Antiharassment Protection Orders in Washington: One Chapter, Six Order Types, and a Permanent Option
Reviewed by DocDraft Legal Team · Washington · Last updated October 22, 2026
Washington gave up having a separate harassment statute in 2022, folding every civil protection order into one chapter, so a reader searching for one will not find it and may wrongly conclude the state has no such order. It does. The antiharassment protection order is its own order type inside chapter 7.105 RCW, with its own standard and its own duration rule, and a court can make it permanent. An antiharassment protection order directs someone to stop harassing you and stay away. Washington handles the domestic violence question differently from most states, and the difference matters: if your facts involve domestic violence, nonconsensual sexual conduct or stalking, the same chapter offers a domestic violence, sexual assault or stalking protection order, and those are usually the better fit because the standards and the firearm consequences differ. But the statute leaves the choice to you, providing that such a petitioner may, but is not required to, seek one of those orders rather than an antiharassment order (RCW 7.105.100(1)(f)). What you must show here is unlawful harassment, proved by a preponderance of the evidence (RCW 7.105.225(1)). The chapter defines it two ways: a knowing and willful course of conduct that seriously alarms, annoys, harasses or is detrimental to you, serves no legitimate or lawful purpose, and both would cause and does cause you substantial emotional distress; or a single act of violence or threat of violence. Constitutionally protected free speech is expressly excluded from a course of conduct. This page is document-preparation information, not legal advice, and no order can guarantee your safety. Attorney review is available through DocDraft.
Find out where you stand in Washington
Who is harassing you?
DocDraft provides document preparation, not legal advice.
Does Washington still have a separate harassment order after the 2022 consolidation?
Yes. Chapter 7.105 RCW enumerates the antiharassment protection order as one of its order types, with its own standard at RCW 7.105.225 and its own duration rule at RCW 7.105.315. The consolidation changed where the law sits, not whether the order exists. A separate stalking protection order sits alongside it.
Can a Washington antiharassment protection order be permanent?
Yes. When issuing an order after notice and a hearing, the court may either grant relief for a fixed period of time or enter a permanent order of protection (RCW 7.105.315(1)). Which of the two a court chooses is a matter for the judge on the evidence presented.
Do I need a pattern of behaviour, or can one incident be enough in Washington?
Either can work. The usual route is a knowing and willful course of conduct causing substantial emotional distress. But a single act of violence or threat of violence also qualifies, where a lone threat involves a malicious and intentional threat or the presence of a firearm or other weapon (RCW 7.105.010).
Is there a filing fee for a Washington antiharassment protection order?
Possibly, and this is the one order type in the chapter that can be charged. RCW 7.105.105(9)(b) allows a filing fee for an antiharassment petition, with exceptions including stalking and conduct that would constitute domestic violence, and the court must waive it if it finds you cannot pay. Service of process is always free.
Washington antiharassment order rules at a glance
Washington is the state where the law looks consolidated and is not. Chapter 7.105 RCW gathered every civil protection order under one roof in 2022, yet the antiharassment protection order kept its own definition of unlawful harassment, its own issuing standard, its own duration rule and even its own enforcement and penalties section, separate from the one covering every other order type in the chapter. Two features are worth knowing before you file. A permanent order is genuinely available, not merely a long one. And the antiharassment order is the single order type the chapter exempts from its own minimum term, so where other orders cannot run less than a year, yours can. That cuts both ways, and a reader planning around protection should ask the court for a stated period rather than assume one.
A Spokane County allotment secretary and eleven months of gate photographs
Take the volunteer secretary of a Spokane County community garden who ruled against a member in a plot allocation dispute. Over eleven months the member photographs her at the gate most weekends, emails the committee about her roughly weekly, and begins appearing at the hardware shop where she works on Saturdays. None of it is violent and none of it is a threat. That shape fits the course-of-conduct limb of unlawful harassment rather than the single-act limb, so she pleads repeated acts causing substantial emotional distress and serving no legitimate purpose, and brings the email she sent asking him to stop, since clear notice is something the statute directs the court to weigh. She asks for a permanent order. Whether the court grants one is for the judge.
