In Democrat-Controlled Washington State, it is now apparently perfectly fine to vote in multiple states in the same election. In a stunning blow to democracy, the Leftist-Controlled WA Court of Appeals, Division II, in Washington v. Padrta, issued an unprecedented ruling (reversing a “double Voting” conviction) on January 6, 2026.
SUMMARY:
According to the Lewis County Auditor’s office, the Electronic Registration Information Center (ERIC), a cross-state organization that compares voter rolls and voting history, discovered a November 2022 dual voting issue and notified the Washington Secretary of State's office (SoS) and the Oregon SoS.
The WA SoS office subsequently notified the Lewis County Auditor’s office, which researched the issue and forwarded information to the Lewis County Prosecutor. The prosecutor then notified county law enforcement.
During an investigation, Mr. James Padrta admitted to a detective sergeant with the Lewis County Sheriff’s Office that, after moving from Oregon to Chehalis, WA, he voted in both OR and WA in the Nov 2022 general election.
Court docs say Padrta voted in WA, mailing in a ballot on Oct 25, 2022. The ballot was received by the Lewis County Auditor two days later. Padrta also received a Clackamas County, OR ballot for the Nov 2022 general election in his post office box. He voted the ballot and mailed it on Nov 5, 2022. Oregon election officials received Padrta’s ballot on Nov 8, 2022.
The Lewis County Prosecutor’s office filed one count of repeater voting (a class C felony punishable by up to five years in prison) on Dec. 1, 2023. Padrta was then tried in Lewis County Superior Court in March 2024 and found guilty and convicted in a bench trial on May 14, 2024, by Judge J. Andrew Toynbee.
The conviction was for voting more than once, or double voting (repeat voting) across jurisdictions (voting in two states).
This appeared to be a clear case proving Parda illegally “double voted,” violating RCW 29A.84.650(1), the WA state law prohibiting voting more than once in the same election. The statute reads: (1) Any person who intentionally votes or attempts to vote in this state more than once at any election, or who intentionally votes or attempts to vote in both this state and another state at any election, is guilty of a class C felony.
Parda appealed the ruling in June, 2024. In Dec, 2025 the Court of Appeals heard the case and on Jan 6, 2026 the 3 judge panel (all Inslee appointee justices) issued its curious 2-1 split decision, ruling the law did not prohibit voting in Washington and another state in the same election cycle; saying that Padrta did not vote in the same “election” and therefore did not violate RCW 29A.84.650(1).
With one judge dissenting, the majority concluded that the term “election” in the statute is ambiguous as to whether “election” refers to the overall voting process or specific contests. The court held that the evidence was insufficient to support the conviction under RCW 29A. 84. 650(1) and found the statute could mean either (1) a specific slate of candidates and issues on a particular ballot in one jurisdiction, or (2) the particular date on which an election occurs.
The court majority ended up agreeing with Padrta’s interpretation of the statute: The Washington and Oregon November 2022 general elections were not the same election because they had a different slate of candidates. And Padrta was not guilty because he only voted once in each of two separate elections.
And writing, The State prosecuted Padrta for voting in Oregon. It is unclear whether Washington can criminalize something done in another state.
The three Judges were Bradley Maxa, Bernard Veljacic, and Linda Lee, with the majority ruling (2-1) in favor of reversal and Judge Lee dissenting.
Lee, writing in her dissenting opinion, said: The Washington legislature statutorily defined “election.” And based on the plain language of the statutory definitions, an “election” is “an election required to be held on a fixed date recurring at regular intervals.” I find no ambiguity with the term “election.”
Under the plain language of the statutes, a person violates RCW 29A.84.650(1) by intentionally voting or attempting to vote “in both this state and another state at [an election required to be held on a fixed date recurring at regular intervals].” RCW 29A.84.650(1); RCW 29A.04.043; RCW 29A.04.073.
Padrta admitted that he voted in both Washington and Oregon in the November 2022 election. There is no dispute that the November 2022 election was a general election that is required to be held on a fixed date every year. Therefore, because Padrta voted in this state (Washington) and another state (Oregon) at an election required to be held on a fixed date recurring at regular intervals, I would hold that sufficient evidence supports Padrta’s conviction and affirm Padrta’s conviction.
The 2-1 appellate court ruling subsequently reversed Padrta’s conviction and remanded the case to the trial court, instructing it to dismiss it with prejudice.
The WA Court of Appeals, Division II, District 3, is based in Tacoma and is one of three geographic divisions of the State Court of Appeals, which serves as the state's intermediate appellate court. It handles appeals from superior courts (and other lower courts) in counties in western and southwestern WA. Division II has seven judges, who serve six-year terms (elected or appointed by the Governor to fill vacancies). Cases are typically heard by panels of three judges.
Obviously, the Court of Appeals took the opportunity to make a mockery of current state law and to create a legal precedent by interpreting and creating its own definition of “election” in its decision.
To make matters worse, the case prompted a WA State Democrat (aka “The Anyone From Anywhere Can Vote Party”) legislative response, with SB 6084. As written, SB 6084 codifies the appellate court’s ruling allowing dual voting by the same voter in multiple jurisdictions/states as long as the election is not held on "the same day"- SB 6084 rewrites/amends 29A.84.650(1) making it worse, adding language that reads: The legislature finds that it has been and continues to be the law of this state that a person may not vote in an election in Washington and an election in any other state if the election date is the same for both states.
Hmm… So if the “election” isn't on the same date across different states, then all is good - Vote as many ballots, in as many “elections” as your heart desires!
The bill also states: “Election” means any general, primary, or special election. An election is the “same election” if the election date is the same, regardless of the candidates, offices, issues, or measures on the ballot, regardless of the date on which ballots are mailed or returned.
SB 6084 is a terrible bill that facilitates voter fraud and needs to be killed. At a minimum, it needs to be gutted and drastically amended.
These rulings and policies are very dangerous, allowing an unlimited number of potential “voters” to legally vote multiple times in the same election cycle, wherever they receive ballots. The negative collateral impacts and ramifications are obvious: “voters” can now live in several states and vote in all of them at any time (as long as the election day is not the same date), with no consequences.
And of course, mail-in voting facilitates all of this! It is an interesting fact that both Oregon and Washington were among the first states to adopt vote-by-mail.
One of the basic tenets of democracy is that each person has one vote. Since 2005, the original spirit and intent of state law RCW 29A.84.650(1) has always been very clear, until now. WA State judiciary leftists and legislative Marxist Democrats once again are making a sham of state election laws, allowing more election fraud to occur, crippling elections, and solidifying their power base, all the while continuing their path of destroying election confidence in WA State.
Let’s hope and pray that common sense prevails, that SB 6084 dies, and that the appellate court’s terrible ruling is appealed to the WA State Supreme Court and eventually gets overturned.
There is a public hearing scheduled tomorrow, Tuesday, January 27, at 1:30 PM on SB 6084 in the Senate State Government & Tribal Committee. PLEASE make your voice heard and go on the record: Register CON (complete the online form here) and press submit to state your position; send a comment to your legislators here, and/or register to testify online or in-person here.
Share This Post...
