US Judge Rejects California Law Banning Masks for Federal Officers

Federal judge says California's mask ban on federal officers likely unconstitutional

Published on Feb. 10, 2026

Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›

A federal judge in Los Angeles has preliminarily struck down a California state law that banned federal officers from wearing masks while on duty, ruling that the U.S. government is likely to prove the law is unconstitutional. The judge upheld another California law requiring federal officers to display identification when performing their duties.

Why it matters

This ruling is significant as it prevents California from interfering with federal law enforcement activities, including immigration enforcement operations, by targeting federal officers. The decision highlights the ongoing tensions between state and federal authority over law enforcement matters.

The details

U.S. District Judge Christina Snyder granted the U.S. government's request for an order against enforcing California's law banning federal officers from wearing masks. The judge said the law improperly targets federal officers by treating them differently than state law enforcement officers, who were excluded from the mask ban. However, Snyder upheld another California law that requires federal officers to display identification when performing their duties.

  • On February 9, 2026, a federal judge in Los Angeles issued the preliminary ruling.

The players

U.S. District Judge Christina Snyder

The federal judge who issued the preliminary ruling striking down California's law banning federal officers from wearing masks while on duty.

California Governor Gavin Newsom

The California governor who signed the provisions, including the mask ban, amid Republican President Donald Trump's deployment of National Guard troops to Los Angeles during protests over immigration enforcement operations.

U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi

The U.S. Attorney General who called the decision on the mask law 'ANOTHER key court victory' and stated that federal agents face harassment, doxxing, obstruction, and attacks just for doing their jobs.

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What they’re saying

“These federal agents are harassed, doxxed, obstructed, and attacked on a regular basis just for doing their jobs. We have no tolerance for it.”

— U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi (X)

“Snyder's decision on the identification law was 'a clear win for the rule of law,' and that 'no badge and no name mean no accountability.'”

— California Governor Gavin Newsom (Statement)

What’s next

The judge's preliminary ruling will likely be appealed, and the case could eventually reach the Supreme Court to determine the constitutionality of California's laws regarding federal law enforcement officers.

The takeaway

This case highlights the ongoing tensions between state and federal authority over law enforcement matters, with California seeking to impose restrictions on federal officers while the U.S. government argues that such laws interfere with its ability to carry out its duties. The ruling underscores the complex legal landscape surrounding the balance of power between state and federal governments.