The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals supported the Trump administration in overturning a California requirement that immigration agents show visible identification while on duty.
By Nigel Duara, CalMatters
This article was initially published by CalMatters. Subscribe for their newsletters.
A federal appeals court on Wednesday invalidated California’s stipulation that masked federal agents must identify themselves, which deals a setback to the state’s ongoing opposition to the Trump administration’s deportation policies.
A panel from the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals issued a ruling preventing California from enforcing a section of the 2025 law that requires federal law enforcement officers to display identification while performing their duties.
The law was predicted to undergo intense scrutiny from the federal judiciary. A Supreme Court case from 1890 asserts that a state cannot prosecute federal law enforcement officers working within their official capacities.
This law also conflicted with the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution, which stipulates that states cannot regulate federal government operations.
Gov. Gavin Newsom enacted this law alongside one banning federal immigration agents from wearing masks. The Trump administration filed a lawsuit challenging both measures.
On February 19, a federal judge granted an injunction against the mask law. The latest ruling by a unanimous 3-0 decision concentrates on the identification requirement.
“If a state law directly regulates the conduct of the United States, it is null and void regardless of whether the regulated activities are integral to federal functions or operations, and irrespective of how significantly the state law interferes with federal functions or operations,” stated Judge Mark J. Bennett.
California’s attorneys contended that, even if the law breaches the Supremacy Clause, the court should also address the state government’s apprehensions regarding the impact of federal immigration enforcement on public safety.
“We decline to do so,” Bennett responded. “Since the United States has demonstrated a likelihood that the Act contravenes the Supremacy Clause, it has also shown that both the public interest and the balance of equities tip ‘decisively in…favor’ of a preliminary injunction.”
Democrats enacted the law, known as the “No Vigilantes Act,” to regulate federal officers who appeared in masks and without visible identification during the Trump administration’s immigration enforcement actions.
This year, lawmakers are advancing additional bills aimed at the administration’s immigration agents, including proposals that would prohibit their employment in California law enforcement agencies and a measure to facilitate the ability of people to sue federal agents for civil rights violations.
Acting U.S. Attorney General Todd Blanche celebrated the 9th Circuit ruling on social media.
“This Department of Justice stands unwaveringly and completely behind the dedicated men and women of ICE who risk their lives daily to enforce our immigration laws and protect American citizens,” he wrote. “Today’s legal success in the 9th Circuit halts the enforcement of California’s mask prohibition for ICE agents and is a significant victory for law enforcement.”
