AN ACT Relating to prohibiting law enforcement training with certain foreign entities;
Bill Description
Prohibiting law enforcement training with certain foreign entities.
What this bill does Powered by Legitron
This bill creates new statutory prohibitions by adding sections to RCW 10.93, 43.43, and 43.101. It bars general authority and limited authority Washington law enforcement agencies and their officers, the Washington State Patrol and its officers, and a referenced "commission" from participating in any training program, exchange, or partnership with any foreign country's military forces, intelligence agencies, or security services. It also prohibits those agencies and the commission from funding, sponsoring, or facilitating officers' travel to foreign countries for the purpose of such training.
The change is a new-law prohibition on specified training relationships and on funding or facilitating travel for that training; it is a substantive statutory restriction rather than a penalty change or procedural rule. The bill includes a severability clause. The extracted text does not supply definitions for key terms (for example, "the commission," "peace officer," "participate," or "facilitate"), does not state an effective date, and does not include enforcement mechanisms, penalties, oversight, exceptions, or compliance procedures.
Bill header information from the extract: Prefiled 01/07/26; read first time 01/12/26; referred to the Committee on Community Safety.
Why it matters Powered by Legitron
If enacted, Washington generaland limited-authority law enforcement agencies, the Washington State Patrol, and the unnamed "commission" would no longer be able to take part in, fund, sponsor, or facilitate any training, exchange, or partnership with foreign military forces, intelligence agencies, or security services, and the commission could not include or send peace officers to such programs. Agencies that previously relied on international training or exchanges would lose those options, likely stopping any current or planned travel-based programs and shifting training needs and budgets toward domestic alternatives or cancelling certain specialized instruction.
Key practical uncertainties remain: the bill text does not define critical terms (for example, which body "the commission" refers to, who counts as a covered peace officer, or what counts as "participate" or "facilitate"), nor does it specify an effective date, enforcement mechanisms, or penalties. That ambiguity would leave affected agencies unclear about the scope of prohibited activities and could require internal policy development or legal guidance before they can implement the change.