A Los Angeles federal judge Monday blocked California from enforcing a new law limiting when federal agents can wear masks while engaged in deportation operations, but upheld a second law requiring local, state and federal law enforcement personnel to display their name or badge number while on duty.
Senior U.S. District Judge Christina Snyder rejected the Trump administration’s claim that U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents need to wear masks to prevent doxing, meaning the online disclosure of agents’ personal information that could lead to harassment or targeting.
However, the judge said in her ruling that California’s No Secret Police Act appears to discriminate against the federal government because its provisions do not apply to state or local law enforcement officers.
Snyder wrote that the act “treats federal law enforcement officers differently than similarly situated state law enforcement officers.”
But the judge upheld the No Vigilantes Act, a separate new state law which requires most local, state and federal law enforcement personnel to display their name or badge number while on duty.
The laws, passed by the Legislature and signed into law by Gov. Gavin Newsom, came in response to the Trump administration’s illegal immigration raids in Southern California in the summer, during which masked, unidentified federal officers detained people as part of the president’s mass deportation program.
U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi on Monday applauded the judge’s ruling on masks, calling the decision “ANOTHER key court victory thanks to our outstanding” DOJ attorneys.
“Following our arguments, a district court in California BLOCKED the enforcement of a law that would have banned federal agents from wearing masks to protect their identities,” Bondi posted on social media.
“These federal agents are harassed, doxxed, obstructed, and attacked on a regular basis just for doing their jobs. We have no tolerance for it. We will continue fighting and winning in court for President Trump’s law-and-order agenda — and we will ALWAYS have the backs of our great federal law enforcement officers.”
The U.S. Department of Justice sued California, Newsom and state Attorney General Rob Bonta in September, challenging what the federal government claims is an “unconstitutional” attempt to impede federal law enforcement by imposing the mask ban and identification requirement on officers.
The laws made California the first state in the nation to prohibit federal law enforcement, including agents of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, from hiding their identities, and requiring non-uniformed federal law enforcement to visibly display identification information, including agency, name or badge number during enforcement duties.
Snyder, a nominee of President Bill Clinton, heard the DOJ’s arguments last month for a preliminary injunction that aims to pause the laws.
The laws took effect Jan. 1, but are not being enforced while their constitutionality is challenged in court.
“A federal court upheld California’s law requiring federal agents to identify themselves — a clear win for the rule of law,” Newsom said in a statement Monday. “No badge and no name mean no accountability. California will keep standing up for civil rights and our democracy.”
The judge’s ruling allows legislators to rewrite the No Secret Police Act without an exemption for state law enforcement. Newsom has not said whether he would sign a revised version of the bill.
The DOJ lawsuit, filed in Los Angeles federal court, alleges that the No Secret Police Act and the No Vigilantes Act threaten the safety of officers facing harassment, doxing and violence while carrying out enforcement duties.
The DOJ also says the laws violate the Constitution’s Supremacy Clause, under which states have no power to control the operations of the federal government.
“California’s anti-law enforcement policies discriminate against the federal government and are designed to create risk for our agents. These laws cannot stand.”
The Trump administration’s complaint states that the federal government does not intend to comply with the challenged laws.