Newsom signs bill banning ICE agents from wearing face coverings

Gov. Gavin Newsom (D-CA) signed a new bill into into law on Saturday that bans most federal, local, and out-of-state law enforcement officers from wearing face coverings.

The bill, dubbed the No Secret Police Act, prohibits most law enforcement operating in the state, including U.S. ICE agents, from masking while on the job. It includes a few exemptions, such as for SWAT teams and undercover police work, and still allows officers to wear medical masks and gas masks, if necessary.

Penalties for violating the law include either an infraction or misdemeanor, and apply to officers who committed an “assault, battery, false imprisonment, false arrest, abuse of process, or malicious prosecution” while covering their face, a press release from Democratic state Sen. Scott Wiener, who headed the bill, said.

The new piece of legislation was part of a slate of others signed by Newsom this weekend, most of which are designed to clamp down on the Trump administration‘s immigration operations in the state.

Those include one bill requiring officers to provide identification while conducting operations, two others prohibiting ICE agents from entering schools or health facilities without a warrant, and another requiring schools to notify parents and teachers if ICE agents are on site.

Newsom signs bill banning ICE agents from wearing face coverings

The bill, dubbed the No Secret Police Act, prohibits most law enforcement operating in the state from masking while on the job.

www.washingtonexaminer.com

 

[1LoverofGod]

Gov. Gavin Newsom (D-CA) signed a new bill into into law on Saturday that bans most federal, local, and out-of-state law enforcement officers from wearing face coverings.

The bill, dubbed the No Secret Police Act, prohibits most law enforcement operating in the state, including U.S. ICE agents, from masking while on the job. It includes a few exemptions, such as for SWAT teams and undercover police work, and still allows officers to wear medical masks and gas masks, if necessary.

Penalties for violating the law include either an infraction or misdemeanor, and apply to officers who committed an “assault, battery, false imprisonment, false arrest, abuse of process, or malicious prosecution” while covering their face, a press release from Democratic state Sen. Scott Wiener, who headed the bill, said.

The new piece of legislation was part of a slate of others signed by Newsom this weekend, most of which are designed to clamp down on the Trump administration‘s immigration operations in the state.

Those include one bill requiring officers to provide identification while conducting operations, two others prohibiting ICE agents from entering schools or health facilities without a warrant, and another requiring schools to notify parents and teachers if ICE agents are on site.

Newsom signs bill banning ICE agents from wearing face coverings

The bill, dubbed the No Secret Police Act, prohibits most law enforcement operating in the state from masking while on the job.

www.washingtonexaminer.com

But he signs no bill to keep thugs from wearing face coverings.
Around here it is common to see guys covering their faces with bandanas. When I see a guy wearing a full ski mask in 90+ degree weather, I dont think its because he is cold. But law enforcement officers like ICE aren't permitted to have their face covered.
And then to require schools to notify parents if ICE are on school property, but they wont notify parents when the schools are helping kids transition? SMH

 

[Tall Timbers]

I don't believe the state has any say over how Feds clothe themselves...

 

[KMendel]

I see ICE officers wearing facemasks much the same as I see KKK members wearing their masks.............
It is cowardice and fear-mongering.

 

[1LoverofGod]

***This is why ICE started wearing masks.....

ICE agents ‘doxed’ on social media, wear masks after receiving death threats, director says​

Federal officers have been “doxed” on social media, and often wear masks while on duty and making immigration arrests after officers, and their families, have received death threats, Lyons said.

“A lot of agencies were invited to come out two weeks ago in Los Angeles where we ran our operation where ICE officers were doxed,“ Lyons said.

“So let’s just say that again. People are out there taking photos of the names, their faces and posting them online with death threats to their family and themselves,” Lyons said.

“They are wearing those masks because we ran an operation with the Secret Service where we arrested someone that was going online, taking their photos, posting their families’, their kids’ Instagram, their kids’ Facebooks and targeting them,” Lyons said Monday.

