Skip to main content
Evergreen Ledger

2SHB 1391

Signed

House

Court alternatives/youth

Improving developmentally appropriate alternatives for youth outside the formal court process.

How does a bill become law?
  1. Introduced: The bill is filed and assigned a number.
  2. Committee: A subject-matter committee holds hearings, takes public testimony, and decides whether to advance the bill.
  3. Floor Vote: The full chamber (House or Senate) debates and votes on the bill.
  4. Opposite Chamber: The bill repeats the committee and floor vote process in the other chamber.
  5. Governor: The Governor reviews the bill and decides whether to sign or veto it.
  6. Signed: The bill has been signed into law.
Introduced: February 27, 2025
Last Action: April 22, 2025
Status: C 140 L 25
View Bill Text (HTML) (opens in new tab)View Bill Text (PDF) (opens in new tab)

AI Analysis

This analysis was generated by AI and may contain errors. It is not legal advice. Always refer to the official bill text for authoritative information.
People & CommunitiesPeople-leaningCorporate & Wealthy Interests

This bill expands access to and strengthens the juvenile diversion system in Washington by clarifying what conditions can be part of diversion agreements, enhancing youth and family rights, creating new funding for community-based programs, and requiring standardized data collection to improve accountability and equity. It aims to reduce reliance on formal court processing for youth and improve long-term outcomes.

  • Expands the definition of 'diversion' and clarifies what conditions can be included in diversion agreements, such as up to 30 hours of counseling for youth with identified mental health or substance use needs (Sec. 3(2)(c)).
  • Strengthens due process protections for youth in diversion, including the right to counsel at intake, clear written agreements, and a court hearing before a diversion can be terminated (Sec. 3(7)).
  • Prohibits termination of a diversion agreement on or after the youth’s 21st birthday, and requires dismissal of any pending charges if that occurs (Sec. 3(7)(f)).
  • Creates a new state grant program to fund community-based diversion programs that aim to reduce racial disparities and are run by organizations partnering with schools, law enforcement, prosecutors, or courts (Sec. 7).
  • Requires standardized data collection and reporting on formal and informal diversion across counties, including breakdowns by race, ethnicity, and gender, with a report due to the legislature by July 1, 2026 (Sec. 8, 9).

Who is affected

  • Youth in the juvenile justice system — Youth under age 18 (and up to age 21 in some cases) who are accused of or have admitted to committing an offense, and who may now have expanded access to diversion programs instead of formal court processing.
  • Local justice and education agencies — Local governments and agencies (counties, school districts, law enforcement, prosecuting attorneys, courts) that implement or oversee diversion programs and must now follow updated standards, reporting requirements, and potentially expand services.
  • Community service providers — Community-based organizations that provide services like counseling, restorative justice, and youth development programs; they gain new opportunities to apply for state grants to support diversion efforts.
  • Families and guardians of involved youth — Families and guardians of youth involved in the justice system, who retain rights to be informed and involved in diversion decisions and agreements.
  • Crime victims — Victims of crimes, who gain clearer rights to be notified about diversion processes, provide input via victim impact letters, and receive restitution.
Effective: March 9, 2025Fiscal impact: The bill establishes a new grant program for community-based diversion programs (Sec. 7), which depends on new appropriations. It also requires expanded data collection and reporting by courts and the administrative office of the courts (Sec. 8, 9), which may require additional staff or technology resources. A 2019 state study cited in the bill found diversion returns over $11,000 in societal benefits for every $1 spent, primarily through reduced recidivism.
Model: Intel/Qwen3-Coder-Next-int4-AutoRoundGenerated: Mar 19, 2026 at 6:54 PM

Pro/Con Analysis

Stronger case for benefits

Potential Benefits (5)

  • Strengthened due process protections—including written agreements, notice, right to counsel at intake, and court hearings before termination—reduce arbitrary or discriminatory removal from diversion and protect youth from coerced pleas or unfair termination, especially for marginalized youth who are disproportionately represented in the system.

