AN ACT Relating to gathering and preserving digital data and evidence relating to federal agent misconduct;
HB2651 would authorize the Washington State Patrol, at the direction of the Attorney General or a county prosecuting attorney, to gather and securely retain identifying digital data about federal agents who are the subject of a complaint alleging federal agent misconduct. The bill defines federal agent misconduct to include excessive force, assault, kidnapping or unlawful detention, and actions that lead to a credible complaint alleging a violation of federal constitutional rights. It also defines the kinds of digital information that may be collected, including license plate data, cell tower and cellphone data, location data, image search results, GPS data, stingray data, facial recognition data, and other recoverable digital data that may help identify the agents involved.
The bill further allows a complainant to access identifying digital data relevant to their complaint only through a court order, and only in connection with either a civil proceeding alleging a violation of federal constitutional rights by the subject of the complaint or a criminal proceeding involving that subject. In effect, the measure creates a state-level process for preserving evidence tied to alleged misconduct by federal law enforcement personnel and for limiting access to that evidence through judicial oversight.
HB2651 would add a new section to chapter 43 of the Revised Code of Washington, creating a statutory framework for collecting, preserving, and conditionally disclosing digital evidence related to alleged misconduct by federal agents. It would expand the role of the Washington State Patrol and the Attorney General or county prosecutors in responding to complaints involving federal law enforcement conduct, while also establishing court-supervised access for complainants. The bill would affect state law enforcement procedures, evidence preservation practices, and the handling of complaints involving federal officers or contractors assisting federal law enforcement.
Based on the bill text alone, the measure appears to be framed as a civil-rights and accountability bill aimed at preserving evidence of alleged misconduct by federal agents. No committee transcripts or recorded votes were provided, so there is no direct evidence of support or opposition from hearings or floor action. The overall tone of the bill is protective of complainants and focused on documentation and accountability rather than punishment.
The main points of potential contention are the scope of state authority over federal agents, the breadth of the digital data that may be collected, and privacy/civil-liberties concerns associated with technologies such as GPS tracking, cell-site data, stingray data, and facial recognition. Supporters would likely emphasize evidence preservation, accountability, and access to justice for complainants, while critics may question whether the state should direct collection of information about federal officers or whether the bill could intrude on privacy, law-enforcement operations, or federal-state relations.