Senate Bill 6362 amends multiple sections of the protection order statutes (chapter 7.105 RCW) and related statutes and adds at least one new section. It requires the Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC), subject to available funds, to establish and maintain a credentialing program for spoken language interpreters with testing, training, lists of credentialed interpreters, periodic exams in eastern and western Washington, different credential types (including heightened credentials for simultaneous interpretation), and authority to charge reasonable fees for testing, training, and credentialing. The bill also mandates court interpreter appointment rules for parties who are deaf, hard of hearing, or have limited English proficiency, limits simultaneous-interpretation intervals to 30 minutes, requires certain recordings of simultaneous remote interpretation, and directs courts to provide technology and private space for interpretation and sight translation. The bill makes substantial procedural changes to protection order hearings: it designates these hearings as special proceedings that supersede inconsistent civil rules; prioritizes ex parte temporary orders and certain law-enforcement-filed extreme risk orders; allows remote participation with advance notice (generally three judicial days) and prohibits fees for remote appearances; restricts discovery before hearings unless a written motion is filed six judicial days in advance; relaxes some rules of evidence while preserving privileges and rape-shield protections and sets specific procedures for motions to admit a petitioner’s prior sexual activity; requires courts to take steps for party safety and access (for example, physical separation, security escorts, and interpreter conferencing time during recesses); and requires judicial training on trauma-informed and related topics with AOC-developed, free training and a directed AOC review of certain rulings from 2017 through 2027. The bill expands and clarifies court relief and enforcement: it lists broad nonexhaustive remedies a court may grant (for example exclusion from residences or schools, specified-distance prohibitions presumptively at least 1,000 feet, electronic monitoring, mental health or chemical dependency evaluations, treatment program referrals, child residential provisions, orders about pets and personal effects, restraints on cyber harassment and abusive litigation, and short-term restraints on property transfers), requires school districts to provide alternate education and transportation if a minor respondent is excluded from an assigned public school, and continues the presumption that minors are unable to pay costs. It changes penalties and enforcement: certain violations are contempt, some violations are gross misdemeanors subject to electronic monitoring and a $15 fine remitted to the domestic violence prevention account, officers must arrest without a warrant when there is probable cause and knowledge of the order, and the bill creates broader criminal escalation—specific protection-order violations can be class C felonies (including repeated violations or conduct creating substantial risk of death or serious injury). The bill also amends the state law on recording private communications (RCW 9.73.030) by restating prohibitions and exceptions and provides that the act may be cited as "Zhen's law." Several excerpts in the provided material are incomplete or cut off and other listed sections in the bill header (for example a new section to chapter 7.105 and portions of RCW 7.105.245, 7.105.255, 7.105.310, 7.105.450, and the full amended text of RCW 9.73.030) are not fully included here, so some specific language, definitions, and final subsections are missing from this summary.

If enacted, courts and the state Administrative Office of the Courts will need to build new systems and processes for protection order cases and for language access. The AOC is expected to create a statewide credentialing program for spoken-language interpreters with testing and training available in both eastern and western Washington, and it can charge reasonable fees for those services subject to funding. Trial courts will be required to prioritize emergency protection hearings, offer and verify remote appearances, protect participants’ contact information, limit prehearing discovery, and shorten or reset hearings quickly when respondents are not served. Judges and commissioners must receive specialized, ongoing training on trauma-informed practices, domestic violence dynamics, and related topics if funds are provided. Interpreters will face stricter qualification rules (no advocates serving as interpreters, limits on simultaneous interpretation intervals, and required technology support), and courts must provide private spaces and interpreter time for limited-English and deaf parties. These changes shift costs and responsibilities to several groups: the AOC will need appropriations to run credentialing and free judicial training; local courts may need more technology, staff time, and security to manage prioritized calendars, remote hearing logistics, and contempt or criminal enforcement; school districts must arrange alternative education and free transportation if a minor respondent is excluded from their assigned public school; respondents may be ordered to pay electronic monitoring or reimburse petitioners, though courts must consider ability to pay; and law enforcement and county jails will face faster arrest and magistrate appearance timelines along with stiffer contempt/felony consequences for violations. Some implementation details and cross-references are missing from the provided text (several sections are cut off and other cited provisions are not included), so the full resource needs and precise procedures remain uncertain.