WSP settles $340K records-destruction lawsuit — alleged auto-deletion of chat messages and withheld documents tied to 132 vaccine-mandate terminations; CJTC complaint open
The Washington State Patrol agreed in May 2026 to pay $340,000 to settle a Public Records Act lawsuit alleging the agency destroyed or withheld chat messages, texts, phone records, emails, and litigation-hold notices related to the October 2021 termination of 132 employees (70 troopers, 8 sergeants, and 1 captain) who refused the COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The plaintiffs, identifying themselves as the “WSP Transparency Task Force,” alleged WSP maintained an unconstitutional auto-deletion policy and used the “transitory communications” designation to encourage routine deletion of chat messages regardless of litigation-hold obligations. The complaint cited an email from Chief John Batiste instructing employees that text and chat messaging on state devices must be restricted to transitory communications and deleted immediately. The settlement contains no admission of liability and bars the plaintiffs from making further PRA requests concerning the vaccine mandate. A related complaint is under intake review at the Criminal Justice Training Commission. This case is the only one of three recent WSP PRA matters (totaling approximately $548,000 in public funds over 18 months) that alleges actual records destruction; the other two involve withholding or delayed production rather than destruction.
What happened
The underlying terminations
In October 2021, the Washington State Patrol terminated 132 employees, including 70 troopers, 8 sergeants, and 1 captain, for failing to comply with the COVID-19 vaccine mandate issued by then-Governor Jay Inslee in August 2021 (Proclamation 21-14). At the time, 163 WSP troopers and other agency employees were fired, resigned, or retired rather than receive the vaccine (Governing.com, June 2023). The mandate did not provide for periodic testing as an alternative to vaccination.
The terminations spawned multiple parallel litigation tracks. In August 2022, 67 WSP troopers represented by Redmond attorney Nathan Arnold filed suit in Thurston County Superior Court, alleging violations of statutory rights to a three-member trial board, wage theft, breach of contract, and religious discrimination (Governing.com). A broader vaccine-mandate lawsuit involving approximately 100 WSP plaintiffs (and 600 other state and local workers) had been filed earlier in Walla Walla Superior Court in September 2021 (KOMO News, September 22, 2021).
The records-destruction lawsuit
The matter that settled in May 2026 is a separate Public Records Act track. According to reporting in The Seattle Times by Shauna Sowersby (May 21, 2026), a group of former WSP troopers identifying themselves as the “WSP Transparency Task Force” filed a complaint in Thurston County Superior Court alleging that WSP destroyed or withheld text messages, chat messages, phone records, emails, and litigation-hold notices related to the October 2021 terminations. The plaintiffs filed nearly 100 distinct records requests as part of the matter (Seattle Times).
The factual centerpiece of the complaint, per The Seattle Times, was an email circulated to WSP employees by Chief John Batiste. Per the article, the email instructed that “all work-related communications must take place on state-issued devices, and that text and chat messaging on these devices should be restricted to transitory communications and must be deleted immediately after fulfilling their intended purpose.” The plaintiffs alleged this practice, combined with automatic deletion of chat messages on agency platforms, constituted destruction of public records during a period in which active litigation by terminated employees made the records reasonably foreseeable for production.
Procedural history is incompletely sourced in public reporting. Per WSP spokesperson Chris Loftis, an initial filing under the anonymous “WSP Transparency Task Force” banner was dismissed in Thurston County Superior Court for failure to demonstrate legal standing (The Seattle Times). Plaintiffs subsequently re-filed under their actual names. Public reporting does not identify the named plaintiffs, the case number, the plaintiffs’ attorney of record, or the precise sequence and dates of the dismissal-and-refile cycle. The Washington Courts public case search portal was inaccessible during research for this case due to reCAPTCHA quota limits; the case number and full caption remain to be confirmed through direct contact with the Thurston County Superior Court Clerk or document discovery.
The settlement
In March 2026, the parties mediated. The settlement reached in May 2026 obligates WSP to pay $340,000, of which $4,000 is allocated to attorney fees and mediation costs (The Seattle Times). The plaintiffs agreed to:
- withdraw any outstanding records requests with WSP
- refrain from making additional PRA requests concerning the COVID-19 vaccine mandate
- not initiate further legal action regarding records related to the mandate that had already been submitted
The settlement contains no admission of liability. WSP spokesperson Chris Loftis described the agency’s rationale as anticipating “a costly, time-consuming legal proceeding” given the range of legal theories raised.
The agency retention rule
The Washington State Patrol Records Retention Schedule, Version 1.0 (February 2025), published by the Washington Office of the Secretary of State (Washington State Archives), governs destruction of WSP public records. The schedule states explicitly: “Public records must not be destroyed if they are subject to ongoing or reasonably anticipated litigation. Such public records must be managed in accordance with the agency’s policies and procedures for legal holds. Public records must not be destroyed if they are subject to an existing public records request in accordance with chapter 42.56 RCW.”
