Wash. Rev. Code » Title 69 · Chapter 69.51A
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 69.51A.060 (2026)

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(1) It shall be a class 3 civil infraction to use or display medical cannabis in a manner or place which is open to the view of the general public.
(2) Nothing in this chapter establishes a right of care as a covered benefit or requires any state purchased health care as defined in RCW 41.05.011 or other health carrier or health plan as defined in Title 48 RCW to be liable for any claim for reimbursement for the medical use of cannabis. Such entities may enact coverage or noncoverage criteria or related policies for payment or nonpayment of medical cannabis in their sole discretion.
(3) Nothing in this chapter requires any health care professional to authorize the medical use of cannabis for a patient.
(4) Nothing in this chapter requires any accommodation of any on-site medical use of cannabis in any place of employment, in any youth center, in any correctional facility, or smoking cannabis in any public place or hotel or motel.
(5) Nothing in this chapter authorizes the possession or use of cannabis, cannabis concentrates, useable cannabis, or cannabis-infused products on federal property.
(6) Nothing in this chapter authorizes the use of medical cannabis by any person who is subject to the Washington code of military justice in chapter 38.38 RCW.
(7) Employers may establish drug-free work policies. Nothing in this chapter requires an accommodation for the medical use of cannabis if an employer has a drug-free workplace.
(8) No person shall be entitled to claim the protection from arrest and prosecution under RCW 69.51A.040 for engaging in the medical use of cannabis in a way that endangers the health or well-being of any person through the use of a motorized vehicle on a street, road, or highway, including violations of RCW 46.61.502 or 46.61.504, or equivalent local ordinances.
[ 2023 c 254 s 3; 2022 c 16 s 122; 2019 c 204 s 3; 2015 c 70 s 31; 2011 c 181 s 501; 2010 c 284 s 4; 2007 c 371 s 6; 1999 c 2 s 8 (Initiative Measure No. 692, approved November 3, 1998).]

Notes:

Intent—Finding—2022 c 16: See note following RCW 69.50.101.
Effective date—2015 c 70 ss 12, 19, 20, 23-26, 31, 35, 40, and 49: See note following RCW 69.50.357.
Short title—Findings—Intent—References to Washington state liquor control board—Draft legislation—2015 c 70: See notes following RCW 66.08.012.
Intent—2007 c 371: See note following RCW 69.51A.005.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5 cases, 2009–2019 · leading case: Roe v. TeleTech Customer Care Mgmt., 257 P.3d 586 (Wash. 2011).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Roe v. TeleTech Customer Care Mgmt., 257 P.3d 586 (Wash. 2011). · cites it 8× “" RCW 69.51A.060 (2007 amendment italicized).”
Roe v. TeleTech Customer Care Mgmt. (Colorado) LLC, 171 Wash. 2d 736 (Wash. 2011). · cites it 6× “” RCW 69.51A.060 (2007 amendment italicized).”
Whitmire v. Wal-Mart Stores Inc., 359 F. Supp. 3d 761 (D. Ariz. 2019). · cites it 4× “, RCW 69.51A.060, differs drastically from § 36-2813(B) of the AMMA as well.”
Roe v. Teletech Customer Care Mgmt., 216 P.3d 1055 (Wash. Ct. App. 2009). “The prohibition against "penaliz[ing] in any manner, or den[ying] any right or privilege" follows that provision's earlier limiting reference to those charged with violating a state criminal law relating to marijuana—that is, those charged and subject to criminal prosecution.…”
Roe v. Teletech Customer Care Mgmt. (Colorado), LLC, 152 Wash. App. 388 (Wash. Ct. App. 2009). “Former RCW 69.51A.040(1). The average voter would interpret this language as restricting the State from imposing penalties ancillary to criminal prosecution.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 69.51A.060(4) — 4 cases
Roe v. TeleTech Customer Care Mgmt., 257 P.3d 586 (Wash. 2011). “" RCW 69.51A.060 (2007 amendment italicized).”
Roe v. TeleTech Customer Care Mgmt. (Colorado) LLC, 171 Wash. 2d 736 (Wash. 2011). “” RCW 69.51A.060 (2007 amendment italicized).”
Roe v. Teletech Customer Care Mgmt., 216 P.3d 1055 (Wash. Ct. App. 2009). “The prohibition against "penaliz[ing] in any manner, or den[ying] any right or privilege" follows that provision's earlier limiting reference to those charged with violating a state criminal law relating to marijuana—that is, those charged and subject to criminal prosecution.…”
Roe v. Teletech Customer Care Mgmt. (Colorado), LLC, 152 Wash. App. 388 (Wash. Ct. App. 2009). “Former RCW 69.51A.040(1). The average voter would interpret this language as restricting the State from imposing penalties ancillary to criminal prosecution.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 69.51A.060(6) — 1 case
Whitmire v. Wal-Mart Stores Inc., 359 F. Supp. 3d 761 (D. Ariz. 2019). “, RCW 69.51A.060, differs drastically from § 36-2813(B) of the AMMA as well.”
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.