Pierce County Sheriff Keith Swank threatened legislators at a January 15 committee hearing. “When you try to remove me from office, thousands of Pierce County residents will surround the County-City Building in downtown Tacoma and will not allow that to happen,” he told the Senate Law & Justice Committee. “I hope it doesn’t come to that, but I and they are prepared. Are you prepared?”
The Washington Association of Sheriffs and Police Chiefs announced within hours it was considering expelling him.
Senate Bill 5974 would give an unelected state board power to unseat elected sheriffs. Swank’s testimony made the case for why sponsors believe that’s necessary.
The bill, prefiled January 5 by eleven Democratic senators led by John Lovick, creates state-level eligibility requirements for sheriffs, police chiefs, and town marshals. The Washington State Patrol would conduct mandatory background investigations on all sheriff candidates before the filing deadline. The Criminal Justice Training Commission would publicly post which candidates are “eligible” or “ineligible.” The bill creates automatic vacancy if a sheriff loses CJTC certification or fails to maintain eligibility—giving an unelected state board power to end the career of an official elected by county voters.
The emergency clause declares the bill “necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, or safety.” The effective date is April 30, 2026—before the filing deadline for thirty-five sheriff races this November.
Sponsors frame the bill as establishing professional standards. Sheriffs would need to be at least 25 years old, have five years of full-time law enforcement experience, hold no felony or gross misdemeanor convictions, and never have had certification denied or revoked in any state.
The bill’s purpose is codifying state control over sheriffs who refuse to enforce laws they believe are unconstitutional—and giving the state apparatus power to remove them without recall elections or voter input.
The bill incorporates the 2021 In re Recall of Fortney ruling, which held that sheriffs must enforce laws “as interpreted by the Washington Supreme Court.” That decision followed multiple sheriffs declining to enforce Initiative 1639’s gun restrictions in 2018 and 2019. Klickitat County Sheriff Bob Songer announced he would not enforce it. Loren Culp in Republic refused. Grant County, Ferry County, Stevens County, Lincoln County—sheriffs across rural Washington refused to enforce the measure, citing their oath to the Constitution, not to the legislature.
The Washington Attorney General’s office sued Adams County in 2019 after its sheriff refused to enforce I-1639. The state won. The court ruled that sheriffs enforce laws as written and as interpreted by courts. They don’t independently determine constitutionality.
The defiance continued. When Washington passed the Keep Washington Working Act in 2019, prohibiting local law enforcement from cooperating with federal immigration enforcement without judicial warrants, multiple sheriffs announced they would continue working with ICE. Attorney General Nick Brown sued Adams County again in 2024 over immigration cooperation. Governor Bob Ferguson, who spent years as AG suing sheriffs over gun laws, took office this month with a public safety agenda that includes SB 5974 and a ban on law enforcement face coverings at protests.
The pattern is clear. Washington Democrats are systematically removing local discretion over law enforcement policy. SB 5974 is the mechanism: if you won’t enforce our laws, we’ll decertify you and install someone who will.
Sheriff Swank is facing three separate CJTC investigations. The first stems from disciplinary actions at Seattle Police Department before he became sheriff. The second involves Facebook posts questioning transgender policies. The third relates to comments about legislative testimony being “traitorous.” He told legislators during the hearing that sheriffs hold “supreme authority” over law enforcement in their counties. The Washington Supreme Court has repeatedly rejected this position. The Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association embraces it and has been organizing resistance to state oversight.
The CSPOA ideology holds that county sheriffs are the highest constitutional authority in their jurisdictions, superior to federal and state officials, empowered to nullify laws they deem unconstitutional. It’s a fringe legal theory with no basis in Washington jurisprudence, but it has adherents in sheriff’s offices across the West. If Swank loses his certification before November 2026 and SB 5974 passes, he would be automatically removed from office mid-term. No recall election. No voter input. The state board decides.
Senator Lovick, a former Snohomish County sheriff, framed the bill as ensuring professional standards and protecting public safety. He pointed to sheriffs who have lost certification for criminal conduct or gross misconduct—situations where a county would be stuck with an ineligible sheriff for years until the next election.
Opponents see the state arrogating power to remove elected officials for ideological non-compliance, a backdoor recall process that bypasses voters entirely, Democrats weaponizing professional standards to purge sheriffs who won’t enforce progressive policies. The timing matters: April 30, 2026, ensures this bill governs the upcoming election cycle.
The bill faces legal challenges if it passes. Constitutional questions include whether the state can impose eligibility requirements on county elected officials beyond what’s in the constitution, whether the legislature can delegate effective recall power to an appointed board, and whether stripping sheriffs of enforcement discretion violates separation of powers.
Democrats hold majorities in both chambers. The Senate Law & Justice Committee holds its executive session January 22. The legislative session ends March 12. If the bill passes and Governor Ferguson signs it, sheriffs have promised legal challenges to the state Supreme Court—the same court that ruled against them in Fortney.
Washington Democrats believe voters will accept state control over sheriffs in exchange for professional standards and accountability. Republican sheriffs believe voters will reject state bureaucrats overruling local elections. Sheriff Swank has promised that thousands will surround the building if the state removes him.
The legislature will decide which vision of law enforcement authority prevails in Washington.
Support Independent Local Journalism — High Country Advocate was created as a real alternative to regional media that too often silences dissenting voices while taking sides in the political struggle. Producing in-depth, unflinching reporting like this series and others is expensive: servers, editing, research time, and legal review all add up quickly. If these articles have informed you or given you new perspective, please consider supporting HCA with a paid subscription — every subscriber helps keep this reporting strong and independent. 