ICE agents ‘doxed’ on social media, wear masks after receiving death threats, director says

Acting ICE Director Todd Lyons said Monday that federal immigration officers have been ‘doxed’ on social media and wear masks while on duty and making arrests after the officers, and their families, have received death threats.

www.boston25news.com

 

[Ghoti Ichthus]

Gov. Gavin Newsom (D-CA) signed a new bill into into law on Saturday that bans most federal, local, and out-of-state law enforcement officers from wearing face coverings.

The bill, dubbed the No Secret Police Act, prohibits most law enforcement operating in the state, including U.S. ICE agents, from masking while on the job. It includes a few exemptions, such as for SWAT teams and undercover police work, and still allows officers to wear medical masks and gas masks, if necessary.

Penalties for violating the law include either an infraction or misdemeanor, and apply to officers who committed an “assault, battery, false imprisonment, false arrest, abuse of process, or malicious prosecution” while covering their face, a press release from Democratic state Sen. Scott Wiener, who headed the bill, said.

The new piece of legislation was part of a slate of others signed by Newsom this weekend, most of which are designed to clamp down on the Trump administration‘s immigration operations in the state.

Those include one bill requiring officers to provide identification while conducting operations, two others prohibiting ICE agents from entering schools or health facilities without a warrant, and another requiring schools to notify parents and teachers if ICE agents are on site.

Newsom signs bill banning ICE agents from wearing face coverings

The bill, dubbed the No Secret Police Act, prohibits most law enforcement operating in the state from masking while on the job.

www.washingtonexaminer.com

So, what if the LE officer/agent is a muslim woman?

 

[Ghoti Ichthus]

I never bothered with covering my face, even when it was authorized/suggested. I'm so small, "everyone" knew who I was, anyway
Even in jurisdictions, where I didn't work, because we helped each other, and after being on the street long enough, one gets a reputation (good or bad) that gets spread around. I was a Rookie the year the gangs agreed to work together against LE in the St Louis Metro to "move the dope," and they had/have excellent communication and intel systems.

I might have felt differently about covering my face if I had had children living at home.

 

[mattfivefour]

I find it interesting that the protestors aren't protesting against Congress who created the laws that ICE and other LE personnel are enforcing. Attacking the police for doing their jobs is not only wrong-headed and illegal, or is actually evil. God does not tell us that we must like the authority over us. But He does tell us we must not only obey it but honor it-- Romans 13:1-2 and 1 Peter 2:13-17.

As much as I am not at all pleased with police masking their identities, given the hateful and violent behavior of the left-wing protesters and their personal harassment and attacks on people whom they identify (harassment and attacks that include the people's families) I reluctantly agree the police have no choice. Why should they be harmed because they are simply doing their jobs? Why should their families suffer? Respectfully, they are not cowards; they are simply protecting their families and themselves from criminal and harmful attacks.

I personally believe that anybody who tries to interfere with LEOs in the performance of their duties in enforcing the laws of the land should be arrested and prosecuted. I think law enforcement is giving far too much leeway to the protestors. What I am seeing in most cases is not the exercise of free speech but the exercise of criminal action. If America is to remain a land of laws and order, this behavior needs to be stopped with an iron fist. I say all this as a citizen, a brother in Christ, and as a pastor who must teach the principles of the Word of God.

 

[Ghoti Ichthus]

I find it interesting that the protestors aren't protesting against Congress who created the laws that ICE and other LE personnel are enforcing.

Law enforcement is the most visible part of the law and the most accessible. There's "always" TV coverage of law enforcement and events/incidents law enforcement responds to, and the bright blue and red lights, especially when contrasting against the night, add attention. If an officer does something wrong, or something that can be twisted to look wrong, there's a lot of coverage, immediately and continuing as long as it continues to sell ratings, inflame, or contribute to an agenda. In contrast, unless one watches C-SPAN, there's very little TV coverage of lawmaking, and even less of the discussion in committee and on the floor.

