This bill amends RCW 70.48.140. It lets a person in charge of a jail choose to receive and keep people confined or committed by U.S. process when there is room, and to treat those individuals the same as persons committed under state process. Except when there is a valid judicial warrant, the jail must have a contract with the United States in place before accepting any person in federal custody, and each contract must include a fee equal to the total cost to the jail of confining or committing that individual. If the expected funds from the United States are not received, or there is an indication they will not be received as provided by the contract, the jail must stop agreeing to hold federal detainees. The bill also prohibits any county or municipality, except when there is a valid judicial warrant, from contracting with the United States to confine or commit an individual who has been transported across any state line. Affected parties include county and municipal jails, the officials in charge of those jails, the United States as a contracting party, and individuals in federal custody. This is a modification of existing law imposing procedural and contractual requirements and financial terms for accepting federal detainees and adding a prohibition on interstate transported persons being accepted by local contract; it does not create a new crime or specify new penalties in the provided text. The extracted text does not define key terms (for example, "valid judicial warrant," "total cost to the jail," or "transported across any state line"), does not state an effective date, and does not indicate whether existing contracts are grandfathered or how noncompliance would be enforced.

If enacted, county and city jails would only take federal detainees without a court-issued warrant when they have a preexisting contract with the United States that pays the jail the full cost of holding the person. Jail officials would gain clearer authority to refuse federal inmates unless payment and a contract are in place, and they would be required to stop accepting federal detainees if promised federal funds are not received or appear unlikely. The groups most affected are county and municipal jails and the local officials who run them, who would see stronger funding protection but also new paperwork and the operational risk of suddenly having to stop accepting federal transfers if payments fail. The federal government would need to cover the total confinement cost or face fewer local holding options. The bill leaves unclear key details such as definitions (for example, what counts as a valid judicial warrant or total cost), whether existing contracts are grandfathered, the effective date, and how noncompliance would be enforced.