Ground prepares for 75th Anniversary CelebrationThe City of Battle Ground is marking the 75th anniversary of its incorporation with a year-long series of community activities and celebrations planned throughout 2026.
- Opinion: Nationwide strike in support of illegals and opposing the rule of law?Lars Larson argues that a reported nationwide strike reflects opposition to immigration enforcement and the rule of law, criticizing political leaders and media coverage.
- POLL: Should councilors serving on boards be required to vote the way the full council decides?A new poll asks whether Clark County councilors serving on boards should be required to vote in line with the full council’s position or retain independent judgment.









I’d like to know what the allegations are to say the signatures had been collected in an illegal fashion.