Skip to main content
PRINT EDITION

Marital Disharmony: Examining the Adverse Spousal Testimonial Privilege and Its Impact in Washington State

Abstract: In Washington State, RCW 5.60.060(1) provides that “[a] spouse or domestic partner shall not be examined for or against his or her spouse or domestic partner, without the consent of the spouse or domestic partner.” This evidence rule, known as the adverse spousal testimonial privilege, allows a defendant to exclude witness testimony by their spouse under most circumstances. A product of common law tradition, this privilege stems from a time when the law treated women as chattel with no independent legal rights. Since Washington State codified the adverse spousal privilege, the United States Supreme Court amended the federal spousal testimonial privilege by vesting the power to determine whether to testify or not in the witness-spouse. That is, a witness-spouse may choose not to testify against the defendant- spouse, but the defendant-spouse cannot prevent the witness-spouse from willingly testifying. After this landmark decision, most states followed suit and amended their evidentiary rules to reflect the federal standard. However, Washington State remains one of four states that still retains the common law tradition as it once was, allowing the defendant-spouse to prevent spousal testimony (with a few specific exceptions). This Comment contrasts the evolution of the adverse testimonial privilege at the federal level with Washington State. It examines how Washington courts are slowly chipping away at the edges of this statutory privilege in the absence of legislative action. This Comment argues that despite legislative efforts to modernize the privilege by creating certain exceptions, the Washington rule remains overly burdensome for testifying witness-spouses to overcome and perpetuates historical inequities for women, who are often the witnesses and victims of their husband’s crimes. Finally, this Comment recommends that the Washington State Legislature follow federal precedent and vest the privilege solely in the witness-spouse.

Download the Full Article

Other Articles from WLR Print Edition

March 1, 2024 in PRINT EDITION

Preempting Private Prisons

Abstract: In 2019 and 2021, respectively, California and Washington enacted laws banning the operation of private prisons within each state, including those operated by private companies in contracts with the…
Read More
March 1, 2024 in PRINT EDITION

Speaking Back to Sexual Privacy Invasions

Abstract: Many big players in the internet ecosystem do not like hosting sexual expression. They often justify these bans as a protection of sexual privacy. For example, Meta states that…
Read More
March 1, 2024 in PRINT EDITION

From Precedent to Policy: The Effects of Dobbs on Detained Immigrant Youth

Abstract: In June 2022, the United States Supreme Court released the historic decision Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, holding that the U.S. Constitution does not protect an individual’s right to an…
Read More