The schedule was published in February 2025, the same month WSP’s vaccine-mandate-related auto-deletion practice came under public scrutiny. Whether the schedule’s litigation-hold provision was operative during the October 2021 to early-2025 window covered by the plaintiffs’ records requests, or whether it represents a post-conduct policy update, has not been publicly addressed by WSP. The Washington State Archives publishes parallel guidance for all law enforcement agencies in the Law Enforcement Agencies Records Retention Schedule.
Related oversight tracks
CJTC spokesperson David Quinlan confirmed to The Seattle Times that “there is an open complaint related to the lawsuit” undergoing intake review, in which “staff will assess the records to determine whether to proceed with an investigation or close the case if it does not meet statutory requirements.” Quinlan noted that the CJTC has received “only a handful of complaints alleging PRA violations” and that such complaints are rare. CJTC has authority to issue discipline up to certification revocation for individual law enforcement officers.
Other WSP PRA matters within 18 months
Two other WSP Public Records Act matters resulted in financial exposure during the same 18-month window. Both involve withholding or delayed production of records that existed, rather than destruction of records. They are presented here as context for an ongoing WSP PRA-compliance question, not as evidence of a destruction pattern.
- October 2024 — Brangwin matter. WSP paid $58,433.67 to settle a PRA lawsuit brought by Wenatchee-area DUI defense attorney John Brangwin. The dispute concerned production of WSP records relevant to Brangwin’s DUI defense practice. WSP had unsuccessfully moved to dismiss; Chelan County Superior Court Judge Travis Brandt denied the motion before settlement was reached. The matter does not appear to involve allegations of records destruction (KIRO 7 News, October 16, 2024).
- December 2024 — I-5 fatal crash matter. King County Superior Court Judge Emily Richards fined WSP $150,000 for failing to disclose investigative records to families of victims in a 2021 I-5 fatal crash involving a semi-truck. Production was delayed approximately 18 months, after which some documents were released but were “incomplete and heavily redacted” per the available summary. The court found WSP in violation of PRA for delay and inadequate response; per the ruling, “the delays appeared intentional, aimed at avoiding scrutiny over potential mishandling of the crash investigation.” The matter does not appear to involve allegations of records destruction (Shepherd & Allen Law Office summary).
- May 2026 — Vaccine mandate records matter (this case). $340,000 settlement. This is the only one of the three WSP matters in which the core allegation is destruction of records, anchored by the alleged Chief Batiste guidance on transitory communications and automatic chat-deletion practices.
The three matters together represent approximately $548,000 in WSP PRA-related financial exposure across an 18-month window. The pattern they establish is one of PRA non-compliance broadly, not destruction specifically. Whether the destruction allegations in this case reflect a structural practice or a localized failure tied to vaccine-mandate-era litigation cannot be determined from the present record.
What is contested
The settlement contains no admission of liability. WSP has not publicly acknowledged that the alleged auto-deletion practice constituted a PRA or retention violation. Loftis’s public statement frames the settlement as a cost-benefit decision in light of complex litigation, not as an acknowledgment of records destruction.
The Court of Appeals ruling in Jamie Nixon v. State of Washington (Division II, February 20, 2026) upheld dismissal of a separate challenge to state agency seven-day Teams auto-deletion, but the appellate panel did not reach the substantive question of whether such auto-deletion practices comply with RCW 40.14 or chapter 42.56 RCW. The Court of Appeals released the ruling as unpublished, meaning it does not establish binding precedent (Washington Coalition for Open Government).
The broader policy question, whether and when agency auto-deletion of chat platforms is lawful under Washington retention law, remains formally unresolved in Washington appellate doctrine.
What is not yet documented
- Case number and full caption of the settled Thurston County Superior Court matter
- Named plaintiffs (the article references only the “WSP Transparency Task Force” group identifier)
- Plaintiffs’ attorney of record
- Final signed settlement agreement (likely available via PRA request to WSP)
- CJTC complaint number and current status
- Whether WSP has revised the Chief Batiste guidance on transitory communications following the settlement
- Whether the auto-deletion of chat messages on WSP-issued devices has been suspended or modified
- The internal Batiste email itself (referenced in the complaint per The Seattle Times; not separately published in available reporting)
These items would substantially strengthen the documentary record and are appropriate follow-up work via direct PRA request to WSP, Thurston County Superior Court Clerk lookup, or contact with reporter Shauna Sowersby (Seattle Times) or CJTC spokesperson David Quinlan.
Reform implication
This case is the only one of three recent WSP Public Records Act matters that alleges actual destruction of records. The other two, listed below for context, involve withholding or delayed production rather than destruction. The distinction is material: withheld records still exist and can be compelled; destroyed records are not recoverable. The three matters together establish a pattern of PRA non-compliance at WSP, but they do not establish a pattern of records destruction.
