In a functioning democracy, law enforcement must be visible, accountable, and answerable to the people it serves. When officers cover their faces, hide their identities, and act without explanation or legal process, the line between legitimate policing and authoritarian control begins to disappear.
That’s exactly what has been happening under the Trump administration’s immigration enforcement operations—and it’s why California lawmakers are right to act before it’s too late.
Last week, State Senators Scott Wiener and Jesse Arreguín introduced SB 627, the No Secret Police Act, legislation that would prohibit law enforcement officers in California from obscuring their identities during operations. It would bar local, state, and federal law enforcement from covering their faces unless there is a clearly defined, narrow exception—such as SWAT operations or wildfire emergencies.
The bill also requires that officers wear uniforms or markings clearly identifying their name or badge number. In short, it enforces the most basic standard of democratic law enforcement: if you wield power in the public’s name, the public has a right to know who you are.
SB 627 responds to a pattern that has become unmistakable: federal agents, particularly Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers, are conducting enforcement operations in ways that deliberately obscure who they are. They appear in unmarked vehicles. They wear plain clothes or generic “POLICE” jackets. They pull masks over their faces. They refuse to identify themselves even when asked. And they’re sweeping people—students, workers, immigrants—off the street and into detention without a warrant, without informing families, and without any clear justification.
As Washington Post columnist Philip Bump bluntly described it, “The mass deportation effort Donald Trump promised on the campaign trail has unfolded less like a careful, accountable police operation than the emergence of a secret police force acting on behalf of the chief executive.”
In March, Rumeysa Ozturk, a Tufts University student, was walking down a public street in Somerville, Massachusetts, when she was surrounded by plainclothes federal agents. Some were masked. None were clearly identified. Ozturk was detained and slated for deportation, not for a criminal offense, but because she had co-written an essay critical of her university’s response to the war in Gaza. It took more than a month for her legal team to secure her release. Her case is not an outlier—it’s a warning.
In recent months, raids have been reported across California—in Los Angeles, San Francisco, Concord, San Diego, Downey, Montebello—where agents wearing masks and generic identifiers have apprehended individuals without transparency or proper legal process. This is not merely a logistical or procedural concern. It is a breakdown of constitutional norms. It is the normalization of unaccountable state violence.
And it creates fertile ground for impersonation, vigilantism, and abuse. As Bump put it, “In an environment where any guy on the street could turn out to be part of an ICE or Homeland Security sting operation, such impersonations become trivially easy.” That’s not a theoretical risk. In Florida, a woman was arrested for allegedly dressing as a masked ICE officer and kidnapping her ex-boyfriend’s wife. When legitimate officers operate anonymously, it becomes nearly impossible for the public to distinguish between lawful enforcement and criminal impersonation.
ICE has justified the use of masks by citing officer safety, pointing to a supposed 413 percent increase in assaults against their personnel. But as Bump thoroughly documented, this figure is unverified, shifting, and lacks meaningful context. A 413 percent increase could mean an increase from eight to 41 incidents—or from 200 to 1,000. Without baseline numbers, it’s impossible to interpret. Even more troubling is ICE’s refusal to provide any documentation or breakdown of these incidents.
Customs and Border Protection, by contrast, publishes monthly data showing that assaults on officers are actually 20 percent lower than they were in 2024. Bump reviewed Justice Department and Department of Homeland Security (DHS) press releases and was able to identify just a handful of confirmed assaults—twelve total—since January.
In many cases, these incidents involved suspects resisting arrest during raids, not officers being targeted outside of official duties. In some cases, the assaults included an elbow to the face or a vehicle collision while a suspect tried to flee. None of the documented incidents would have been prevented by masks. In fact, in several, officers were wearing clearly marked uniforms, and the government used that visibility to strengthen its legal case.
So what is this really about?
As journalist Radley Balko told Bump, “The masking thing isn’t exactly new… I think it grew more common with the general trend toward militarization, as balaclavas became a standard part of the SWAT uniform. There was really no safety reason for it. It was mostly about intimidation.” That pattern—anonymity as a weapon—is deeply corrosive to public trust and civil society.
And it’s not just a matter of physical fear. It’s a matter of legal evasion.
In 2007, Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) officers stormed the home of two innocent women. They were masked and never identified. Despite the women’s efforts to sue, federal courts refused for nearly a decade to compel the agency to release the officers’ names. The case was ultimately dismissed. Bump draws the connection clearly: “Unidentified federal agents would be a problem precisely because they are less likely to face accountability for their actions.”
