Justice vs. safety: Washington lawmakers clash over sentencing reform bill

The House Community Safety Committee advanced a bill Thursday that opens the door to a possible floor vote on one of the most significant law and justice bills of this legislative session and it involves sentencing reform.

House Bill 1125 (HB 1125) would allow certain incarcerated individuals to petition for a reduced sentence if their original sentence no longer aligns with the “interests of justice.” Judges would have judicial discretion to determine what qualifies as the “interests of justice.”

Supporters say it’s about second chances and smarter criminal justice policies. Opponents warn it could put public safety at risk and ignore the voices of victims.

Currently, people convicted of felonies in Washington have very few options to challenge their sentences. Even if they’ve turned their lives around in prison, they can’t ask a judge to reconsider their sentence — only a prosecutor can do that.

HB 1125 changes this by allowing individuals to petition for a sentence modification if they meet certain criteria.

The bill rolls out eligibility in phases, starting in 2026. Those who committed crimes at 17 or younger and have served at least seven years, or those with terminal illnesses, can apply. Over time, the criteria expand to include older offenders and those who’ve served longer sentences. By 2032, individuals convicted as adults who have served at least ten years could petition for resentencing.

Judges would be required to hold a hearing for eligible applicants and consider factors such as rehabilitation efforts, disciplinary records, and whether the person poses a risk if released.

More from Matt Markovich: Washington lawmakers push to slash parking requirements, paving way for new housing

The case for the sentencing reform bill: Rehabilitation, cost savings

Supporters argue that the bill is based on research, not just emotions. They say keeping people incarcerated long past their risk of reoffending is both unnecessary and expensive.

Rep. Tarra Simmons, a Democrat from Bremerton who supports the bill and is the state’s first formerly incarcerated lawmaker, said Thursday many people in prison are victims of crimes, too.

“Everyone I knew in prison was a victim of trafficking, of sexual assault, of childhood abuse, and we forget that and think that they’re just throwaways and can never be redeemed,” she said.

She also pointed to the financial cost of prolonged incarceration.

“The recidivism rate of people who’ve served long sentences and then get a resentencing is so small,” Simmons added. “Yet, out of our feelings and not based on research and data, we continue the prolonged incarceration of people.”

She noted that it costs $3.2 billion every biennium to keep people in prison.

“A lot of individuals would be safe in our communities, and the research and data have shown that,” she said.

Parental rights showdown: WA lawmakers accuse one another of lying about student privacy

The case against the sentencing reform bill: Public safety, victim rights

Not everyone is on board with the legislation. Opponents argue the bill focuses too much on those who committed crimes and not enough on the victims.

Rep. Lauren Davis, D-Shoreline, broke ranks with her Democratic colleagues and voted with Republicans against the bill Thursday.

She shared a deeply personal story about her experience navigating the criminal justice system after her abuser — a lobbyist working at the Capitol — was convicted last year.

“Every single thing in that courtroom was built for my abuser — every document, every court procedure, every pretrial ruling, every ruling on an objection of counsel. All of it. All of it built for his protection and not mine,” Davis explained.

Davis also pointed out the bill would allow individuals originally charged with serious crimes — including aggravated murder — to petition for a reduced sentence.

“The title of this act provides for judicial discretion to modify sentences in the interest of justice, but I must ask—justice for whom?” Davis said during the committee meeting.

“As currently construed, this bill provides justice only for the person who has caused harm. It’s not that I don’t see the rehabilitation of some of our incarcerated individuals—I do. But there’s a victim on the other side of this. I see their brokenness too. Their wounds matter too.”

During a public hearing last week on the bill, Davis questioned King County Superior Court Judge Veronica Galván, who has faced criticism for releasing violent criminals, about whether she felt responsible when individuals she released reoffended.

Galván appeared frustrated by the question and responded that not all judges are perfect.

More from Olympia: Washington House committee advances controversial firearm bills amid heated debate

Rep. Jenny Graham, R-Spokane, brought up that exchange when she voiced opposition to the bill.

“We heard testimony from a judge who has made terrible decisions that have gotten people hurt and people killed, and her reaction when she was questioned about it — she did not care, and she was angry that she was being questioned about it,” Graham said.

She argued the bill shifts the burden onto victims’ families if an activist judge releases someone early, leading to tragedy.

“When we have somebody committing a crime and they’re not doing what the police are asking them to do, we have families that are literally suing for millions of dollars,” she said.

Graham added a point about being on the other side of a judge’s decision like this.

“But if you’re on the other end of this, where a judge makes a decision and lets that person out and their family members are hurt or killed, there’s no recourse.”

At its core, the debate over HB 1125 comes down to a fundamental question: Can the justice system craft policies that acknowledge rehabilitation without compromising public safety?

The committee voted 5-4 to give the bill a “do pass” recommendation, with Davis as the only Democrat joining the committee’s three Republicans in opposition. It now heads to a potential floor vote in the House.

Matt Markovich often covers the state legislature and public policy for KIRO Newsradio. You can read more of Matt’s stories here. Follow him on X, or email him here.

Follow @https://twitter.com/mattmarkovich