A newly revealed memo from Washington’s Attorney General’s Office delivered an inconvenient truth for tax-hungry lawmakers: the wealth tax Democrats have been pushing for years has a “realistic possibility” of being struck down as unconstitutional.

According to the memo, Washington’s Constitution requires property taxes to be applied uniformly. That’s a problem when Democrats want to slap a tax only on assets above $50 million while carving out special exemptions and credits. The AG’s own attorneys warned that those provisions create some of the biggest legal risks.

In other words, the obstacle isn’t a lack of political will—it’s that the state Constitution keeps getting in the way.

The memo also raised concerns about a proposed $10 million tax cap, noting it could further increase the likelihood that courts find the tax unconstitutional. Yet despite these warnings, progressive lawmakers continue searching for ways to squeeze more revenue out of taxpayers while pretending constitutional limitations are merely suggestions.

Washington Policy Center researcher Paul Guppy summed up the issue bluntly: the Constitution is written in plain English, and lawmakers don’t get to ignore it just because they want a new source of tax revenue.

The irony is that this comes after the Washington Supreme Court already gave Democrats a major victory by upholding the state’s capital gains tax after lawmakers rebranded it as an “excise tax” instead of an income tax. Critics argued the court bent over backward to reach a politically convenient outcome, raising concerns that future wealth-tax proposals could receive similar treatment.

For now, legislative leaders claim a wealth tax lacks support and won’t advance in 2027. But given Olympia’s endless appetite for new taxes, many taxpayers are treating that promise the same way they treat every “temporary” government program—with a healthy dose of skepticism.

The bigger story is that Democrats keep proposing taxes that their own lawyers warn may violate the state Constitution. At some point, the question becomes whether the goal is sound public policy or simply finding creative ways around constitutional limits on government power. Read more at Center Square.

Washington Attorney General Nick Brown is asking the U.S. Supreme Court to take another look at the state’s legislative district maps after a recent ruling dramatically changed the legal standards governing redistricting.

The irony is hard to miss. Democrats spent years defending Washington’s redrawn Yakima Valley legislative districts, insisting they were perfectly legal and necessary. Now that the Supreme Court has limited the use of race in drawing political boundaries, Brown is acknowledging that the courts may need to revisit those same maps.

Brown blasted the Supreme Court’s decision as “horrible” because it curtails race-based redistricting schemes that have become a favorite tool of the left. But even he admits the ruling is now the law of the land and cannot simply be ignored.

The case stems from a challenge by State Rep. Alex Ybarra and others who argued Washington’s new legislative map amounted to racial gerrymandering. Lower courts sided with the state, but the Supreme Court’s recent decision has cast doubt on whether those rulings would survive under the new legal standard.

So after years of insisting everything was settled, Democrats are back in court hoping to preserve maps that just happened to produce outcomes they liked. If the case moves forward, Washington could once again face questions about whether district lines were drawn to represent communities—or to engineer political results.

For a party that constantly lectures about protecting democracy, Democrats seem remarkably comfortable manipulating the rules whenever it helps keep their thumb on the scale. Read more at the Washington State Standard.

Washington’s budget writers are sounding the alarm: the state is heading into what they describe as one of the toughest fiscal environments in memory, with major budget shortfalls looming in both the operating and transportation budgets.

In a memo to agency directors, the Office of Financial Management made it clear that “business as usual” is over. Agencies are being ordered to freeze expansions, scale back spending requests, and start identifying programs that can be cut.

The explanation? State officials point to inflation, population growth, economic uncertainty, shrinking federal support, and costly court rulings. But taxpayers might reasonably ask how a state that has enjoyed years of economic growth, population increases, and repeated tax hikes suddenly finds itself scrambling for cash.

Perhaps the most telling part of the memo is the warning not to count on revenue from Washington’s controversial new “millionaire’s tax.” Despite supporters pitching it as a solution to the state’s budget challenges, even budget officials acknowledge the tax faces legal challenges and could disappear before the money ever arrives.

Governor Bob Ferguson’s administration is now directing agencies to conduct a top-to-bottom review of spending, including programs created or expanded since 2019. Officials are also being told to look at areas where Washington provides more generous services than other states and identify opportunities to trim costs.

