Debate Continues Over Bill Expanding AGO Investigative Powers

Critics argue the proposed legislation would give the Attorney General's Office too much unchecked authority.

Published on Feb. 24, 2026

Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›

Lawmakers and stakeholders in Washington state are raising concerns over a bill that would grant the Attorney General's Office broader authority to issue civil investigative demands, a move some critics say could allow the AGO to potentially target political rivals without proper oversight.

Why it matters

The proposed legislation has sparked a debate over the balance of power between the AGO and other elected officials or law enforcement agencies, with critics arguing it would give the AGO too much unchecked investigative authority.

The details

Senate Bill 5925 would empower the AGO to demand documents, records, and testimony from individuals or entities during civil investigations into potential violations of state laws and the state and U.S. constitutions. The AGO would not require a judicial warrant to issue these civil investigative demands, and could request a gag order to prevent the subject from discussing the investigation. Critics argue this could allow the AGO to target political rivals without proper oversight or accountability.

  • The bill was passed by the state Senate last week.
  • A public hearing on the bill was held in the House Civil Rights & Judiciary Committee on Tuesday.

The players

Jenny Graham

A Republican state representative from Spokane Valley who expressed concerns about the bill granting the AGO too much power.

Preston McCollam

A Spokane county prosecutor who testified in opposition to the bill, arguing it gives the AGO wide-ranging investigative authority with little oversight.

Chalia Stallings-Ala'ilima

An assistant attorney general who sought to downplay the bill's scope, arguing it would not grant new authority and that individuals could turn to the Washington State Bar Association if they believed the CIDs were being abused.

Jim Walsh

A Republican state representative who raised the issue of accountability, asking who would oversee the AGO's use of civil investigative demands.

James McMahan

A representative of the Washington Association of Sheriffs and Police Chiefs, who warned the bill would allow the AGO to 'bring a law enforcement agency to its knees.'

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What they’re saying

“This an enormous amount of power to be giving this office, when we've already seen corruption and bad behavior on their side.”

— Jenny Graham, State Representative (dailyfly.com)

“The argument that the bar association will oversee this is a red herring. The bar association does not oversee the individual actions of a law enforcement agency or an investigative agency to the level that's necessary for public scrutiny for this type of power. In my opinion it should be put down. There is zero restriction here.”

— Preston McCollam, Spokane County Prosecutor (dailyfly.com)

“Who watches the watchman? What is your process for checking the administration and execution of civil investigative demands? The answer is you (the AGO) watch yourself.”

— Jim Walsh, State Representative (dailyfly.com)

“We believe that government should helping each other serve the public, not suing each other. Is the attorney general a law enforcement agency or the watchdog over Washington law enforcement agencies? We don't think it can be both.”

— James McMahan, Washington Association of Sheriffs and Police Chiefs (dailyfly.com)

What’s next

The bill will now move to the full House for further consideration.

The takeaway

This debate highlights the ongoing tensions over the balance of power between the Attorney General's Office and other elected officials or law enforcement agencies in Washington state, with critics arguing the proposed legislation would grant the AGO too much unchecked investigative authority.