The proposal, which has drawn 900 written comments this year, would raise the legal standard for imposing monetary bail and cap bail at $200 for most misdemeanors, excluding DUI, domestic violence, and charges involving sexual motivation or unlawful firearm use. It would also create a "strong presumption" that judges allow defendants to post a 10% refundable deposit with the court instead of paying a nonrefundable fee to a bail bond company.

"For people with money, bail is a condition of release," said Katie Hurley, special counsel for criminal policy and practice at the King County Department of Public Defense, during the hearing. "For people without money, it becomes an order of pretrial detention."

The amendments were proposed by public defense offices for the state and for King and Snohomish counties, along with the Washington Defender Association. Under the current rule, judges can set bail based on whether a person is likely to fail to appear for a court hearing. The proposal would instead require a finding of "high likelihood of willful flight from prosecution" — a tougher evidentiary bar that opponents say is nearly impossible to meet at a first appearance.

King County Prosecutor Leesa Manion argued the change would effectively reduce court-ordered bail by 90%, leading to a "significant" number of people bonding out. She contended that bail bond companies serve as an important check, incentivizing defendants to return to court. The Washington Superior Court Judges' Association also urged the court to reject the proposal, writing that it "sharply" constrains judicial discretion.

Several justices questioned whether changing the rule would address disparities in how bail is applied across counties. "One of the themes in the research that we've been reviewing is that culture and education of judges is equally, or perhaps more important than changing the rules themselves," Justice Theo Angelis said.

Justice Sal Mungia, speaking before arguments began, said the court was tackling "some very complex issues" and was "trying to craft the best rules that we can for all the people of the state of Washington."

The hearing also exposed procedural tensions. Some opponents criticized the court for revising the proposal less than two weeks before the hearing. Prosecutor Jason Cummings said he felt like "Charlie Brown when Lucy is holding the football." Jefferson County prosecutor James Kennedy sharply criticized the court, saying: "When I-5 public defenders say 'jump,' this court responds with 'how high.'"

Republican legislators submitted a letter arguing the court was going "beyond procedural rulemaking" and raising "serious separation of powers concerns." The criticism reflects a broader debate over whether the judiciary should make policy on bail rather than leave it to the Legislature.

Supporters pointed to other states that have adopted similar "willful flight" standards. Hurley cited Illinois, New York, and Vermont, and noted that after Illinois passed its Pretrial Fairness Act in 2023, "the sky did not fall. People are coming to court." In Cook County, Illinois, 62% of prosecutors' detention petitions were still granted under the new standard, and 83% of defendants were not charged with a new crime while on pretrial release, according to county data.

Nationally, about two-thirds of people in local jails have not been convicted of the crime they are held on, and the pretrial population grew 433% between 1970 and 2015, largely due to increased use of monetary bail, according to the Vera Institute of Justice.

After the hearing, the court's rulemaking committee will meet and send a full recommendation to the justices, who can adopt, reject, or amend the proposal. The decision will shape how thousands of Washington residents await trial each year — and whether wealth continues to determine who stays in jail and who goes home.