It's very easy to talk to a cop. Go to the police department, flag an officer down, approach an officer in a store or restaurant, visit if one is a neighbor, or call 911. In contrast, it's hard to get in to talk to a staff member, let alone an elected official. All sorts of hoops to jump through to get an appointment, and then one has to go through security to enter the "inner sanctum." Time is strictly limited. At some level, elected officials usually end up with security and live in secure locations with comprehensive alarm systems, etc. because of threats to their safety.

Most people haven't read the Declaration of Independence or U.S. Constitution since they were required to read it in school, and most have never read the State Constitution or any of the laws of the State in which they reside. Except maybe what's in the driver's manual (only so they can pass the DL test). So they really and truly don't know what the laws are.

 

[mattfivefour]

Law enforcement is the most visible part of the law and the most accessible. There's "always" TV coverage of law enforcement and events/incidents law enforcement responds to, and the bright blue and red lights, especially when contrasting against the night, add attention. If an officer does something wrong, or something that can be twisted to look wrong, there's a lot of coverage, immediately and continuing as long as it continues to sell ratings, inflame, or contribute to an agenda. In contrast, unless one watches C-SPAN, there's very little TV coverage of lawmaking, and even less of the discussion in committee and on the floor.

It's very easy to talk to a cop. Go to the police department, flag an officer down, approach an officer in a store or restaurant, visit if one is a neighbor, or call 911. In contrast, it's hard to get in to talk to a staff member, let alone an elected official. All sorts of hoops to jump through to get an appointment, and then one has to go through security to enter the "inner sanctum." Time is strictly limited. At some level, elected officials usually end up with security and live in secure locations with comprehensive alarm systems, etc. because of threats to their safety.

Most people haven't read the Declaration of Independence or U.S. Constitution since they were required to read it in school, and most have never read the State Constitution or any of the laws of the State in which they reside. Except maybe what's in the driver's manual (only so they can pass the DL test). So they really and truly don't know what the laws are.

I understand. But if a person doesn't like a law, let them act to change it. Citizens in this great and free country of ours have that right. In fact, our Constitution not only gives us that right but also gives us the mechanism to do so. As Americans we should always act lawfully, and that includes dealing with laws we don't like. As Christians, we MUST always act lawfully. There is only one exception to my last sentence-- when man's law fundamentally contradicts God's law.

 

[Ghoti Ichthus]

if a person doesn't like a law, let them act to change it. Citizens in this great and free country of ours have that right. In fact, our Constitution not only gives us that right but also gives us the mechanism to do so.

People frequently do what's expedient, not what's legal [sigh]
Whoever/whatever handy/close-at-hand/proximate takes the brunt of the displaced anger/rebellion against God/etc.
(government is ordained of God, so rebellion against lawful government is rebellion against God)

As Americans we should always act lawfully, and that includes dealing with laws we don't like. As Christians, we MUST always act lawfully. There is only one exception to my last sentence-- when man's law fundamentally contradicts God's law.