This lack of accountability doesn’t just silence victims. It emboldens abuse.
When New York City Comptroller Brad Lander attempted to accompany an immigrant targeted by ICE into a courthouse, he was arrested. Video shows Lander calmly attempting to de-escalate and request paperwork. Still, he was charged with “assaulting law enforcement.” The charges were later dropped—but the intention was clear: intimidate elected officials, punish interference, and weaponize the law to suppress oversight.
Bump again asked the critical question: “Why are these officers covering their faces if not to avoid accountability?”
That question lies at the heart of SB 627.
It’s worth remembering that California has been here before. In 2020, during the protests over George Floyd’s murder, unidentified federal agents were deployed in Washington, D.C., leading then–NYPD Commissioner Bill Bratton to ask: “What is the need for anonymity in controlling crowd demonstrations?” The answer, in that moment and in this one, is chilling: there is none, unless the goal is to escape consequences.
The Trump administration has made it clear that it has no interest in confronting police misconduct or abuse. On the contrary, it has pledged to “protect and defend law enforcement officers wrongly accused and abused by State or local officials.” It has issued executive orders shielding officers from scrutiny. And it has fostered a culture of impunity among federal agencies like ICE and DHS, even as those agencies escalate mass raids and arrests.
SB 627 pushes back on that culture. It affirms that, in California, law enforcement is not above the law. Officers who act legally and professionally have no reason to fear transparency. Those who do fear it should not be empowered with the state’s coercive authority.
This is not an anti-police bill. It is a pro-accountability bill. It draws a firm, democratic boundary: if you are going to arrest someone, you must identify yourself. If you are going to enter someone’s home or stop them on the street, you must show your face. If you are going to act in the name of the law, you must be visible to the people whose rights you affect.
Anything less is not just bad policy—it is a step toward authoritarianism.
As Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez said after a high-profile raid in California, “This idea that we are going to allow some kind of paramilitary force to bloom that is not in any way … accountable to the Constitution of the United States? We’ve got another thing coming.”
She’s right. And California has the opportunity to lead by example.
At a time when federal agencies are using secrecy, intimidation, and legal evasion as tools of immigration enforcement, states must act as bulwarks of constitutional rights. SB 627 is not symbolic—it is a tangible defense of transparency, oversight, and the democratic principle that no one, not even law enforcement, is above the law.
Here’s the problem, there are prominent Democrats calling for the doxing of ICE agents which would put the agents and their families in danger. At the very least it would subject these agents to ridicule. I think we all know this is what this is all about.
“House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) sparked controversy Thursday after pledging to publicly identify Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents involved in deportation operations, even as agents continue to face an increase in violent threats and doxing.”
https://www.lifezette.com/2025/06/hakeem-jeffries-threatens-to-dox-ice-agents-amid-rising-attacks-death-threats-watch/
“ICE, our new secret police agency, claims its agents must wear masks and conceal their identities because of a rising risk of violence on the job or home terror attacks. But according to columnist Philip Bump at the Washington Post, ICE refuses to substantiate those claims—and there’s much reason to doubt them.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2025/06/19/brad-lander-ice-assault-masking/
I’ve been doxed for simply commenting on the Vanguard. I can imagine how crazy leftists would go overboard doxing and threatening ICE agents if they have their identities. Just look at our SCOTUS judges and how their homes were protested at with Kavanaugh’s life being threatened.
There are two problems here and you only examining half of it. Problem one: they are claiming all sorts of things but not substantiating the claim. You didn’t respond to that. Second problem is what happens if a masked person commits misconduct, where is the accountability? When I interviewed the attorneys in Sacramento for example from 2020, because they couldn’t identify the cops involved, it caused all sorts of problems. You’re basically saying that you don’t care about this issue.
“Second problem is what happens if a masked person commits misconduct”
You mean like Antifa or the masked mob that attacked Beth Bourne and the TPUSA booth at UCDavis?
Clearly you are not interested in addressing my concerns.
DG say: “You didn’t respond to that. Second problem is what happens if a masked person commits misconduct, where is the accountability?”
Total hypocrisy with what you said a few weeks ago about why masked protesting should be allowed. What if a masked protestor commits misconduct, as they frequently do. No masks on protestors, no masks on law enforcement.
“Federal officers have been “doxed” on social media, and often wear masks while on duty and making immigration arrests after officers, and their families, have received death threats, Lyons said.
“A lot of agencies were invited to come out two weeks ago in Los Angeles where we ran our operation where ICE officers were doxed,“ Lyons said.
