Wash. Rev. Code » Title 9 · Chapter 9.41
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 9.41.290 (2026)

State preemption

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
The state of Washington hereby fully occupies and preempts the entire field of firearms regulation within the boundaries of the state, including the registration, licensing, possession, purchase, sale, acquisition, transfer, discharge, and transportation of firearms, or any other element relating to firearms or parts thereof, including ammunition and reloader components. Cities, towns, and counties or other municipalities may enact only those laws and ordinances relating to firearms that are specifically authorized by state law, as in RCW 9.41.300, and are consistent with this chapter. Such local ordinances shall have the same penalty as provided for by state law. Local laws and ordinances that are inconsistent with, more restrictive than, or exceed the requirements of state law shall not be enacted and are preempted and repealed, regardless of the nature of the code, charter, or home rule status of such city, town, county, or municipality.
[ 1994 sp.s. c 7 s 428; 1985 c 428 s 1; 1983 c 232 s 12.]

Notes:

Finding—Intent—Severability—1994 sp.s. c 7: See notes following RCW 43.70.540.
Effective date—1994 sp.s. c 7 ss 401-410, 413-416, 418-437, and 439-460: See note following RCW 9.41.010.
Severability—1985 c 428: "If any provision of this act or its application to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the remainder of the act or the application of the provision to other persons or circumstances is not affected." [ 1985 c 428 s 6.]
Application—1983 c 232 s 12: "Section 12 of this act shall not apply to any offense committed prior to July 24, 1983." [ 1983 c 232 s 13.]
Severability—1983 c 232: See note following RCW 9.41.010.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 18 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1986–2022 · leading case: Pac. Nw. Shooting Park Ass'n v. City of Sequim, 144 P.3d 276 (Wash. 2006).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Pac. Nw. Shooting Park Ass'n v. City of Sequim, 144 P.3d 276 (Wash. 2006). · cites it 22× “It also claimed that the city’s actions violated RCW 9.41.290 and .300. PNSPA later argued that the city interfered with its business expectancies with *346 vendors and the general public, but it failed to amend its complaint to add this claim.”
Cherry v. Mun. of Metro. Seattle, 808 P.2d 746 (Wash. 1991). · cites it 22× “The Court of Appeals held that RCW 9.41.290 preempted ¿nd invalidated Metro's regulation of firearms possession by municipal employees.”
Brett Bass, Respondents/cross-app. v. City Of Edmonds, Apps./cross-resp., 481 P.3d 596 (Wash. Ct. App. 2021). · cites it 32× “We conclude the Gun Owners have standing to raise their pre-enforcement challenge and hold that the ordinance is, regardless of its arguable benefits to public safety, preempted by RCW 9.41.290. No. 80755-2-I/2 FACTUAL BACKGROUND In 2018, the Edmonds City Council enacted…”
Chan v. City of Seattle, 164 Wash. App. 549 (Wash. Ct. App. 2011). · cites it 41× “¶1 Except as authorized in RCW 9.41.290, the legislature expressly preempts municipalities from enacting firearm regulations prohibiting the possession of firearms.”
City of Seattle v. Ballsmider, 856 P.2d 1113 (Wash. Ct. App. 1993). · cites it 16× “In RCW 9.41.290, the Legislature declared its intent to preempt the field of firearms regulation, stating: The state of Washington hereby fully occupies and preempts the entire field of firearms regulation within the boundaries of the state, including the registration,…”
Cherry v. Mun. of Metro. Seattle, 787 P.2d 73 (Wash. Ct. App. 1990). · cites it 22× “[2] RCW 9.41.290 provides that the State "fully occupies and preempts the entire field of firearms regulation", that local laws and ordinances that are "inconsistent with, more restrictive than, or exceed the requirements of state law" are preempted, and that "[c]ities, towns,…”
Omar Abdul Alim v. City Of Seattle, 474 P.3d 589 (Wash. Ct. App. 2020). · cites it 2× “The challengers claim that the ordinance, prohibiting the unsecured or uncontrolled storage of firearms, violates RCW 9.41.290, which preempts “the entire field of firearms regulation within the boundaries of the state.”
PNSPA v. City of Sequim, 144 P.3d 276 (Wash. 2006). · cites it 23× “It also claimed that the city's actions violated RCW 9.41.290 and .300. PNSPA later argued that the city interfered *278 with its business expectancies with vendors and the general public, but it failed to amend its complaint to add this claim.”
Chan v. City of Seattle, 265 P.3d 169 (Wash. Ct. App. 2011). · cites it 41× “¶ 1 Except as authorized in RCW 9.41.290, the legislature expressly preempts municipalities from enacting firearm regulations prohibiting the possession of firearms.”
Bass v. City of Edmonds, 508 P.3d 172 (Wash. 2022). · cites it 13× “The plaintiffs contend that both operative portions of the ordinance are preempted by RCW 9.41.290. “A state statute preempts an ordinance if the statute occupies the field or if the statute and the ordinance irreconcilably conflict.”
Knott v. Liberty Jewelry & Loan, Inc., 748 P.2d 661 (Wash. Ct. App. 1988). “Knott argues that given this knowledge, RSR Wholesale Guns was under a duty to warn retailers of the "dangerous propensities of the Saturday Night Specials" and to provide retailers with safe marketing guidelines, and that Liberty was under a duty to go beyond statutory mínimums…”
Watson v. City of Seattle (Wash. 2017). · cites it 39× “RCW 9.41.290 forbids the local regulation of guns.”
Show all 18 citing cases →
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.