[ad_1]
A 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.
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.
“Why couldn’t California say every immigration officer needs to wear pink, so it’s super 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 … flips the Constitution on its head.”
The judge appeared skeptical.
“Why can’t they perform their duties without a mask? They did that until 2025, did they not?” Snyder said. “How in the world do those who don’t mask manage to operate?”
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 “while conducting law enforcement operations in the Golden State.” Both offenses would be misdemeanors.
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.
“These were clearly and purposefully targeted at the federal government,” Davis told the court Wednesday. “Federal officers face prosecution if they do not comply with California law, but California officers do not.”
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 — rage that has latched on to masks as a symbol of perceived lawlessness and impunity.
“It’s obvious why these laws are in the public interest,” California Department of Justice lawyer Cameron Bell told the court Wednesday. “The state has had to bear the cost of the federal government’s actions. These are very real consequences.”
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.
“I later learned that my mother and sister witnessed the incident and reported to the Los Angeles Police Department that I was kidnapped,” Angeleno Andrea Velez said in one such declaration. “Because of my mother’s call, LAPD showed up to the raid.”
The administration argues the anti-mask law would put ICE agents and other federal immigration enforcement officers at risk of doxing and chill the “zealous enforcement of the law.”
“The laws would recklessly endanger the lives of federal agents and their family members and compromise the operational effectiveness of federal law enforcement activities,” the government said in court filings.
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.
(Carlin Stiehl / Los Angeles Times)
Davis also told the court that ICE‘s 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.
California contends its provisions are “modest” and aligned with past practice, and that the government’s evidence showing immigration enforcement would be harmed is thin.
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 “threat” and that agency claims have faced “significant credibility issues” in federal court.
“Blowing a whistle to alert the community, that’s hardly something that increases threats,” Bell said.
On the identification rule, Snyder appeared to agree.
“One might argue that there’s serious harm to the government if agents’ anonymity is preserved,” she said.
The fate of the mask law may hinge on the peace officer exemption.
“Would your discrimination argument go away if the state changed legislation to apply to all officers?” Snyder asked.
“I believe so,” Davis said.
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.
A ruling is expected as soon as this week.
[ad_2]
Sonja Sharp
Source link