A Thurston County Superior Court judge has upheld the state’s fiscal impact disclosure for a ballot measure that would repeal Washington’s income tax on high earners, according to reporting by the Washington State Standard and The Center Square. The ruling on Friday, August 8, 2026, ensures that voters in Clark County and across the state will see a specific warning on their November ballots regarding the potential loss of public funding.

Initiative 645 seeks to repeal the 9.9 percent tax on individual and household wage income exceeding $1 million per year. Under state law, the Attorney General’s office is required to draft a Public Investment Impact Disclosure (PIID) for such measures. The language approved by Judge Chris Lanese states:

This measure would decrease funding for public K-12 education, higher education (including universities and community colleges), and human services (primarily healthcare).

In an opinion letter published by Clark County Today, Vancouver resident Jonathan Hines argued that the language represents politically charged framing rather than a neutral disclosure. The Attorney General’s office, led by Nick Brown, maintained that the statement provides necessary context regarding financial tradeoffs. Judge Lanese ruled that the disclosure is constitutional and serves to inform voters of the measure’s consequences.

The court’s decision also resulted in the cancellation of a separate hearing that had been scheduled for later that same Friday. That hearing was intended to address a legal challenge brought by Let’s Go Washington, the primary campaign organization sponsoring the initiative. Brian Heywood, the founder of Let’s Go Washington, expressed sharp condemnation of the procedural move, as the ruling on the individual challenge effectively preempted the campaign’s opportunity to present its own arguments in court.

The outcome of the Initiative 645 challenge means the current PIID language will remain on the ballot as drafted by the state, despite the objections from the initiative’s sponsors regarding procedural fairness and perceived bias.

Source: Letter: Why judicial activism threatens Washington Democracy