The bill would create a new section in chapter 28B.10 RCW that requires certain public higher education governing boards to adopt a free speech policy statement. Affected entities named are the boards of regents of the state universities, the boards of trustees of the regional universities, the Evergreen State College board, and the boards of trustees of each community and technical college district. The required policy statement must articulate principles comparable to the University of Chicago "Chicago principles" or "Chicago statement" and, at minimum, commit to: (1) promote and protect free and open inquiry; (2) promote and protect completely free and open discussion of ideas while maintaining a climate of mutual respect; (3) promote and protect the principle of debate or deliberation without judgment by the institution; and (4) act in conformity with the principle of free expression and not obstruct or otherwise interfere with others’ freedom to express views they reject. The provision requires the governing boards to adopt the statement in collaboration with faculty and students. This is a procedural change establishing a new statutory requirement; the bill does not create a new criminal offense or change penalties. The text provided does not include a deadline for adoption, any enforcement mechanism, penalties, reporting requirements, or detailed procedures for how collaboration with faculty and students must occur. It also does not define the "Chicago principles" or "Chicago statement" or indicate whether private institutions are affected. The bill is identified as S-0174.1 / Senate Bill 5608 and was read for the first time on 01/31/25 and referred to the Committee on Higher Education & Workforce Development.

If enacted, public higher education governing boards in Washington (state and regional universities, The Evergreen, and community and technical college districts) would be required to adopt a written free speech policy that follows the University of Chicago–style principles and, at minimum, promises to protect open inquiry, respectful open discussion, debate without institutional judgment, and not to obstruct others’ expression. That means each board will have to set aside time and staff to work with faculty and students to draft and formally adopt such a statement, and campuses will likely foreground these specific free-speech commitments in their official policies. The bill does not provide money, set a deadline, define the Chicago principles, or create enforcement or reporting rules, so practical effects will mainly be administrative: boards must undertake the policy-writing process but can decide timing and details. Costs are likely limited to staff and meeting time; the risk is unresolved tensions over how to interpret or apply the principles because key implementation details are left unclear.