Judge Blocks California's Ban on Federal Agents Wearing Masks

Agents must still wear clear identification showing their agency and badge number

Published on Feb. 9, 2026

Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›

A federal judge has blocked a California law that would have banned federal immigration agents from covering their faces, but the agents will still be required to wear clear identification showing their agency and badge number. The Trump administration had filed a lawsuit challenging the law, arguing it would threaten the safety of officers facing harassment and violence.

Why it matters

This ruling could have national implications as states grapple with how to deal with federal agents enforcing the Trump administration's immigration crackdown. The case highlights the ongoing tensions between state and federal authorities over immigration enforcement.

The details

The judge ruled that the mask ban as enacted discriminated against the federal government by exempting state law enforcement. The ruling leaves open the possibility for future legislation banning federal agents from wearing masks if it applies to all law enforcement agencies. The judge said federal officers can perform their duties without wearing masks. California's law also required law enforcement to wear clear identification, which was upheld by the judge.

  • The ruling will go into effect on February 19, 2026.
  • The California law banning facial coverings was originally set to go into effect on January 1, 2026 but was put on hold due to the lawsuit.

The players

Judge Christina Snyder

The federal judge who issued the initial ruling blocking California's ban on federal agents wearing masks.

Gavin Newsom

The Democratic governor of California who signed the bill banning some law enforcement officers from wearing masks.

Scott Weiner

The California state senator who proposed the original bill to ban facial coverings.

U.S. Department of Homeland Security

The federal agency that claimed there has been a multifold increase in assaults and threats against federal officers, which was cited as a reason for allowing federal agents to wear masks.

Cameron Bell

An attorney for the California Department of Justice who challenged the federal government's claims about the need for federal agents to wear masks.

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What they’re saying

“It appears that we don't have the legal authority for federal agents but we do for other law enforcement authorities.”

— Gavin Newsom, Governor of California (Online interview)

“ICE and Border Patrol are covering their faces to maximize their terror campaign and to insulate themselves from accountability. We will ensure our mask ban can be enforced.”

— Scott Weiner, California State Senator (News release)

“There is real deterrence on the officer's safety and ability to perform their duties.”

— Tiberius Davis, Government Lawyer (Court hearing)

“It's obvious why these laws are in the public interest.”

— Cameron Bell, California Department of Justice Attorney (Court hearing)

What’s next

The judge's ruling will go into effect on February 19, 2026. California State Senator Scott Weiner has said he will immediately introduce new legislation to include state police in the law banning facial coverings.

The takeaway

This case highlights the ongoing tensions between state and federal authorities over immigration enforcement, with California seeking to increase transparency and accountability for federal agents while the Trump administration argues such measures threaten officer safety. The ruling could have broader implications for how states approach regulating federal law enforcement activities within their borders.