Judge skeptical of feds’ case to overturn ban on masked ICE agents

A top lawyer for the Trump administration pressured a federal judge on Wednesday to block a newly enacted California law that bans most law enforcement officers in the state, including U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers, from wearing masks.

Tiberius Davis, representing the U.S. Department of Justice, argued at a hearing in Los Angeles that the first-of-its-kind ban on police face masks could cause chaos across the country and potentially put many ICE agents on the wrong side of the law that is allowed to take effect.

“Why doesn’t California say that every immigration officer has to wear pink, so it’s obvious who they are?” Davis told U.S. District Judge Christina A. Snyder. “The idea that all 50 states can regulate the conduct and uniforms of officers… turns the Constitution upside down.”

The judge looked skeptical.

“Why can’t they do their duty without a mask? They did it until 2025, right?” said Snyder. “How do people who don’t wear masks manage to have surgery?”

The administration sued to block the new rules after Gov. Gavin Newsom signed the Secret Police Act and its companion Vigilante Interdiction Act in November. The law prohibits law enforcement officers from wearing masks and forces them to show identification “while conducting law enforcement operations in the Golden State.” Both crimes would be misdemeanors.

Federal officials have vowed to oppose the new rules, saying they are unconstitutional and put agents in danger. They also condemned the exception in the law for California state peace officers, arguing that the law was discriminatory. While the California Highway Patrol is among those exempt, city and county agencies, including the Los Angeles Police Department, must also comply.

“These were clearly and deliberately aimed at the federal government,” Davis told the court Wednesday. “Federal officials face prosecution if they fail to comply with California law, but California officers do not.”

The hearing took place at a moment of intense public anger at the institution following the fatal shooting of American protester Renee Good by ICE agent Jonathan Ross in Minneapolis; This anger clung to masks as symbols of perceived lawlessness and impunity.

“It’s clear why these laws are in the public interest,” California Department of Justice attorney Cameron Bell told the court Wednesday. “The state has been forced to bear the costs of the federal government’s actions. These are very real consequences.”

He noted accounts of U.S. citizens who believed they had been abducted by criminals when confronted by masked immigration officers, including incidents in which local police were called to intervene.

“I later learned that my mother and sister witnessed the incident and reported my abduction to the Los Angeles Police Department,” Angeleno Andrea Velez said in one such statement. “The LAPD raided after my mother called.”

The administration argues that the anti-mask law would put ICE agents and other federal immigration enforcement officials at risk of exposure and hinder “vigorous enforcement of the law.”

“The laws would recklessly endanger the lives of federal agents and their family members and jeopardize the operational effectiveness of federal law enforcement activities,” the government said in court filings.

Davis also told the court that ICE’s current tactics are necessary in part because of laws in California and throughout much of the U.S. that limit police cooperation with ICE and prohibit immigration enforcement in sensitive places like schools and courts.

California argues that its provisions are “modest” and consistent with past practices, and that the government’s evidence that immigration enforcement would be harmed is weak.

Bell disputed Department of Homeland Security statistics showing an 8,000% increase in death threats and a 1,000% increase in attacks against ICE agents, saying the government has recently changed what qualifies as “threats” and that the agency’s claims face “significant credibility issues” in federal court.

“Blowing a whistle to warn the public is not something that increases threats,” Bell said.

On the identification rule, Snyder seemed to agree.

“It could be argued that serious harm would be done to the government if the anonymity of the agents was preserved,” he said.

The fate of the mask law may depend on peace officer immunity.

“If the state changes the legislation to apply to all civil servants, will your discrimination claim disappear?” Snyder asked.

“I believe so,” Davis said.

The ban was scheduled to come into force on January 1, but is on hold until the case is heard in the courts. If the law is allowed to take effect, California would become the first state to prevent ICE agents and other federal law enforcement from concealing their identities while on duty.

A decision is expected within this week.