By Tran Nguyen and Martha Bellisle
Associated Press
SACRAMENTO, Calif. — California became the first state to ban most law enforcement officers, including federal immigration agents, from covering their faces while conducting official business under a bill that was signed Saturday by Gov. Gavin Newsom and swiftly denounced by Trump administration officials.
The ban is a direct response to recent immigration raids in Los Angeles, where federal agents wore masks while making mass arrests. The raids prompted days of protest and led President Donald Trump to deploy National Guard troops and Marines to the area.
| STATE YOUR CASE: Should officers face charges for wearing face coverings during operations?
Newsom said at a news conference in Los Angeles, where he signed the No Secret Police Act (SB 627), flanked by state lawmakers, education leaders and immigrant community members, that California is unique in that 27% of its residents are foreign born.
“We celebrate that diversity. It’s what makes California great. It’s what makes America great. It is under assault,” he said.
The Democratic governor said the state is pushing back against the practice of masked agents without identification or badge numbers detaining people on the streets.
“The impact of these policies all across this city, our state and nation are terrifying,” Newsom said. “It’s like a dystopian sci-fi movie. Unmarked cars, people in masks, people quite literally disappearing. No due process, no rights, no right in a democracy where we have rights. Immigrants have rights, and we have the right to stand up and push back, and that’s what we’re doing here today.”
But it’s unclear how — or whether — the state can enforce the ban on federal agents.
Trump administration officials have defended use of masks, saying immigration agents face strident and increasing harassment in public and online as they carry out enforcement in service of Trump’s drive toward mass deportation. Obscuring their identities is necessary for the safety of the agents and their families, officials contend.
Bill Essayli, acting U.S. attorney for Southern California, said on the social platform X that the state does not have jurisdiction over the federal government and he has told agencies the mask ban has no effect on their operations. “Our agents will continue to protect their identities,” he said.
| WEBINAR: Active shooter response: The patrol officer’s complete toolkit
Essayli also criticized Newsom’s comment on X saying Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem was “going to have a bad day today,” adding that there is zero tolerance for “direct or implicit threats against government officials.” He referred the matter to the Secret Service, which said in a statement, also on X, that it could not comment on the specific case but must investigate any potential threat.
DHS official criticizes California law
Tricia McLaughlin, Homeland Security assistant secretary for public affairs, called it “despicable and a flagrant attempt to endanger our officers.”
“While our federal law enforcement officers are being assaulted by rioters and having rocks and Molotov cocktails thrown at them, a sanctuary politician is trying to outlaw officers wearing masks to protect themselves from being doxxed and targeted by known and suspected terrorist sympathizers,” she said via email.
The men and women of federal immigration agencies put their lives on the line to arrest violent criminal illegal aliens, she said, and rhetoric like Newsom’s has contributed to a surge in assaults.
Newsom countered that concerns about doxing agents, or publishing their personal information online, are unfounded and unproven.
“There’s an assertion that somehow there is an exponential increase in assaults on officers, but they will not provide the data,” he said. “All they have provided is misinformation and misdirection.”
Ban applies to various face coverings, includes some exceptions
The new law prohibits neck gaiters, ski masks and other facial coverings for local and federal officers, including immigration enforcement agents, while they conduct official business. It makes exceptions for undercover agents, medical masks such as N95 respirators or tactical gear, and it does not apply to state police.
Democrats in Congress and lawmakers in several states, including Tennessee, Michigan, Illinois, New York, Massachusetts, and Pennsylvania, have introduced similar proposals calling for mask bans.
Proponents of the California law said it is especially needed after the Supreme Court ruled this month that the Trump administration can resume its sweeping immigration operations in Los Angeles. The law aims to boost public trust in law enforcement and stop people from impersonating officers to commit crimes, supporters said.
Constitutional law expert Erwin Chemerinsky at the University of California, Berkeley, also defended the legislation. Federal employees still have to follow general state rules “unless doing so would significantly interfere with the performance of their duties. For example, while on the job, federal employees must stop at red lights,” he wrote in an opinion piece for the Sacramento Bee.
What impact could California’s mask ban have on officer safety and operational tactics nationwide? Share your thoughts below.
Police1 readers respond:
- There are many cases where, the officers or (agents), cover up because they try not to expose themselves to (media) and gang affiliates from photographing their likenesses, as they may be required to engage in “undercover” operations later on. The media’s intent isn’t always to flash the officers’ faces, but with Artificial Intelligence on the media networks, the officers’ faces are (often) pasted on the networks and used to exploit what might have been a minor arrest or questioning of a suspect. Yet, I’m afraid that, with all of the recent police and military involvements, our police, even though, mean well, are starting to appear to be dressed as the militants that we see on TV news networks. We don’t want to be [paired with that], at any time. Maybe law enforcement appears to be in [overkill] in using the facemasks. It seems to have become a sort of “law enforcement fad”? We could push it back a little. Besides, it’s a little hard to (quickly), pull a gas mask over a cloth mask, if needed.
- I wonder how the state of California plans on enforcing this “law”? Do they plan on having state, county and local law enforcement arrest federal officers? The whole concept makes no sense. Typical political stunt at best.
