This bill amends RCW 9A.36.080 (and 2024 c 34 s 1) to define and clarify a state hate crime offense. It makes a person guilty of a hate crime if they maliciously and intentionally assault another person, cause physical damage to or destruction of another’s property, or threaten a specific person or group and place that person or group in reasonable fear of harm to person or property, in whole or in part because of the defendant’s perception of a protected characteristic. The statute lists protected characteristics (race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender expression or identity, and mental, physical, or sensory disability), defines “threat” and a “reasonable person” standard tied to the victim’s protected characteristic(s), and classifies commission of a hate crime as a class C felony. The bill also sets evidentiary and procedural rules: words alone are not a hate crime unless context shows they are a threat, and threatening words are not a hate crime if it is apparent the speaker lacks the ability to carry out the threat. Unless evidence establishes otherwise, the trier of fact may infer intent to threaten because of perception of a protected characteristic when the defendant commits specified egregious acts (including cross burning on property of a person perceived as African American, defacing Jewish property with Nazi symbols, placing a noose on property of a person perceived to be a racial or ethnic minority, and like items). That inference provision is limited to creating a reasonable inference and does not restrict prosecution when facts fall outside the listed examples. The bill provides that mistake about a victim’s protected characteristic is not a defense, limits introduction of a defendant’s expressions or associations as substantive evidence unless directly related to the charged crime, permits separate prosecution and punishment for other crimes committed during a hate crime, notes victims may still seek other legal remedies, and expressly states it does not create or expand civil rights beyond existing constitutional or statutory law. Affected actors include prosecutors, courts/triers of fact, victims, and accused persons. The bill was prefiled 12/13/24, read first time 01/13/25, and referred to the Committee on Law & Justice. The extracted text does not include an effective date, detailed sentencing ranges beyond classification as a class C felony, fiscal notes, or additional implementation provisions.

If enacted, the bill creates a clearer, stand‑alone hate crime felony for intentionally assaulting someone, damaging their property, or threatening them when the act is motivated at least in part by how the offender perceives a protected characteristic (race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, disability, etc.). It also lists specific situations — burning a cross, placing a noose, defacing Jewish property with Nazi symbols, removing religious garb, and similar acts — where a judge or jury may reasonably infer the offender intended the act as a threat. Ordinary insults won’t qualify unless they amount to a real threat, and a mistaken belief about a person’s identity won’t excuse the conduct. Prosecutors and courts are most affected: prosecutors will have clearer grounds to charge and to rely on specified inferences in certain fact patterns, which could increase hate crime prosecutions; courts will see more cases requiring these bias determinations. People accused of underlying crimes face the added risk of a separate class C felony charge; victims perceived to be in protected groups gain a more explicit route to felony prosecution and do not lose other remedies. The bill does not show an effective date, specific sentence ranges beyond the felony classification, or any fiscal or implementation details, so the likely impact on caseloads, budgets, and exact punishments is unclear.