Effort to ban ICE from wearing masks moves forward in L.A. County
Los Angeles County supervisors are on the cutting edge a regulation On Tuesday, the law passed law enforcement, including immigration officers. wearing a mask while working in unincorporated parts of the county.
The regulation would also require all law enforcement officers to wear identification and clearly state their affiliation with the agency.
The ban was in response to residents’ concerns about unidentified agents conducting immigration enforcement operations throughout the region. Since the raids began this summer, armed federal agents with their faces hidden by neck gaiters or ski masks have repeatedly jumped out of unmarked pickup trucks and apprehended people on street corners, car washes and Home Depot parking lots. Officers often refuse to identify themselves as working in federal immigration enforcement.
Legal experts say federal immigration officials won’t be required to comply with a county mask ban. Dawyn Harrison, the county’s lead attorney, said he suspects the federal government will likely argue that the state law violates the Constitution, which states that federal law takes precedence over conflicting local laws.
“If this leads to a fight in the courts with the federal government, I think that’s a fight worth having,” said Comptroller Janice Hahn, who spearheaded the ban.
Department of Homeland Security Deputy Secretary Tricia McLaughlin said immigration officials must disguise themselves to avoid being named or “doxed.”
The motion passed 4-0, with Counsel Kathryn Barger abstaining. Per county policy, the ban must be approved once again, and the vote is scheduled for next week. The ban will come into force in January 2026.
“If you carry the power of a badge here, you must be visible, accountable and identifiable to those you serve,” said Supervisor Lindsey Horvath, one of the resolution’s authors.
Barger had previously questioned the purpose of a motion that would almost certainly land them in court.
“My concern is that we’re bringing forward a motion that will probably end up in court and that I question whether it’s even legal for us to do,” Barger said in July.
