Washington Police Body Camera Laws: Mandate & Access

Washington has no statewide law requiring police to use body cameras, though a 2026 bill to create one stalled in committee. Agencies that deploy cameras must adopt policies under RCW 10.109, and public access to footage is governed by RCW 42.56.240(14), which exempts recordings only where nondisclosure protects a real privacy interest.

This guide is part of our Police Bodycam Laws by State series.

Jurisdiction scope: This article addresses Washington law governing police body-worn cameras: the policy requirements under RCW 10.109 for agencies that deploy cameras, and public access to footage under RCW 42.56.240(14) of the Public Records Act. It does not address a bystander's right to record on-duty police, a different legal question covered in our guide to recording laws.

Does Washington require police departments to use body cameras?

Not yet, statewide. Washington regulates how agencies that use body-worn cameras must operate them, but no statute forces a department to buy or deploy cameras in the first place. RCW 10.109.010 requires any law-enforcement or corrections agency that "deploys body worn cameras" to adopt written policies, language that governs agencies once they opt in rather than compelling them to opt in. That leaves Washington's roughly 300 city, county, and tribal law-enforcement agencies to decide individually whether to fund a body-camera program, resulting in uneven coverage across the state. Seattle, King County, and many other larger departments have deployed cameras; smaller and rural agencies vary widely, according to MRSC, the Municipal Research and Services Center that advises Washington local governments.

What must a Washington agency's body-camera policy address?

RCW 10.109.010 sets six mandatory subjects for any policy governing a deployed body-worn camera program. At minimum, the policy must specify when a camera must be activated and deactivated and when that decision is left to officer discretion; how officers should respond when a person appears unwilling to be recorded; how officers document an early deactivation during an ongoing interaction; how officers notify the public that they are being recorded, including procedures for non-English speakers, people with limited English proficiency, and people who are deaf or hard of hearing; training requirements and how often that training is renewed; and the security rules protecting stored footage, according to RCW 10.109.010. An agency that deployed cameras before June 9, 2016 had 120 days to adopt a compliant policy; an agency deploying cameras afterward must have the policy in place before the cameras go into use.

What Washington bodycam footage is exempt from public disclosure?

Washington's Public Records Act does not treat bodycam footage as categorically open or categorically closed. Instead, RCW 42.56.240(14) allows an agency to withhold a recording only "to the extent nondisclosure is essential for the protection of any person's right to privacy," and it lists specific circumstances Washington agencies treat as presumptively highly offensive to a reasonable person if disclosed, according to RCW 42.56.240.

Even within a presumptively exempt category, the agency must also determine the footage is not of legitimate concern to the public before withholding it, so the presumption can be overcome. Everything outside these enumerated categories, the large majority of routine bodycam footage involving traffic stops, public encounters, and calls for service in ordinary settings, is subject to the Public Records Act's general presumption of disclosure.

How do you request Washington bodycam footage, and who gets special access?

A Washington public-records request for bodycam footage must reasonably describe the recording being sought. Agencies commonly ask requesters to identify the people involved, the incident or case number, and the date, time, and location of the encounter, along with the name of the officer involved, to help staff locate the correct file among potentially thousands of recordings.

RCW 42.56.240(14)(e)(i) gives several categories of requester a right to obtain a body-worn camera recording, subject to any exemption that otherwise applies: a person directly involved in the recorded incident; an attorney representing such a person; a person, or that person's attorney, requesting a recording relevant to a criminal case involving that person; an attorney representing someone on a potential or existing civil cause of action for the denial of civil rights under the federal or state Constitution, or for a violation of a United States Department of Justice settlement agreement, where the recording is relevant to that action; and the executive director of the Washington state commission on African American affairs, Asian Pacific American affairs, or Hispanic affairs. The civil-rights attorney must explain the recording's relevance to the cause of action and specify that he or she is seeking relief from redaction costs, according to RCW 42.56.240.