Relevant Laws
RCW 7.105.010 (definitions, including unlawful harassment and course of conduct)
Defines unlawful harassment as either a knowing and willful course of conduct directed at a specific person that seriously alarms, annoys, harasses, or is detrimental to such person, and that serves no legitimate or lawful purpose, where the course of conduct would cause a reasonable person to suffer substantial emotional distress and actually causes substantial emotional distress to the petitioner; or a single act of violence or threat of violence, a single threat requiring a malicious and intentional threat as described in RCW 9A.36.080(1)(c) or the presence of a firearm or other weapon. Also defines course of conduct as a pattern composed of a series of acts over a period of time, however short, evidencing a continuity of purpose, including any form of communication, contact or conduct, but expressly excluding constitutionally protected free speech, and lists the factors a court considers on legitimate purpose.
RCW 7.105.225 (standard for issuing a protection order)
Sets out when the court shall issue each type of protection order. For an antiharassment protection order, the finding is that the petitioner has been subjected to unlawful harassment by the respondent. The same section provides that the court may not deny or dismiss a petition on the grounds that the petitioner or respondent is a minor, unless a provision of the chapter specifically limits relief by age, or on the grounds that the petitioner did not report the conduct giving rise to the petition.
RCW 7.105.315 (duration of full protection orders, and the antiharassment exemption)
Provides that when issuing an order after notice to the respondent and a hearing, the court may either grant relief for a fixed period of time or enter a permanent order of protection, and that other than for antiharassment orders, the court shall not grant relief for less than one year unless the petitioner has specifically requested relief for a shorter period. It also caps at one year any restraint on contact between the respondent and the respondent's minor children.
RCW 7.105.310 (relief available in temporary and full protection orders)
Gives the court broad discretion to grant such relief as it deems proper, including restraining the respondent from committing unlawful harassment, stalking, domestic violence and other listed conduct; restraining attempts to contact the petitioner directly, indirectly or through third parties; excluding the respondent from a shared residence or from the petitioner's residence, workplace or school; and restraining the respondent from knowingly coming within or remaining within a specified distance of named locations, presumptively at least 1,000 feet unless the court finds good cause for a shorter distance.
RCW 7.105.405 (renewal of protection orders)
Provides the renewal route for protection orders under the chapter other than extreme risk protection orders. A petitioner whose antiharassment protection order carries an expiry date rather than being permanent uses this section, and the practical significance is that renewal depends on acting before the existing order lapses.
RCW 7.105.455 (enforcement and penalties, antiharassment protection orders)
The enforcement and penalties provision specific to antiharassment protection orders. Its existence alongside RCW 7.105.450, which covers enforcement and penalties for the chapter's other order types, is part of why the antiharassment order remains a distinct instrument rather than a label inside a single consolidated order.
RCW 7.105.450 (enforcement and penalties, other than antiharassment and extreme risk orders)
The companion enforcement section covering the chapter's other protection order types. Cited here for contrast, because a reader comparing the two sections can see that the legislature wrote separate enforcement regimes rather than one, which is the clearest textual signal that the consolidation did not merge the order types into a single remedy.
RCW 7.105.100(1)(f) (what the antiharassment petition must allege, and the choice it leaves open)
Provides that a petition for an antiharassment protection order must allege the existence of unlawful harassment committed against the petitioner by the respondent, and that if a petitioner is seeking relief based on domestic violence, nonconsensual sexual conduct, nonconsensual sexual penetration, or stalking, the petitioner may, but is not required to, seek a domestic violence, sexual assault, or stalking protection order rather than an antiharassment order. The parallel provision at (1)(c) uses the same construction for stalking, saying such a petitioner should, but is not required to, seek a domestic violence protection order. So Washington advises the route rather than barring it.
RCW 7.105.105(9) (fees, and the antiharassment exception)
Subsection (9)(a) provides that no fees for service of process may be charged by a court or any public agency to petitioners seeking relief under the chapter, and that except as provided in (b), courts may not charge petitioners any fees or surcharges as a condition of access to relief. Subsection (9)(b) then allows a filing fee to be charged for an antiharassment protection order petition, with exceptions including where the respondent has engaged in acts of stalking or in conduct that would constitute domestic violence, and requires the court to waive the fee where it determines the petitioner is unable to pay the costs of filing.
RCW 7.105.010, domestic violence definition (the routing provision)
The same definitions section defines domestic violence by reference to conduct between intimate partners or between family or household members, listing physical harm, bodily injury, assault, the infliction of fear of physical harm, nonconsensual sexual conduct, coercive control, unlawful harassment and stalking. A petitioner inside those relationship categories uses the domestic violence protection order rather than the antiharassment order, and the standards and firearm consequences differ between them.