17 Then the high priest rose up, and all they that were with him, (which is the sect of the Sadducees,) and were filled with indignation,
18 And laid their hands on the apostles, and put them in the common prison.
19 But the angel of the Lord by night opened the prison doors, and brought them forth, and said,
20 Go, stand and speak in the temple to the people all the words of this life.
21 And when they heard that, they entered into the temple early in the morning, and taught. But the high priest came, and they that were with him, and called the council together, and all the senate of the children of Israel, and sent to the prison to have them brought.
22 But when the officers came, and found them not in the prison, they returned and told,
23 Saying, The prison truly found we shut with all safety, and the keepers standing without before the doors: but when we had opened, we found no man within.
24 Now when the high priest and the captain of the temple and the chief priests heard these things, they doubted of them whereunto this would grow.
25 Then came one and told them, saying, Behold, the men whom ye put in prison are standing in the temple, and teaching the people.6 Then went the captain with the officers, and brought them without violence: for they feared the people, lest they should have been stoned.
27 And when they had brought them, they set them before the council: and the high priest asked them,
28 Saying, Did not we straitly command you that ye should not teach in this name? and, behold, ye have filled Jerusalem with your doctrine, and intend to bring this man's blood upon us.
29 Then Peter and the other apostles answered and said, We ought to obey God rather than men.
30 The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye slew and hanged on a tree.
31 Him hath God exalted with his right hand to be a Prince and a Saviour, for to give repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins.
32 And we are his witnesses of these things; and so is also the Holy Ghost, whom God hath given to them that obey him.
33 When they heard that, they were cut to the heart, and took counsel to slay them.
34 Then stood there up one in the council, a Pharisee, named Gamaliel, a doctor of the law, had in reputation among all the people, and commanded to put the apostles forth a little space;
35 And said unto them, Ye men of Israel, take heed to yourselves what ye intend to do as touching these men.
36 For before these days rose up Theudas, boasting himself to be somebody; to whom a number of men, about four hundred, joined themselves: who was slain; and all, as many as obeyed him, were scattered, and brought to nought.
37 After this man rose up Judas of Galilee in the days of the taxing, and drew away much people after him: he also perished; and all, even as many as obeyed him, were dispersed.
38 And now I say unto you, Refrain from these men, and let them alone: for if this counsel or this work be of men, it will come to nought:
39 But if it be of God, ye cannot overthrow it; lest haply ye be found even to fight against God.
40 And to him they agreed: and when they had called the apostles, and beaten them, they commanded that they should not speak in the name of Jesus, and let them go.
41 And they departed from the presence of the council, rejoicing that they were counted worthy to suffer shame for his name.
42 And daily in the temple, and in every house, they ceased not to teach and preach Jesus Christ.
Acts 5:17-42, KJV

 

[Tall Timbers]

I personally believe that anybody who tries to interfere with LEOs in the performance of their duties in enforcing the laws of the land should be arrested and prosecuted. I think law enforcement is giving far too much leeway to the protestors.

If the activities of the criminal are felonious, I believe lethal force is justified if the criminal does not comply with LEOs. LEOs risk their own lives when they have to physically fight perps. That shouldn't be necessary in most cases.

 

[1LoverofGod]

The Supremacy Clause​

The direct answer to whether state laws can override federal laws is no, and the reason lies in the U.S. Constitution. Article VI, Clause 2, known as the Supremacy Clause, establishes that the Constitution, federal laws made in accordance with it, and treaties are the “supreme Law of the Land.” This provision creates a clear hierarchy of laws, and state judges are bound by this hierarchy to uphold federal law over conflicting state laws.

This clause was a direct response to the failures of the Articles of Confederation, which lacked a similar provision and resulted in federal statutes being unenforceable in state courts. The framers of the Constitution recognized that for the new national government to function, it needed protection from being ignored by the states. Early Supreme Court cases, such as McCulloch v. Maryland and Gibbons v. Ogden, relied on the Supremacy Clause to affirm the federal government’s authority.

The Doctrine of Federal Preemption​

The legal mechanism that flows from the Supremacy Clause is known as the doctrine of federal preemption. Preemption is the principle courts use to determine whether a federal law supersedes a state or local law. The central question in any preemption case is discerning the intent of Congress. Courts have established two main categories for how federal law can preempt state law: express preemption and implied preemption.

Can State Laws Override Federal Laws?

Explore the constitutional principles that establish the hierarchy between state and federal laws and see how this complex legal balance works in practice.

legalclarity.org

****As I understand it, If a State disagrees with Federal laws and regulations, the State must go to the Supreme Court to settle the matter. States cant interfere with Federal laws and regulations.
Only Congress has the power to make amendments to override Federal laws and regulations and the Supreme Court must side with Congressional laws. That is the balance of powers in the United States****

 

[1LoverofGod]

Because this is California which has a far left Democrat Governor, as well as majority far left Democrat Legislators, its really not about the face coverings, but just the fact that ICE is cracking down on illegal immigration.
California has been a sanctuary state for illegal immigrants and their votes are what has helped keep Democrats in power in California. ICE is removing their source of power

 

[1LoverofGod]

Trump Admin. Schools Gavin Newsom After He Signs Legislation Banning Federal Agents, Including ICE, From Wearing Face Masks​

(Video)

Harmeet Dhillion, the Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights at the U.S. Department of Justice, mocked Newsom over the new law by noting that states have no jurisdiction over federal officials’ attire.

