diff --git a/proposals/ref-assignment-switch-expressions.md b/proposals/ref-assignment-switch-expressions.md
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000..7096bcca73
--- /dev/null
+++ b/proposals/ref-assignment-switch-expressions.md
@@ -0,0 +1,235 @@
+# `ref` assignment on `switch` expressions
+
+* [x] Proposed
+* [ ] Prototype: None
+* [ ] Implementation: None
+* [ ] Specification: Started, below
+
+## Summary
+[summary]: #summary
+
+Provide the ability to return `ref` values in `switch` expressions.
+
+## Motivation
+[motivation]: #motivation
+
+The `switch` expression is meant to provide a quicker way to return values based on a given expression, but does not support returning `ref` expressions. This limitation doesn't prevent any harm, and can be lifted.
+
+## Detailed design
+[design]: #detailed-design
+
+### Grammar
+The [grammar](https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/csharp/language-reference/proposals/csharp-8.0/patterns#switch-expression) needs to be updated for the switch expression's arms to support `ref` expressions:
+
+```diff
+  switch_expression_arm
+-     : pattern case_guard? '=>' expression
++     : pattern case_guard? '=>' switch_expression_arm_value
+      ;
+
++ switch_expression_arm_value
++     : expression
++     | 'ref'? variable_reference
++     ;
+```
+
+### Semantics
+A `switch` expression may return a `ref` value. The returning expression, if not a `throw` expression, must be a `ref` expression.
+
+A `switch` expression that returns a `ref` value needs an extra `ref` in front of it when assigned/returned to a `ref` local. This design aligns with the current design in the ternary operator.
+
+`throw` expressions can still be used normally, and pose no effect on the return type of the `switch` expression.
+
+The default case arm can be omitted, and will throw, behaving in the same manner as switch expressions that do not return a `ref` value.
+
+Once a single switch arm returns a `ref` expression, all other switch arms must return `ref` expressions, unless they are `throw` expressions. Not providing a `ref` expression in a switch arm causes a compiler error.
+
+For all `ref` expressions, the type of the expression must be exactly the same. No conversions are applicable in this context. For example:
+
+```csharp
+private void InvalidConversion(Axis axis)
+{
+    int x = 0;
+    long y = 0;
+    ref int dimension = ref axis switch
+    {
+        Axis.X => ref x,
+        Axis.Y => ref y, // Error: The expression must be of type 'int' to match the common ref type
+    };
+}
+```
+
+In the above example, `int` could be resolved as the best common type due to ordering of the arms, but there is no restriction as to how to resolve the best common type in case of a tie for `ref` switch expressions. Either of the two types above could be considered the best common type, and the mismatching expression would bear the error.
+
+Since all ref expressions are LValues, and the switch arms are all ref expressions or `throw` expressions, the entire result of the switch expression is also an LValue. Therefore, the entire switch expression can be passed by reference, assigned to, and returned by reference. Note that for directly assigning to the switch expression's ref result, the `ref` keyword must not be used, like normal ref locals are assigned. For example:
+
+```csharp
+// Returning by reference
+private ref int GetDirectionField(Direction direction) => ref direction switch
+{
+     Direction.North => ref NorthField,
+     Direction.South => ref SouthField,
+     Direction.East => ref EastField,
+     Direction.West => ref WestField,
+     _ => throw new NotImplementedException(),
+};
+
+// Assigning to a ref local
+private void RefSwitchAssignLocal(Axis axis)
+{
+    ref int dimension = ref axis switch
+    {
+        Axis.X => ref X,
+        Axis.Y => ref Y,
+    };
+}
+
+// Assigning to the ref of the switch expression
+private void RefSwitchAssignDirectly(Axis axis, int value)
+{
+    axis switch
+    {
+        Axis.X => ref X,
+        Axis.Y => ref Y,
+    } = value;
+