Documented WSP PRA exposure within an 18-month window:
- October 2024: Brangwin / DUI records settlement, $58,433.67. Failure mode: withholding and delay of production. No public allegation of destruction. (KIRO 7 News, October 16, 2024.) - December 2024: I-5 fatal crash records fine, $150,000 (King County Superior Court Judge Emily Richards). Failure mode: 18-month delay in producing investigative records to victims' families, with the court finding delays "appeared intentional." No public allegation of destruction. (Shepherd & Allen summary, December 10, 2024.) - May 2026: Vaccine mandate records matter, $340,000 (this case). Failure mode: alleged automatic deletion of chat messages plus the Chief Batiste "transitory communications" guidance encouraging immediate deletion of texts. This is the only one of the three matters in which the core allegation is destruction rather than withholding.
Total documented WSP PRA financial exposure across the three matters is approximately $548,000 in public funds.
The structural argument particular to this case rests on the contrast between WSP's published Records Retention Schedule Version 1.0 (February 2025), which explicitly prohibits destruction of records subject to ongoing or reasonably anticipated litigation, and the alleged internal practice anchored by the Batiste guidance. If the allegations are accurate, the agency's published rule and its operational practice were materially out of alignment during a period of active multi-plaintiff litigation involving 132 terminated employees and a 67-trooper Thurston County lawsuit filed in August 2022 (represented by Nathan Arnold).
The auto-deletion question is also part of a broader Washington state governance dispute that remains substantively unresolved. In Jamie Nixon v. State of Washington (Court of Appeals Division II, February 20, 2026), the court upheld dismissal of a separate challenge to state agency seven-day Teams auto-deletion as nonjusticiable on technical grounds, without reaching the merits of whether the practice complies with RCW 40.14 and chapter 42.56 RCW. Governor Ferguson suspended Teams auto-deletion on February 17, 2025 and promised a six-month evaluation that, as of May 2026, has not been publicly disclosed. The Washington House separately reinstated 30-day email auto-deletion for non-prime-sponsor legislative communications effective July 30, 2025.
The reform argument is not that auto-deletion is per se unlawful, which Nixon left undecided. The argument is narrower: that when an agency operates under a published litigation-hold rule, allegations of routine automated destruction during active multi-plaintiff litigation, supported by an internal guidance document that frames work communications as deletable transitory records, identify a structural-compliance gap distinct from ordinary slow-walked PRA production. The CJTC intake of the related complaint, if it advances, is the structural-followup mechanism with the most direct authority to prescribe corrective practice for law enforcement agencies statewide.
Sources
- Washington State Patrol Records Retention Schedule, Version 1.0 (February 2025)“Public records must not be destroyed if they are subject to ongoing or reasonably anticipated litigation. Such public records must be managed in accordance with the agency's policies and procedures for legal holds. Public records must not be destroyed if they are subject to an existing public records request in accordance with chapter 42.56 RCW.”
- Law Enforcement Agencies Records Retention Schedule
- WSP settles $340K lawsuit over deleted vaccine mandate records“The Washington State Patrol has reached a settlement of $340,000 in a lawsuit that accused the agency of destroying or withholding text messages and other documents connected to the dismissal of state troopers who declined to comply with the COVID-19 vaccine mandate.”
- Washington State Patrol settles $340K lawsuit over deleted vaccine mandate records (TNS syndication)
- Appeals Court rejects challenge to state auto-deleting chats (Nixon v. State context)“The Washington state Court of Appeals on Wednesday upheld a lower court's dismissal of a lawsuit that challenged the state's automatic destruction of agency text messages after seven days. ... The spotlight on text-message retention now swivels back to Gov. Bob Ferguson, who suspended the auto deletion of Teams chat messages a year ago, on Feb. 17, 2025. ... The Governor's Office has yet to disclose the evaluation's outcome.”
- Washington State Patrol pays more than $58K to settle public records lawsuit (Brangwin matter, October 2024)“After reaching a massive settlement agreement, Wenatchee-area DUI Defense Attorney John Brangwin agreed to dismiss his public records lawsuit against the Washington State Patrol. On Oct. 3, Brangwin dropped his allegation of wrongdoing against the law enforcement agency after it agreed to pay him $58,433.67.”
- Washington State Patrol Fined for Withholding Critical Public Records (I-5 fatal crash, December 2024)“A judge has fined the Washington State Patrol $150,000 for failing to disclose essential public records in a case involving a fatal car crash. ... Judge Richards found WSP in violation of Washington's PRA. In her ruling, she stated that the delays appeared intentional, aimed at avoiding scrutiny over potential mishandling of the crash investigation.”
- Washington Faces Worker Lawsuits for Requiring COVID Vaccines (context on 67-trooper Thurston County lawsuit)“Another 67 State Patrol troopers, also represented by [Nathan] Arnold, sued the state last August in Thurston County Superior Court.”
- Washington lawmakers reinstate 30-day email auto-delete policy, raising transparency concerns