The memo acknowledges that these cuts come after billions in reductions were already adopted over the past 16 months, making the next round even more painful.

The result is a remarkable reversal from years of promises that higher spending, bigger government programs, and new taxes would put Washington on solid financial footing. Instead, Olympia is discovering a lesson familiar to families across the state: eventually, the bills come due. Read more at Center Square.

Another prominent billionaire is packing up and heading for lower-tax pastures.

Rich Barton, the co-founder of Zillow and one of Seattle’s most successful entrepreneurs, announced he’s officially relocating to Las Vegas, joining a growing list of high-profile business leaders who have decided their future lies somewhere other than Washington.

Barton says the move comes as he and his wife enter the empty-nest phase of life. Fair enough. But his departure also adds to a pattern that state leaders keep insisting doesn’t exist.

In recent years, Amazon founder Jeff Bezos relocated to Florida, while former Howard Schultz also headed south. Neither explicitly blamed Washington’s new millionaire tax, but Schultz did take parting shots at Seattle’s leadership and what he described as policies hostile to employers.

That context matters. Democrats did just approve their 9.9% tax on income above $1 million, despite repeated warnings that higher earners and business leaders have more mobility than ever. Politicians often claim wealthy residents won’t leave over taxes. Yet every year, the list of prominent departures seems to get a little longer.

Meanwhile, Seattle Mayor Katie Wilson managed to spark controversy by joking about millionaires leaving the state, effectively waving goodbye to the very taxpayers who fund a disproportionate share of government services. It’s a curious strategy: celebrate when successful people leave, then act surprised when revenue projections become less certain.

Of course, nobody can say taxes were the sole reason for Barton’s move. People relocate for family, weather, retirement, and countless personal reasons. But when billionaires, CEOs, investors, and entrepreneurs repeatedly choose states with lower taxes and friendlier business climates, it’s fair to ask whether Olympia’s governing philosophy is making Washington a less attractive place to build—and keep—wealth.

The state’s leaders keep telling voters that tax hikes on “the rich” have no downside. The moving trucks suggest otherwise.

Seattle Mayor Katie Wilson celebrated the opening of her administration’s first new shelter site this weekend, unveiling 50 pallet-home units in Interbay as part of her pledge to add 1,000 shelter beds during her first year in office.

There’s just one problem: Wilson also acknowledged she will miss her self-imposed goal of adding 500 units before the FIFA World Cup.

Instead of 500 units by mid-June, Seattle is opening 50 units now, with another 25 expected by the end of the month. That’s progress, but it’s a long way from the ambitious promises made when Wilson took office.

The new facility will provide transitional housing and access to addiction treatment and behavioral health services. However, residents will not be required to participate in treatment or maintain sobriety to stay there. Wilson defended the approach, arguing that recovery is complicated and people should not be required to be abstinent before entering shelter.

That philosophy has become a defining feature of Seattle’s homelessness response: offer services, but avoid requiring participation. Of course, this prioritizes accommodating addiction over addressing it and helps explain why billions spent on homelessness programs have produced such disappointing results.

Even Wilson seemed to acknowledge the scale of the problem, saying that as long as thousands remain unsheltered, the city is failing.

On that point, there may be broad agreement.

The bigger question is whether more of the same policies that have dominated Seattle for years will produce different results. After spending billions on homelessness programs, expanding shelters, and embracing a housing-first model with few requirements, the city continues to struggle with thousands living on the streets.

For now, Seattle residents are being asked to celebrate the opening of 50 units while being told not to notice that the administration’s first major homelessness benchmark is already out of reach. Read more at KOMO News.

Please consider making a contribution to ensure Shift continues to provide daily updates on the shenanigans of the liberal establishment. If you’d rather mail a check, you can send it to: Shift WA | PO Box 956 | Cle Elum, WA 98922

Forward this to a friend.  It helps us grow our community and serve you better.

You can also follow SHIFTWA on social media by liking us on Facebook and following us on Twitter.

If you feel we missed something that should be covered, email us at [email protected].