![\"a](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/1768471095_776_.jpeg\")
<\/p>\nA top Trump administration lawyer pressed a federal judge Wednesday to block a newly enacted California law that bans most law enforcement officers in the state from wearing masks, including U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents.<\/p>\n
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 coverings could unleash chaos across the country, and potentially land many ICE agents on the wrong side of the law it were allowed to take effect.<\/p>\n
\u201cWhy couldn\u2019t California say every immigration officer needs to wear pink, so it\u2019s super obvious who they are?\u201d Davis told U.S. District Judge Christina A. Snyder. \u201cThe idea that all 50 states can regulate the conduct and uniforms of officers … flips the Constitution on its head.\u201d <\/p>\n
The judge appeared skeptical. <\/p>\n
\u201cWhy can\u2019t they perform their duties without a mask? They did that until 2025, did they not?\u201d Snyder said. \u201cHow in the world do those who don\u2019t mask manage to operate?\u201d<\/p>\n
The administration first sued to block the new rules in November, after Gov. Gavin Newsom signed the No Secret Police Act and its companion provision, the No Vigilantes Act, into law. Together, The laws bar law enforcement officers from wearing masks and compel them to display identification \u201cwhile conducting law enforcement operations in the Golden State.\u201d Both offenses would be misdemeanors. <\/p>\n
Federal officials have vowed to defy the new rules, saying they are unconstitutional and put agents in danger. They have also decried an exception in the law for California state peace officers, arguing the carve out is discriminatory. The California Highway Patrol is among those exempted, while city and county agencies, including the Los Angeles Police Department, must comply. <\/p>\n
\u201cThese were clearly and purposefully targeted at the federal government,\u201d Davis told the court Wednesday. \u201cFederal officers face prosecution if they do not comply with California law, but California officers do not.\u201d <\/p>\n
The hearing comes at a moment of acute public anger at the agency following the fatal shooting of American protester Renee Good by ICE agent Jonathan Ross in Minneapolis \u2014 rage that has latched on to masks as a symbol of perceived lawlessness and impunity. <\/p>\n
\u201cIt\u2019s obvious why these laws are in the public interest,\u201d California Department of Justice lawyer Cameron Bell told the court Wednesday. \u201cThe state has had to bear the cost of the federal government\u2019s actions. These are very real consequences.\u201d <\/p>\n
She pointed to declarations from U.S. citizens who believed they were being abducted by criminals when confronted by masked immigration agents, including incidents where local police were called to respond. <\/p>\n
\u201cI later learned that my mother and sister witnessed the incident and reported to the Los Angeles Police Department that I was kidnapped,\u201d Angeleno Andrea Velez said in one such declaration. \u201cBecause of my mother\u2019s call, LAPD showed up to the raid.\u201d <\/p>\n
The administration argues the anti-mask law would put ICE agents and other federal immigration enforcement officers at risk of doxing and chill the \u201czealous enforcement of the law.\u201d <\/p>\n
\u201cThe laws would recklessly endanger the lives of federal agents and their family members and compromise the operational effectiveness of federal law enforcement activities,\u201d the government said in court filings. <\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
A U.S. Border Patrol agent on duty Aug. 14 outside the Japanese American National Museum, where Gov. Gavin Newsom was holding a news conference in downtown Los Angeles. <\/p>\n
(Carlin Stiehl \/ Los Angeles Times)<\/p>\n
Davis also told the court that ICE\u2018s current tactics were necessary in part because of laws across California and in much of the U.S. that limit police cooperation with ICE and bar immigration enforcement in sensitive locations, such as schools and courts. <\/p>\n
California contends its provisions are \u201cmodest\u201d and aligned with past practice, and that the government\u2019s evidence showing immigration enforcement would be harmed is thin. <\/p>\n
Bell challenged Department of Homeland Security statistics purporting to show an 8,000% increase in death threats against ICE agents and a 1,000% increase in assaults, saying the government has recently changed what qualifies as a \u201cthreat\u201d and that agency claims have faced \u201csignificant credibility issues\u201d in federal court.<\/p>\n
\u201cBlowing a whistle to alert the community, that\u2019s hardly something that increases threats,\u201d Bell said.<\/p>\n
On the identification rule, Snyder appeared to agree. <\/p>\n
\u201cOne might argue that there\u2019s serious harm to the government if agents\u2019 anonymity is preserved,\u201d she said. <\/p>\n
The fate of the mask law may hinge on the peace officer exemption.<\/p>\n
\u201cWould your discrimination argument go away if the state changed legislation to apply to all officers?\u201d Snyder asked. <\/p>\n
\u201cI believe so,\u201d Davis said. <\/p>\n
The ban was slated to come into force on Jan. 1, but is on hold while the case makes its way through the courts. If allowed to take effect, California would become the first state in the nation to block ICE agents and other federal law enforcement officers from concealing their identities while on duty.<\/p>\n
A ruling is expected as soon as this week.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"A top Trump administration lawyer pressed a federal judge Wednesday to block a newly enacted California law that…\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":517647,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":"","_share_on_mastodon":"0"},"categories":[5123],"tags":[19431,230806,1582,276,161605,64530,2142,6616,2961,3228,224,5337,7136,230804,4531,290,230805,6518,6288],"class_list":["post-517646","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-los-angeles","tag-ban","tag-bar-immigration-enforcement","tag-ca","tag-california","tag-court-filing","tag-death-threat","tag-federal-government","tag-judge","tag-la","tag-law","tag-los-angeles","tag-losangeles","tag-mask","tag-masked-ice-agent","tag-officer","tag-state","tag-tiberius-davis","tag-u-s-immigration","tag-u-s-department"],"share_on_mastodon":{"url":"https:\/\/pubeurope.com\/@us\/115898528927239869","error":""},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/517646","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=517646"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/517646\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/517647"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=517646"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=517646"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=517646"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}