Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 29A.72.180 (2026)

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

If the secretary of state refuses to file an initiative or referendum petition when submitted for filing, the persons submitting it for filing may, within ten days after the refusal, apply to the superior court of Thurston county for an order requiring the secretary of state to bring the petitions before the court, and for a writ of mandate to compel the secretary of state to file it. The application takes precedence over other cases and matters and must be speedily heard and determined.

If the court issues the citation, and determines that the petition is legal in form and apparently contains the requisite number of signatures and was submitted for filing within the time prescribed in the Constitution, it shall issue its mandate requiring the secretary of state to file it as of the date of submission for filing.

The decision of the superior court granting a writ of mandate is final.

[ 2003 c 111 s 1819; 1965 c 9 s 29.79.160. Prior: 1913 c 138 s 13, part; RRS s 5409, part. Formerly RCW 29.79.160.]

Notes:

Initiative, referendum, time for filing: State Constitution Art. 2 s 1 (a) and (d) (Amendment 7).

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 6 cases, 2006–2019 · leading case: City of Sequim v. Malkasian, 138 P.3d 943 (Wash. 2006).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

City of Sequim v. Malkasian, 138 P.3d 943 (Wash. 2006). “If the secretary of state refuses to file the measure, its sponsor may apply for a writ of mandate in the superior court of Thurston county, RCW 29A.72.180, and petition the Supreme Court for review.”

City of Sequim v. Malkasian, 157 Wash. 2d 251 (Wash. 2006). “If the secretary of state refuses to file the measure, its sponsor may apply for a writ of mandate in the Thurston County Superior Court, RCW 29A.72.180, and petition the Supreme Court for review.”

Cmty. Care Coalition of Wash. v. Reed, 200 P.3d 701 (Wash. 2009). · cites it 2× “¶ 14 At the outset, petitioners acknowledge they have no statutory right to challenge the secretary's decision to accept and file the petition as a petition for an initiative to the people.”

Cmty. Care Coalition v. Reed, 165 Wash. 2d 606 (Wash. 2009). · cites it 2× “¶14 At the outset, petitioners acknowledge they have no statutory right to challenge the secretary’s decision to accept and file the petition as a petition for an initiative to the people.”

Global Neighborhood v. Respect Washington, 434 P.3d 1024 (Wash. Ct. App. 2019). “The initiative if adopted will take effect regardless of any defect in its title.”

Respect Washington v. Burien Communities For Inclusion (Wash. Ct. App. 2019). “RCW 29A.72.180. This court recently considered an identical argument in Global Neighborhood v.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.