a 30-page decision,<\/a> the judge said California\u2019s \u201cNo Secret Police Act\u201d appears to violate the Constitution\u2019s Supremacy Clause by discriminating against the federal government because the law\u2019s provisions do not apply to state law enforcement officers.<\/p>\n\u201cThe Act treats federal law enforcement officers differently than similarly situated state law enforcement officers,\u201d Snyder concluded.<\/p>\n
But the judge also turned down the federal government\u2019s request to block another California law aimed at abuses in immigration enforcement: the \u201cNo Vigilantes Act.\u201d It requires most local, state and federal law enforcement personnel to display their name or badge number while on duty.<\/p>\n
Snyder, a Clinton appointee based in Los Angeles, said that law is likely to pass constitutional muster because it applies more broadly, including to California officials. She also suggested the anti-masking law would be constitutional if it were broadened to cover state law enforcement as well.<\/p>\n
\u201cThe Court finds that these Acts serve the public interest by promoting transparency which is essential for accountability and public trust. Moreover, the Court finds no cognizable justification for law enforcement officers to conceal their identities during their performance of routine, non-exempted law enforcement functions and interactions with the general public,\u201d Snyder wrote.<\/p>\n
Democratic state Sen. Scott Wiener, who authored the mask ban, on Monday announced he would propose legislation adding state law enforcement to the law in response to the ruling. The lawmaker last year exempted state-level officers while applying the proposal to federal and local agencies amid intense opposition from law enforcement groups.<\/p>\n
Attorney General Rob Bonta\u2019s office agreed not to enforce either law while Snyder was considering the Trump administration\u2019s request to block the statutes. Snyder stayed her ruling until Feb. 19, so enforcement of the identification requirement is unlikely to kick in before then. That law could also remain on hold if the Trump administration gets a further stay from the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.<\/p>\n
Bonta, in a statement, didn’t specify how the state would respond to the split rulings.<\/p>\n
“Safe communities thrive on transparency and trust and California is committed to doing our part to uphold public safety and civil liberties,” he said.<\/p>\n
The Justice Department did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the ruling.<\/p>\n
The widespread use of masks by ICE agents as they have carried out President Donald Trump\u2019s immigration crackdown across the country has stoked intense rebukes from city and state leaders, who say it is creating fear and hindering accountability.<\/p>\n
Trump administration officials say the masks are meant to protect ICE agents from harassment, doxing and recriminations that they have faced at a skyrocketing rate over the past year. But Snyder dismissed those claims, saying the masking was likelier to \u201cheighten the sense of insecurity for all.\u201d Her conclusion that masking is not necessary to protect law enforcement was reinforced, she said, by ICE\u2019s acknowledgment that it\u2019s left to the discretion of each officer, rather than enforced as an agency-wide policy.<\/p>\n
Lindsey Holden contributed to this report. <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"A judge on Monday blocked California from enforcing a new law sharply limiting when federal agents can wear…\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":171735,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[6],"tags":[7,9,8,82169,14299,15609,3537,734,17432],"class_list":["post-171734","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-california","tag-california","tag-california-headlines","tag-california-news","tag-christina-snyder","tag-enforcement","tag-federal-agents","tag-ice-agents","tag-law-enforcement","tag-law-enforcement-officers"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/171734","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=171734"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/171734\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/171735"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=171734"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=171734"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=171734"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}