Federal judge blocks California law that bans ICE agents from wearing masks

[FBaggins]

Source: ABC7

A California law banning law enforcement officers, including ICE agents, from wearing masks was blocked by a U.S. district court judge on Monday in a lawsuit filed by the Trump administration.

In blocking the law, U.S. District Judge Christina Snyder said the law's exemption for state police discriminates against federal agents included in the ban.

The "No Secret Police Act" prohibits any law enforcement officer from wearing a facial covering in the performance of their duties, with a few exceptions, including SWAT team duties and in undercover operations. It was signed into law by Gov. Gavin Newsom in September of last year. It notably names city, county and other local agencies, plus federal law enforcement agencies, but does not include law enforcement officers employed by the state.

Although Snyder blocked the mask ban, she upheld the state's "No Vigilantes Act," which was signed into law at the same time. The law requires any law enforcement officer operating in California to visibly display identification that includes their agency and either their name or badge number. Like the "No Secret Police Act," this law also has exceptions for certain operations, though it notably also applies to state police.

Read more: https://abc7.com/post/us-district-judge-blocks-california-law-bans-ice-agents-wearing-masks/18575550/

[PSPS]

1. I agree with the ruling. There's no reason the state police should be exempt.

[TomSlick]

3. Holding federal agents to a higher standard than state agents was begging that the law be struck down.

Come on California legislature. You can do better than this.

[Seeking Serenity]

2. This isn't surprising

I pretty much knew from when it was proposed that the law had Supremacy Clause problems.

Does Cali have a full-time, year-round legislature?

[Polybius]

4. Good decision

It was overreach, Cali can't tell the feds what to wear (or in this case, what not to wear). Bill Clinton judge too.

[FBaggins]

6. I generally agree, but I don't think the judge does

The judge seems to be saying that they can... as long as they require the same thing of state law enforment.

I don't expect that to stand if CA tries... but it could get past the 9th circuit

[NoMoreRepugs]

5. It brought awareness to the public maybe??