A federal judge has temporarily halted a California law that sought to prohibit federal immigration agents from concealing their faces while on duty. Despite the block, agents will still be mandated to display clear identification, including their agency and badge number.
California became the first state to enact such a ban on facial coverings for most law enforcement officers, a measure signed into law in September following a summer marked by high-profile Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) raids in Los Angeles.
The Trump administration subsequently filed a lawsuit in November, contending that the legislation jeopardised officer safety by exposing them to harassment, doxing and violence, and unconstitutionally regulated the federal government.
Judge Christina Snyder issued the preliminary ruling, explaining that the mask ban, as implemented, did not extend to state law enforcement authorities, thereby discriminating against federal agencies. This decision could carry significant national implications as other states grapple with how to manage federal agents enforcing the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown.
It left open the possibility to future legislation banning federal agents from wearing masks if it applied to all law enforcement agencies, with Snyder writing “the Court finds that federal officers can perform their federal functions without wearing masks.” The ruling will go into effect Feb. 19.
Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom signed the bill in September banning some law enforcement officers from wearing masks, neck gaiters, and other facial coverings. It was slated to go into effect Jan. 1 but was put on hold due to the lawsuit.
In addition to exempting state law enforcement officers, it made exceptions for undercover agents, protective equipment like N95 respirators or tactical gear, and other situations where not wearing a mask would jeopardize an operation. Snyder sided with the federal government, which argued this exemption was discriminatory against federal agents.
Newsom also signed into law a measure requiring law enforcement to wear clear identification showing their agency and badge number while on the job, which was challenged by the federal government but upheld by the judge.
California State Sen. Scott Weiner, who proposed the original bill to ban facial coverings, said Monday he would immediately introduce new legislation to include state police in the law.
“ICE and Border Patrol are covering their faces to maximize their terror campaign and to insulate themselves from accountability,” Weiner said in a news release. “We will ensure our mask ban can be enforced.”
At a Jan. 14 hearing, Snyder repeatedly asked the government’s lawyer, Tiberius Davis, to explain why banning masks would impede the federal law enforcement in carrying out their duties, if officers rarely wore masks prior to 2025.
Davis cited claims by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security that there has been a multifold increase in assaults and threats against federal officers. He also brought up an incident in Los Angeles where three women are being accused of livestreaming while following an ICE agent home and posting the address on Instagram.
“There is real deterrence on the officer’s safety and ability to perform their duties,” Davis said.
Cameron Bell, California Department of Justice attorney, challenged his claims, saying there was no concrete evidence that federal agents can’t perform their duties without facial coverings.
Bell referenced declarations from U.S citizens who have been detained by federal agents but thought they were being kidnapped.
“It’s obvious why these laws are in the public interest,” Bell said.
The federal government also argued in legal briefs that allowing California’s legislation could lead other states to be “emboldened to impose similar unconstitutional restraints.”
Davis cited a statement from Newsom in July 2025 during an interview posted online where he discussed the mask ban bill, saying, “It appears that we don’t have the legal authority for federal agents but we do for other law enforcement authorities.”
Los Angeles County supervisors voted in December to enact a local ordinance banning law enforcement from wearing masks that went into effect Jan. 8. However, the sheriff’s department said it would not enforce the ordinance until after the court ruled on the statewide mask ban. The Los Angeles Police Department had also said it wouldn’t enforce the mask ban.