Acting U.S. Attorney Bill Essayli also scoffed at Newsom’s grandstanding and said he had directed federal agencies to ignore the stupid laws. He also asked if California would force Antifa thugs to abide by the same standards.

“The State of California has no jurisdiction over the federal government,” Essayli wrote on X. “If Newsom wants to regulate our agents, he must go through Congress.”

“I’ve directed our federal agencies that the law signed today has no effect on our operations,” he continued. “Our agents will continue to protect their identities.”

Trump Admin. Schools Gavin Newsom After He Signs Legislation Banning Federal Agents, Including ICE, From Wearing Face Masks (VIDEO) | The Gateway Pundit | by Cullen Linebarger

California Governor Gavin Newsom has struck his latest blow in his war against the Trump Administration’s immigration policies.

www.thegatewaypundit.com

 

[1LoverofGod]

Trump Admin. Schools Gavin Newsom After He Signs Legislation Banning Federal Agents, Including ICE, From Wearing Face Masks​

(Video)

Harmeet Dhillion, the Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights at the U.S. Department of Justice, mocked Newsom over the new law by noting that states have no jurisdiction over federal officials’ attire.

Acting U.S. Attorney Bill Essayli also scoffed at Newsom’s grandstanding and said he had directed federal agencies to ignore the stupid laws. He also asked if California would force Antifa thugs to abide by the same standards.

“The State of California has no jurisdiction over the federal government,” Essayli wrote on X. “If Newsom wants to regulate our agents, he must go through Congress.”

“I’ve directed our federal agencies that the law signed today has no effect on our operations,” he continued. “Our agents will continue to protect their identities.”

Trump Admin. Schools Gavin Newsom After He Signs Legislation Banning Federal Agents, Including ICE, From Wearing Face Masks (VIDEO) | The Gateway Pundit | by Cullen Linebarger

California Governor Gavin Newsom has struck his latest blow in his war against the Trump Administration’s immigration policies.

www.thegatewaypundit.com

I found this interesting from the article .......

"Moreover, the law does not apply to state police."

So California State police can cover their faces, but Federal law enforcement officers cant.

 

[Tall Timbers]

I found this interesting from the article .......

"Moreover, the law does not apply to state police."

So California State police can cover their faces, but Federal law enforcement officers cant.

The law may be addressed to Federal Law Enforcement, but is not applicable to them. That despite Newsum's wishing it was applicable to them. The law is nothing more than a nothing burger (no offense meant towards burgers).

 

[Work4Peanuts]

The law may be addressed to Federal Law Enforcement, but is not applicable to them. That despite Newsum's wishing it was applicable to them. The law is nothing more than a nothing burger (no offense meant towards burgers).

It's more virtue signalling to his base. This will rile them up more and whip them into a frenzy of "law enforcement is supposed to obey the law" More chaos=more power.

Useful pawns and an excuse to incite violence among a group of people who are too stupid to realize that the state doesn't have that power over federal government. It amazes me how little the democrat party has changed since the last civil war. They still want states' rights over federal government, and they still want their slaves, only this time the slaves are children trafficked by the cartels, and other spanish speakers from south of the border.

 

[RonJohnSilver]

Maybe the agents could dye their hair blue and wear fake mustaches and noses and wigs. Works for me at Wal-Mart, I blend right in.

 

[1LoverofGod]

The law may be addressed to Federal Law Enforcement, but is not applicable to them. That despite Newsum's wishing it was applicable to them. The law is nothing more than a nothing burger (no offense meant towards burgers).

So then, "Where's the beef?" Lol