    Rights & LibertiesPeopleRef: Sec. 3(7)(a)-(d)

  • Funding for community-based diversion programs—particularly those partnering with schools—can reduce school-to-prison pipeline effects by keeping youth in school and out of court, improving attendance, graduation rates, and long-term economic mobility.

    EducationPeopleRef: Sec. 7

  • Standardized, race- and gender-disaggregated data collection will improve accountability and reveal disparities in diversion access, enabling evidence-based reforms to reduce racial inequities and improve public safety through more effective, targeted interventions.

    Public SafetyPeopleRef: Sec. 8 & 9

  • Explicitly allowing up to 30 hours of counseling for youth with identified mental health or substance use needs aligns diversion with evidence-based practices, potentially reducing recidivism and improving long-term well-being—especially for youth who would otherwise go untreated.

    HealthcarePeopleRef: Sec. 3(2)(c)

  • Barring termination of diversion agreements after age 21 prevents the criminalization of young adults who age out of the system mid-diversion—a common issue that disproportionately harms low-income and minority youth who face longer processing times and fewer resources to complete requirements.

    Rights & LibertiesPeopleRef: Sec. 3(7)(f)
Potential Concerns (5)

  • Expanding counseling access to up to 30 hours for youth with mental health or substance use needs improves access to behavioral health services, but the bill does not guarantee funding for these services or expand the mental health workforce—many youth may still face waitlists or lack providers in their region, limiting real-world access.

    HealthcarePeopleRef: Sec. 3(2)(c)

  • The new state grant program for community-based diversion programs may benefit small nonprofits and local service providers, but the emphasis on coordination with law enforcement, prosecutors, or courts creates structural barriers for grassroots organizations without existing government contracts or capacity to comply with reporting requirements.

    Business & EmploymentPeopleRef: Sec. 7

  • Mandating standardized data collection and reporting on diversion across counties increases administrative burden on local courts and juvenile justice agencies, especially in rural or under-resourced counties that lack modern IT infrastructure or dedicated staff.

    Local GovernmentLean peopleRef: Sec. 8 & 9

  • Prohibiting termination of diversion after age 21 protects youth from being pushed back into the system, but it does not address the fact that many diversion agreements already extend beyond 21 in practice—this change may only benefit those who would otherwise be penalized for delays in case processing, not fundamentally reform the system.

    Rights & LibertiesLean peopleRef: Sec. 3(7)(f)

  • Allowing restitution to be converted to community restitution at minimum wage rates helps low-income youth avoid debt traps, but the 10-year jurisdiction over restitution enforcement may still trap youth in the system long after they’ve aged out, especially if they experience unemployment or disability.

    FinancialLean peopleRef: Sec. 3(5)(c)

Who Is Most Affected

Youth in the juvenile justice systemPositive Impact

Youth in the juvenile justice system—especially those with mental health needs, low-income youth, and youth of color—will benefit most from expanded diversion access, stronger due process, and reduced long-term system involvement. However, those in counties without robust community programs may see less benefit due to implementation gaps.

Local justice and education agenciesMixed Impact

Local justice and education agencies will face increased administrative responsibilities (e.g., data reporting, coordination with state standards), but may gain flexibility to tailor diversion to local needs. Law enforcement and prosecutors gain clearer protocols but lose some discretion in diversion decisions.

Community service providersMixed Impact

Community-based providers—especially smaller, grassroots organizations—gain new funding opportunities, but must navigate complex grant applications and partnerships with government agencies, which may favor larger, more established nonprofits with existing contracts.

Families and guardians of involved youthPositive Impact

Families gain stronger rights to be informed and involved in diversion decisions and are protected from being forced into agreements against their will. However, low-income families may still struggle with transportation, time off work, or lack of legal representation during diversion proceedings.

Crime victimsMixed Impact

Victims gain clearer rights to be notified, submit impact statements, and receive restitution—but the emphasis on diversion may reduce opportunities for direct accountability or closure if cases are resolved without formal adjudication.