Regional Variances
Washington antiharassment order rules at a glance
Instrument name
Antiharassment protection order, written as one word in the statute. It is one of the order types enumerated in chapter 7.105 RCW, the consolidated civil protection order chapter adopted in 2022. A separate stalking protection order and a separate domestic violence protection order sit in the same chapter.
Who it covers, and the relationship test
Anyone. There is no relationship element on the antiharassment order, and unusually, Washington does not force a domestically-related petitioner out of it. RCW 7.105.100(1)(f) provides that a petitioner seeking relief based on domestic violence, nonconsensual sexual conduct, nonconsensual sexual penetration or stalking may, but is not required to, seek one of those orders instead. Those orders are usually the better fit, because the standards and firearm consequences differ, but the election is the petitioner's.
Burden of proof
Preponderance of the evidence. RCW 7.105.225(1) provides that the court shall issue a protection order if it finds by a preponderance of the evidence that the petitioner has proved the required criteria. That is the ordinary civil standard, and notably lower than the clear and convincing standard some states apply to a harassment order.
Filing fee
The antiharassment order is the one order type in the chapter that may carry a filing fee. RCW 7.105.105(9)(b) permits one, excepting petitions against a respondent who has engaged in acts of stalking or in conduct that would constitute domestic violence, and requires a waiver where the court determines the petitioner cannot pay. Under (9)(a) no court or public agency may charge for service of process.
The standard
Unlawful harassment, by either of two routes (RCW 7.105.225, 7.105.010). Route one is a knowing and willful course of conduct that seriously alarms, annoys, harasses or is detrimental to the petitioner, serves no legitimate or lawful purpose, would cause a reasonable person to suffer substantial emotional distress and actually causes it. Route two is a single act of violence or threat of violence.
Course of conduct, and what is excluded
A pattern of conduct composed of a series of acts over a period of time, however short, evidencing a continuity of purpose, including any form of communication, contact or conduct such as electronic communication. Constitutionally protected free speech is expressly excluded. The court also weighs who initiated contact and whether the respondent had clear notice it was unwanted.
Duration
Either a fixed period or a permanent order, at the court's choice after notice and a hearing (RCW 7.105.315(1)). A permanent order is genuinely available rather than merely a long term.
The minimum-term exemption
Distinctive, and it runs against the petitioner. RCW 7.105.315(1) provides that other than for antiharassment orders, the court shall not grant relief for less than one year unless the petitioner asked for less. The antiharassment order is the one order type the chapter carves out of its own floor, so a term shorter than a year is possible here when it is not elsewhere.
Renewal
Provided for at RCW 7.105.405 for orders other than extreme risk protection orders. Because the antiharassment order may carry a short fixed term, the renewal timetable matters more here than it would under an order with a statutory minimum.
Relief available
Broad discretion under RCW 7.105.310, including restraint from further unlawful harassment, no contact directly or through third parties, exclusion from a residence, workplace or school, and a stay-away distance that is presumptively at least 1,000 feet from named locations including the petitioner's person and vehicle, unless the court finds good cause for less.
No police report required
RCW 7.105.225 directs that a petition may not be denied or dismissed on the grounds that the petitioner did not report the conduct giving rise to it. A petitioner who never called the police is not disadvantaged on that basis.
Enforcement
Antiharassment protection orders have their own enforcement and penalties section at RCW 7.105.455, separate from RCW 7.105.450 covering the chapter's other order types. Specific penalties should be checked against the order itself and with the court.
Court form
Washington runs chapter 7.105 petitions on statewide pattern forms rather than on form numbers fixed in the statute. The current petition number could not be confirmed for this page, because the state courts forms host was unreachable when it was prepared. Ask the court clerk for the current antiharassment protection order petition.
Frequently Asked Questions
Other Washington guides
Adult Guardianship in Washington
Adverse Possession in Washington: Ten Years, or Seven If You Paid the Taxes
Asset Protection Planning in Washington (2026)
Dealing With Debt Collectors in Washington (2026)
Delinquent Property Taxes in Washington: A Certificate Filed in Superior Court, and a Cutoff the Day Before the Auction
Expunging a Criminal Record in Washington (2026)
Ready to Draft Your Document?
Get AI-powered legal documents with attorney review included. Plans start at $39.99/mo.
Get Started