The bill adds a new section to chapter 2.06 RCW authorizing court of appeals bailiffs to conduct threat assessments for court of appeals judicial officers and staff. It requires the court of appeals to ensure bailiffs who perform these threat assessment duties are qualified by training and experience, authorizes those bailiffs to receive criminal history record information that includes nonconviction data exclusively for investigations of persons who make a threat (as defined in RCW 9A.04.110), prohibits use or dissemination of those records for unauthorized purposes, and requires founded threats to be referred to local law enforcement, which may report outcomes and anticipated actions back to the bailiffs. The bill also amends RCW 10.97.050 to specify permissible dissemination rules for criminal history record information, explicitly allowing dissemination of nonconviction data to bailiffs of the supreme court for RCW 2.04.260 investigations and to court of appeals bailiffs for investigations under the new section. The amended provision includes a retention requirement that criminal justice agencies keep records of each dissemination (except notifications that the agency has no record) for at least one year and references other dissemination exceptions and recipients such as the state auditor and certain contractors under statutory limits. This is a procedural change regarding access to and handling of criminal history information and threat assessment authority; it does not create a new crime or change criminal penalties. The extracted text does not include the statutory definition of "threat" (RCW 9A.04.110), a definition of "founded threats," specific training or qualification standards, an effective date for the new provisions, or a filing/approval date despite showing legislative passage (prefiled 01/07/26; passed Senate 02/10/26, Yeas 49 Nays 0; passed House 03/04/26, Yeas 96 Nays 0).

If enacted, court of appeals bailiffs will take on a new role doing threat assessments for court of appeals judges and staff and will be allowed to receive criminal history information that includes nonconviction data specifically for investigating people who make threats. That will likely increase bailiffs’ responsibilities and require the court to fund or arrange qualifying training and experience, while local law enforcement can expect more referrals to investigate “founded threats” and may need to report investigation outcomes back to the bailiffs. Criminal justice agencies will have to share certain nonconviction records with supreme and court of appeals bailiffs as allowed and keep a record of each dissemination for at least one year, creating modest administrative work and some privacy risk because access to nonconviction data is expanded. Important details are missing here — the statutory definition of “threat,” what counts as a “founded threat,” the specific training standards, and the bill’s effective date — so the exact scope of access, oversight, and any cost or liability implications remain uncertain.