California Bill Aims to Ban Police Face Coverings, Prompting Legal and Safety Debate
No Secret Police Act” would require officers to show faces and ID, sparking debate over safety, federal authority.
California lawmakers have introduced legislation that would prohibit law enforcement officers at all levels from covering their faces while conducting operations in the state, citing the need for transparency and public trust.
The proposal, Senate Bill 627—also called the “No Secret Police Act”—would require officers to be identifiable via name tags, badge numbers, or uniforms. It would apply to state, local, and federal officers, with exceptions for SWAT teams, medical-grade face masks, and wildfire protection gear.
Law enforcement officers are public servants, and people should be able to see their faces, see who they are, know who they are, wrote state Sen. Scott Wiener, D-San Francisco. Otherwise, there is no transparency and no accountability.
“Our first responders are responsible for vital work in protecting our communities, and trust and accountability are a key aspects in keeping our neighborhoods safe,” wrote Jesse Arreguin (D-Berkeley). “This bill will ensure that law enforcement are easily identifiable, maintaining that trust and accountability.”
Wiener criticized the Trump administration for targeting illegal immigrants without criminal records and alleged that current tactics allow ICE agents to make themselves appear to be local police in some cases.
“Our first responders are responsible for vital work in protecting our communities, and trust and accountability are key aspects in keeping our neighborhoods safe,” Arreguín added. “This bill will ensure that law enforcement are easily identifiable, maintaining that trust and accountability.”
The legislation follows a series of federal operations in California where officers conducted raids while “covering their faces and, at times, badges, names, and other identifying information,” according to a statement from the authors. These raids have taken place in cities including Los Angeles, San Francisco, San Diego, Concord, Downey, and Montebello.
Opponents argue the bill could create safety issues and interfere with federal operations.
Assemblymember Tom Lackey, a retired California Highway Patrol sergeant, criticized the name of the bill, stating, “To call it the ‘No Secret Police Act,’ I think that promotes distrust. It is an us-versus-them environment.”
Legal experts say the bill may face challenges in federal court. “Is this a reasonable regulation by the state? Yes. Does it conflict with any federal law? Maybe not,” said Mark Reichel, a Sacramento-based legal analyst. “But even the authors of the bill, and then some in the Trump administration have been openly saying we are going to take this to court. We are going to let the courts decide.”
Reichel added, “In light of the fact their own rules require them to identify themselves anyway, there is a good chance this law actually may be upheld in California only for ICE agents who operate in California.”
Still, he warned that the federal government could “respond with a new regulation that explicitly allows mask usage,” which could override the state measure. “Is there a conflict between the federal law and the state law? And if there is, the federal law prevails,” Reichel said.
A hearing date for the bill has not yet been announced.