+    // Equivalent to:
+    ref int dimension = ref axis switch
+    {
+        Axis.X => ref X,
+        Axis.Y => ref Y,
+    };
+    dimension = value;
+}
+```
+
+Compound assignments with the result of a `ref`-returning `switch` expression on the LHS are permitted, for example:
+```csharp
+private void RefSwitchCompoundAssignment(Axis axis, int value)
+{
+    axis switch
+    {
+        Axis.X => ref X,
+        Axis.Y => ref Y,
+    } += value;
+
+    // Equivalent to:
+    ref int dimension = ref axis switch
+    {
+        Axis.X => ref X,
+        Axis.Y => ref Y,
+    };
+    dimension += value;
+}
+```
+
+Note that, a switch arm can only return a `ref` to a read-only reference if the switch expression is assigned to a `ref readonly` expression. Consider the example:
+```csharp
+void M(Axis axis, ref int x, in int y)
+{
+    ref int dimension = ref axis switch
+    {
+        Axis.X => ref x,
+        Axis.Y => ref y, // Error: y is readonly and cannot be passed by reference to a non-readonly reference
+    };
+}
+```
+
+To pass `ref y`, the declaration of `dimension` must be `ref readonly int`, demoting all assigned references to readonly:
+```csharp
+void M(Axis axis, ref int x, in int y)
+{
+    ref readonly int dimension = ref axis switch
+    {
+        Axis.X => ref x,
+        Axis.Y => ref y,
+    };
+}
+```
+
+Likewise, the same error would be thrown if the above expression were to be directly assigned a value, like in the example:
+```csharp
+void M(Axis axis, ref int x, in int y)
+{
+    axis switch
+    {
+        Axis.X => ref x,
+        Axis.Y => ref y, // Error: y is readonly and cannot be assigned by reference
+    } = 412;
+}
+```
+
+When not in the context of assigning the ref result of the `switch` expression, not using the `ref` keyword in front of the switch expression is considered a logical error. Thus, it is an error, like in the example:
+```csharp
+private void RefSwitchAssignLocal()
+{
+    // Error: The switch expression returns a reference, which cannot be immediately discarded
+    int dimension = axis switch
+    {
+        Axis.X => ref X,
+        Axis.Y => ref Y,
+    };
+}
+```
+
+> Note: this does not align with the current behavior of ref ternary expressions (`a ? ref b : ref c`). This is intentional, and the handling of this case in ref ternary expressions is a separate concern.
+
+The scope of the returned expression relies on the narrowest scope of each individual arm that is not a throw expression. That means, the scope of ref safety, and the scope of the actual value are both taken into account, and the narrowest of all is applied to the entire switch expression. This rule is similar to ref ternary expressions.
+
+For example, the following is unsafe to return:
+```csharp
+private void RefSwitchNarrowScope(ref int paramRef)
+{
+    int x = 1;
+    int outer = 2;
+
+    // outerRef contains a reference to the narrowest scope,
+    // which is that of 'x' and 'outer'
+    ref int outerRef = ref axis switch
+    {
+        Axis.X => ref x,
+        Axis.Y => ref outer,
+    };
+
+    {
+        int inner = 3;
+
+        // innerRef contains a reference to the narrowest scope,
+        // which is that of 'inner'
+        ref int innerRef = ref axis switch
+        {
+            Axis.X => ref x,
+            Axis.Y => ref inner,
+        };
+        
+        // 'innerRef' holds a reference to a narrower scope than
+        // that of 'outerRef', so the following is illegal
+        outerRef = ref innerRef;
+    }
+
+    // The scope of 'paramRef' is outer than that of the current method
+    // 'outerRef' holds a reference to a scope within the method,
+    // so the following is illegal
+    paramRef = ref outerRef;
+}
+```
+
+## Drawbacks
+[drawbacks]: #drawbacks
+
+None.
+
+## Alternatives
+[alternatives]: #alternatives
+
+Currently, this may only be achieved with a `switch` statement, or a sequence of `if`-`else` statements.
+
+## Unresolved questions
+[unresolved]: #unresolved-questions
+
+- [ ] Requires LDM review
+
+## Design meetings
+[meetings]: #design-meetings
+
+None.