SSB 5852
In CommitteeSenate
Immigrant workers
Concerning immigrant worker protections.
This status may be delayed. See Action History below for the latest updates.
How does a bill become law?
- Introduced: The bill is filed and assigned a number.
- Committee: A subject-matter committee holds hearings, takes public testimony, and decides whether to advance the bill.
- Floor Vote: The full chamber (House or Senate) debates and votes on the bill.
- Opposite Chamber: The bill repeats the committee and floor vote process in the other chamber.
- Governor: The Governor reviews the bill and decides whether to sign or veto it.
- Signed: The bill has been signed into law.
AI Analysis
This law, called the Immigrant Worker Protection Act, requires employers to notify workers and their representatives quickly when federal immigration authorities conduct I-9 or worker record inspections, and prohibits employers from sharing worker records with federal agencies without a court order. It also strengthens protections against retaliation and sets civil penalties for violations.
- Requires employers to post a notice about worker rights under the new law in a visible location by July 1, 2026, and to provide written notice to workers and their representatives within 72 hours of receiving federal notice of an I-9 or worker record inspection.
- Mandates that employers share the federal agency’s inspection notice and a summary of worker and employer obligations with affected workers within 72 hours of receiving it — including in the five most commonly spoken non-English languages in Washington.
- Prohibits employers from voluntarily allowing federal agencies to access worker records (e.g., personnel files, payroll data) without a subpoena or judicial warrant — except for I-9 forms subject to a valid inspection notice.
- Bars employers from retaliating against workers for exercising their rights under the law (e.g., filing complaints, participating in investigations), and defines prohibited adverse actions (e.g., wage theft, termination, hours reduction, threats based on immigration status).
- Sets civil penalties enforceable by the Attorney General — starting at $2,000 per Washington-based worker for first violations, up to $10,000 per worker for repeat violations — and allows private lawsuits by workers with potential damages up to 80 times the state minimum wage per violation.
Who is affected
- Immigrant workers and other affected workers — Workers who may have issues with their work authorization documents or whose I-9 records are flagged during a federal audit — they gain rights to timely notice, copies of inspection results, and protections against retaliation.
- Employers (all sizes, including public agencies) — Must post notices, notify workers and their representatives within 72 hours of federal I-9 or worker record inspections, and avoid retaliating against workers who exercise their rights under the law.
- Union representatives and other worker advocates — May represent workers in discussions with employers about I-9 deficiencies or inspection results, and help ensure workers understand their rights and options.
- State and local government agencies (e.g., Attorney General, Department of Labor & Industries) — Will receive guidance from the Attorney General on employer rights and responsibilities, and may be contacted for interpretation or support during inspections.
Pro/Con Analysis
Stronger case for benefits
Potential Benefits (5)
Workers gain timely, multilingual access to inspection notices and deficiency details — enabling them to prepare responses, seek legal help, and avoid being caught off-guard during federal audits, reducing fear and uncertainty.
Rights & LibertiesPeopleRef: Sec. 3(2), (4), (5); Sec. 3(6)Strong anti-retaliation protections — including statutory damages up to 80× minimum wage per violation — give workers real leverage to challenge adverse actions (e.g., termination, wage theft, threats based on immigration status) without fear of financial ruin.
Rights & LibertiesPeopleRef: Sec. 7(2), (3)By requiring court orders to access worker records (excluding I-9 forms under valid inspection), the bill limits federal agencies’ ability to conduct broad, warrantless data sweeps — protecting worker privacy and reducing the risk of immigration enforcement actions that disrupt communities and deter reporting of crimes or workplace violations.
Public SafetyPeopleRef: Sec. 6(1)Private right of action allows workers (or advocacy groups) to sue for damages up to 80× minimum wage per violation — empowering individuals to enforce their rights independently of state agencies, especially where government enforcement may be under-resourced.
Rights & LibertiesPeopleRef: Sec. 8(4)Mandated multilingual notices (in top five non-English languages) improve worker understanding of rights and procedures — supporting language access and informed decision-making, especially for non-English-dominant immigrant workers.
EducationPeopleRef: Sec. 3(5), (6)
Potential Concerns (5)
Employers face significant new administrative burdens: must post notices, notify workers and representatives within 72 hours of federal inspections, and provide materials in five non-English languages — requiring staff time, translation costs, and risk of penalties for procedural errors.
Business & EmploymentPeopleRef: Sec. 3(2), (4), (5); Sec. 3(6)Employers lose flexibility in responding to federal immigration enforcement requests — cannot voluntarily share personnel or payroll records without a court order, even if doing so might expedite cooperation or demonstrate good faith, potentially increasing legal risk or federal scrutiny.
Business & EmploymentPeopleRef: Sec. 6(1)Civil penalties are structured to scale with workforce size — $2,000 per Washington-based worker for first violations, rising to $10,000 per worker for repeat violations — creating disproportionate financial exposure for mid- and large-size employers, even for minor or technical violations.
FinancialPeopleRef: Sec. 8(2)(a)(i), (b)The broad definition of prohibited retaliation — including threats based on immigration status — may chill legitimate employer communications with workers about work authorization issues, even when done without retaliatory intent, due to fear of misinterpretation or enforcement action.
Rights & LibertiesPeopleRef: Sec. 7(3)(f)Willful violations carry a $5,000 per worker penalty, but the bill provides no clear definition of 'willful' — creating uncertainty for employers about when conduct crosses the line from negligence to willfulness, potentially leading to inconsistent enforcement.
FinancialRef: Sec. 8(2)(a)(ii)
Who Is Most Affected
Immigrant workers — especially those with work authorization concerns — gain critical protections: timely notice of audits, copies of inspection results, and strong anti-retaliation safeguards. This reduces fear, enables preparation, and helps prevent exploitation. However, workers whose records are flagged may still face federal enforcement, and some may fear even non-retaliatory employer contact.
All employers face new compliance obligations: posting notices, 72-hour notification windows, multilingual communications, and strict limits on sharing worker records. While the bill provides AG guidance, the penalties scale with workforce size, making compliance costly — especially for small and mid-sized businesses with limited HR capacity.
Unions and worker advocates gain formal standing as 'authorized representatives' and can help interpret inspection results, coordinate responses, and support workers through the process. This strengthens collective bargaining and advocacy capacity, but may also increase legal exposure if employers misinterpret their obligations.
State agencies (AG, L&I) gain enforcement authority and new responsibilities — AG can investigate and sue, L&I retains existing authority. This expands state capacity to protect workers but also increases administrative and legal workload. Local governments are not directly affected beyond employer compliance.