E2SSB 6070
In CommitteeSenate
Recovery of missing persons
Supporting the recovery of missing persons.
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 bill updates Washington’s surveillance laws to allow law enforcement to use cell site simulators, pen registers, and trap-and-trace devices to locate missing endangered persons, while adding strict privacy safeguards, court oversight, and new criteria for probable cause. It also expands who qualifies as a missing endangered person and creates new public alert systems.
- Allows law enforcement to use pen registers, trap-and-trace devices, and cell site simulators only with a court order, or in emergencies (up to 48 hours without a court order), and requires immediate deletion of data from non-targeted individuals.
- Adds 12 specific factors courts can consider when determining probable cause to locate a missing endangered person, including mental health status, age, disability, and signs of involuntary disappearance.
- Expands the definition of 'missing endangered person' to include Black persons, Indigenous persons, people with disabilities, older adults (60+), and those with Alzheimer’s or dementia, and creates new alert designations (Ebony, Missing Indigenous Person, Silver, Purple).
- Prohibits use of surveillance tools to investigate lawful health care services (e.g., reproductive care) and requires special court attestation if such an investigation is suspected.
- Strengthens privacy protections by requiring court orders to specify exactly what data will be collected, limiting incidental collection, and mandating deletion of non-relevant data within 30 days (or immediately in emergency cases).
Who is affected
- Law enforcement agencies — Law enforcement agencies gain new legal authority to use cell site simulators (e.g., Stingrays), pen registers, and trap-and-trace devices to locate missing endangered persons, but must follow strict procedural and privacy safeguards, including court orders and time limits.
- Missing endangered persons — Individuals who are missing and considered endangered—such as people with disabilities, older adults, those in mental health crisis, or missing Indigenous persons—may benefit from faster law enforcement efforts to locate them, but their personal data is protected by strict usage and deletion rules.
- Wire and electronic communication service providers — Communication service providers must comply with court-ordered surveillance requests, but are protected from liability if they act in good faith, and may be reimbursed for reasonable costs.
- Judicial officers (magistrates and superior court judges) — Courts and magistrates must review and approve surveillance requests before they are carried out, except in emergencies, and must apply specific criteria to determine probable cause for locating missing endangered persons.
Pro/Con Analysis
Stronger case for benefits
Potential Benefits (5)
The bill imposes strict, court-enforceable limits on data collection—including requiring specificity in court orders, mandating immediate deletion of non-targeted data, and prohibiting surveillance of lawful health care services—which significantly strengthen privacy protections beyond current federal standards and reduce the risk of overbroad or discriminatory surveillance.
Rights & LibertiesPeopleRef: Sec. 1(4)(c)(ii)(G), Sec. 1(6)(c)(i)-(iii), Sec. 1(7)(b)By expanding the definition of 'missing endangered person' to explicitly include Black, Indigenous, older, disabled, and demented individuals—and adding 12 specific probable cause factors (e.g., mental health crisis, left behind personal items)—the bill addresses documented disparities in missing persons response and enables faster, more targeted recovery efforts for historically underserved groups.
Public SafetyPeopleRef: Sec. 1(3), Sec. 3, Sec. 13.60.010(2)(b)The creation of targeted alert systems—Ebony, Missing Indigenous Person, Silver, and Purple—enhances public engagement and coordination across jurisdictions, potentially accelerating recovery times for vulnerable missing persons and reducing trauma for families and communities.
Public SafetyPeopleRef: Sec. 13.60.010(1), Sec. 4The 48-hour emergency exception allows law enforcement to act swiftly in time-sensitive missing person cases (e.g., a child abducted or a person in medical crisis), which could be life-saving—especially in rural areas where response times are longer and coordination is more difficult.
Public SafetyPeopleRef: Sec. 1(6)(a)The bill requires court orders for all surveillance (except emergencies), mandates sealing of orders, prohibits disclosure of investigations, and provides a civil liability shield for providers acting in good faith—striking a balanced framework that prioritizes judicial oversight while enabling effective law enforcement without exposing providers to litigation risk.
Rights & LibertiesPeopleRef: Sec. 1(5), Sec. 1(6)(a)
Potential Concerns (5)
The bill authorizes warrantless surveillance for up to 48 hours in emergency situations without prior judicial review, creating a risk of overuse or abuse—especially given that 'emergency' is defined broadly as involving 'immediate danger of death or serious bodily injury' and applies to missing persons cases, not just criminal investigations. This lowers the threshold for government intrusion into personal communications without prior judicial scrutiny.
Rights & LibertiesPeopleRef: Sec. 1(6)(a)The bill expands the definition of 'missing endangered person' to include Black persons, Indigenous persons, people with disabilities, older adults (60+), and those with dementia, but does not allocate dedicated funding for training, technology, or staffing needed to implement the expanded surveillance and alert systems effectively. Without adequate resources, the promise of faster recovery may not materialize—especially for marginalized groups who already face under-resourced law enforcement response.
Public SafetyLean peopleRef: Sec. 1(4)(d) & Sec. 3While the bill prohibits use of surveillance tools to investigate lawful reproductive or other protected health care services, it does not provide enforcement mechanisms or penalties for violations of this prohibition. This creates a risk that the restriction may be symbolic rather than effective—especially in a post-Dobbs environment where prosecutors may be incentivized to overreach despite statutory barriers.
HealthcarePeopleRef: Sec. 1(7)(a)-(b)The bill allows incidental collection of data from non-targeted individuals and only requires deletion within 30 days (or immediately in emergencies), but does not mandate independent audits or transparency reporting to assess how often non-targeted data is collected or retained beyond limits. This creates a risk of de facto mass surveillance despite the stated safeguards.
privacyLean peopleRef: Sec. 1(4)(c)(ii)(F) & Sec. 1(6)(c)(ii)Communication service providers must comply with court-ordered surveillance and may be reimbursed for reasonable costs, but the bill does not cap those costs or establish standardized compensation, potentially imposing unpredictable financial burdens on small telecom providers—especially in rural areas with limited resources.
Business & EmploymentLean peopleRef: Sec. 1(4)(e) & Sec. 1(5)
Who Is Most Affected
Law enforcement agencies gain new legal authority to use surveillance tools in missing persons cases, but must comply with strict procedural and privacy safeguards. While this enhances their ability to locate vulnerable individuals, it also increases administrative burdens (e.g., court applications, 48-hour reporting, data deletion protocols) and potential liability for noncompliance.
Black, Indigenous, disabled, older, and demented individuals who go missing may benefit from faster, more equitable law enforcement response and targeted public alerts. However, they also face increased risk of surveillance intrusion if tools are misused—even with safeguards, systemic bias may lead to disproportionate targeting or false positives.
Wire and electronic communication service providers must comply with court-ordered surveillance but are protected from liability and may be reimbursed for costs. Small providers may struggle with implementation costs, while large providers may absorb them more easily—creating a modest burden across the sector.
Judicial officers gain new responsibility for reviewing surveillance requests and applying expanded probable cause factors, but the bill does not increase judicial staffing or resources. This may strain already-overburdened courts, especially in rural counties, without corresponding funding.
Families and loved ones of missing persons—especially those from marginalized groups—may benefit from faster recovery and more equitable response, but could also experience retraumatization if surveillance is misused or if alerts are not deployed equitably across jurisdictions.