Bondi Wrongly Claims Win in ICE Mask Ban Fight

Court ruling was on a different California case, not the mask ban.

Published on Mar. 2, 2026

Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›

U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi falsely claimed the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals issued a ruling blocking California's ban on immigration agents and other law enforcement officers wearing masks. In reality, the court's ruling was on a separate case involving a California law requiring officers to display identification, not the mask ban.

Why it matters

This case highlights the ongoing legal battles between the federal government and California over immigration enforcement policies, with the mask ban being a particularly contentious issue. Bondi's inaccurate claim of victory could mislead the public about the status of the mask ban case.

The details

While a federal judge in Los Angeles did block California's initial mask ban law 10 days earlier, the state did not appeal that decision. Instead, lawmakers introduced a new mask bill without the problematic exemption for state law enforcement. The 9th Circuit ruling Bondi referenced was actually on a separate California law requiring officers to display identification, which the DOJ had appealed. The appellate court issued a temporary injunction pausing that law, but the case is still pending a full review.

  • On February 9, 2026, a federal judge blocked California's initial mask ban law.
  • On February 19, 2026, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals issued a temporary injunction pausing a California law requiring officers to display identification.
  • On March 3, 2026, the 9th Circuit is scheduled to hold a hearing on the identification law case.

The players

Pam Bondi

U.S. Attorney General who falsely claimed the 9th Circuit ruled against California's mask ban.

Christina A. Snyder

U.S. District Judge who previously blocked California's initial mask ban law.

Scott Wiener

California state senator who introduced a new mask ban bill after the initial law was blocked.

Bill Essayli

U.S. Attorney's Office in Los Angeles who also celebrated the 9th Circuit's ruling, incorrectly suggesting it was related to the mask ban case.

Mark Bennett

One of the 9th Circuit judges who will hear the case on the California law requiring officer identification, and has previously signaled skepticism over the administration's immigration enforcement policies.

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What they’re saying

“The 9th Circuit has now issued a FULL stay blocking California's ban on masks for federal law enforcement agents.”

— Pam Bondi, U.S. Attorney General (X)

“Another key win for the Justice Department.”

— Bill Essayli, U.S. Attorney's Office in Los Angeles (X)

What’s next

The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals is scheduled to hold a hearing on the California law requiring officer identification on March 3, 2026, which will determine if the temporary injunction remains in place.

The takeaway

This case highlights the ongoing legal battles between the federal government and California over immigration enforcement policies, with both sides making claims of victory that do not always align with the facts. Accurate reporting is crucial to ensure the public understands the true status of these complex legal disputes.