The fee waiver sits in the next subsection. Under RCW 42.56.240(14)(e)(ii), an agency responding to a request from any of those requesters may not require them to pay the cost of redacting, altering, distorting, pixelating, suppressing, or otherwise obscuring any portion of the recording. General requesters, including journalists and members of the public who are not involved in the incident and do not fall within one of the (14)(e)(i) categories, can be billed for that redaction time. Beyond that right of access and the redaction-cost waiver, RCW 42.56.240(14)(e) confers nothing further: the recording these requesters receive is still subject to any exemption that otherwise applies under the Public Records Act. House Bill 1080, which would have expanded body-camera access, passed the House in 2023 but stalled in the Senate and was never enacted, so it made no amendment to RCW 42.56.240.

Washington's push for a statewide mandate

Washington came closer to a statewide activation requirement in 2026 than at any earlier point. On January 22, 2026, Representative Tarra Simmons introduced House Bill 2644, the Law Enforcement Body Worn Camera Act, which would create a uniform statewide standard requiring all law-enforcement officers to activate their body cameras during law-enforcement encounters and would let anyone who is the subject of a recorded interaction obtain a copy at no cost, according to Washington House Democrats. The bill was referred to the House Civil Rights & Judiciary Committee on January 23, 2026, but did not advance further before the 2026 session's cutoff deadlines, according to the Washington State Legislature's bill tracking page. Until a future version of this or a similar bill passes, whether a given Washington resident's interaction with police is recorded still depends on which agency responds and that agency's own policy, not a statewide floor.

Is a civilian allowed to record the police in Washington?

That is the reverse question from the one this page answers. Washington generally recognizes a person's right to record an on-duty officer performing public duties in a public place. For the full explanation of that right and how it differs from the rules on police-generated bodycam footage discussed here, see Is It Illegal to Record Someone?

More Washington Laws

• Washington Data Privacy Laws
• Washington Drone Laws
• Washington Recording Laws

Frequently Asked Questions

Does Washington require police departments to use body cameras?

No. RCW 10.109.010 only regulates agencies that choose to deploy body cameras; no statute currently forces adoption, though House Bill 2644 proposed a statewide mandate in 2026.

What happened to HB 2644, Washington's proposed body-camera mandate?

It was introduced January 22, 2026 and referred to the House Civil Rights & Judiciary Committee, but stalled there and did not pass during the 2026 session.

Can I get a copy of Washington police bodycam footage?

Generally yes, through a Public Records Act request, unless the footage falls into one of RCW 42.56.240(14)'s enumerated categories, such as a private residence interior, a medical facility, or a domestic violence victim's identity, where release is presumed highly offensive.

Do I have to pay for redacted Washington bodycam footage?

It depends on who you are. RCW 42.56.240(14)(e)(i) gives a right of access to a person directly involved in the incident and that person's attorney, to a person or attorney seeking a recording relevant to a criminal case involving that person, to an attorney pursuing a civil-rights claim under the federal or state Constitution or a violation of a U.S. Department of Justice settlement agreement where the recording is relevant, and to the executive directors of the state commissions on African American, Asian Pacific American, and Hispanic affairs. Under RCW 42.56.240(14)(e)(ii), an agency may not charge any of those requesters for redaction costs. Other requesters can be billed for that work.

What must a Washington agency's body-camera policy cover?

At minimum, activation and deactivation rules, how officers handle reluctant subjects, documentation of early deactivation, notice procedures including for non-English speakers and deaf or hard-of-hearing people, training, and data security, per RCW 10.109.010.

Can a Washington defense attorney get unredacted bodycam footage?

No. RCW 42.56.240(14)(e)(i) gives the attorney of a person directly involved in an incident, and an attorney requesting a recording relevant to a criminal case involving that person, the right to obtain the recording, and RCW 42.56.240(14)(e)(ii) bars the agency from charging them redaction costs, but the footage is still subject to any exemption that otherwise applies. RCW 42.56.240 was not amended in 2024 to create a separate unredacted-copy or confidentiality-agreement procedure, and House Bill 1080, which would have expanded body-camera access, never passed the Legislature.

Is it legal to record a Washington police officer?

That is a separate question from bodycam footage access. See our guide to Is It Illegal to Record Someone? for Washington's recording-consent rules.