“So let’s just say that again. People are out there taking photos of the names, their faces and posting them online with death threats to their family and themselves,” Lyons said.”
““So I’m sorry if people are offended by them wearing masks, but I’m not gonna let my officers and agents go out there and put their lives on the line and their family on the line because people don’t like what immigration enforcement is,” Lyons said.”
https://www.boston25news.com/news/local/ice-agents-doxed-social-media-wear-masks-after-receiving-death-threats-director-says/2NIC6OZ6XRGMXDRYLWLIKJ66GU/
Law enforcement identifying themselves seems like a way of maintaining the trust of the community and holding law enforcement to be professionally accountable. If they don’t identify themselves and I am detained, then how could I be certain that they weren’t individuals impersonating law enforcement? Am I actually being kidnapped?
Many individuals in law enforcement scrub the internet of any information about their personal lives, and that seems fair. If law enforcement fears personal retribution by identifying themselves while on the job, then perhaps law enforcement isn’t really the appropriate profession for those individuals.
This is happening.
Keith doesn’t care
There are many cases where people impersonate cops that aren’t wearing masks.
This is happening.
We’re in a different society today where crazy leftists will go to any extreme to go after law enforcement. We even have elected officials on the left telling their constituents to identify and dox officers.
David doesn’t care.
I don’t. You don’t have to worry about your kids getting grabbed
I don’t have to worry about ending up in a Gulag either like you do, right David?
Right now more concerned about my kids and overzealous ICE agents hiding behind masks.
“overdramatic”
adjective (also over-dramatic)
UK /ˌəʊ.və.drəˈmæt.ɪk/ US /ˌoʊ.vɚ.drəˈmæt̬.ɪk/
Add to word list
showing much stronger emotions than are necessary or usual for a situation
If I’m in a conservative state (maybe Florida), someone says that they are ICE law enforcement and asks me to submit but doesn’t produce a badge and refuses to identify themselves, they are carrying a firearm, I’m also carrying a fire arm for personal defense, would I be justified in shooting that person in self defense, similar to the way George Zimmerman killed Trayvon Martin in self-defense?
ICE is detaining people in Florida, and many of those being detained include those who would stereotypically vote conservative — Cuban, Venezuelan immigrants.
Actually worse than Antifa. These are not crazy anarchists but instead the law enforcement officers of the Federal Government of the United States of America. We should expect, no, we should demand that our law enforcement officers be accountable for actions they take in the field. Remember the oath of defending the constitution against enemies foreign and domestic. How do you do that if the enemies are unidentified?
No secret police!
“Remember the oath of defending the constitution against enemies foreign and domestic. How do you do that if the enemies are unidentified?”
Yes, like I said, Antifa and masked rioters.
DG, I absolutely, fully, 100% agree with you here. Masked police is a terrifying concept and should not be allowed. I hope this law passes.
HOWEVER, the same must be said of protestors. A few weeks ago you tried to justify masks in protests because people are marginalized and might be targeted/arrested or some such BS. Yeah, that’s what protest is about, taking the consequences, but today’s enabled cowards skirt it because Gary May, who should be fired, allow it. On May 2nd, 2025, fully, 100% masked protestors stormed the UCD Coffeehouse with a bullhorn, violating all UC Davis time, manner and place protest rules. This had made no media outlets, Gary May seems content to hope that it ‘didn’t happen’ and has offered no apology to the Jewish community, except to please the outcast antizionists.
Gary May needs to be dragged to DC and set down before Elise Stefanik and grilled until forced to step down. The coverup is always the big sin.
That you could even begin to justify masks for protestors and then come out against this police bill is vile. No one should be masked, all should be accountable with their faces.
“Our ICE enforcement officers are facing a 413% increase in assaults against them. Disturbingly, in recent days, ICE officers’ family members have been doxed and targeted as well.”
https://www.dhs.gov/news/2025/06/07/dhs-releases-statement-violent-rioters-assaulting-ice-officers-los-angeles-ca-and
“because people don’t like what immigration enforcement is, . . .”
That’s the REAL reason behind all of this. And in fact, a lot of these same people don’t like what ANY law enforcement “is”.
(Other than the “street law” that they themselves will enforce, if anyone dares to disobey them when they hold others hostage by blocking roads, etc.).
(ICE) Director Todd Lyons says left-wing activists are targeting ICE agents, with some going after agents’ families, including their children.
“Wouldn’t you wear a mask if it kept your family safe, if it kept your kids safe? We ran an operation with the Secret Service,” Lyons said. “We arrested someone who was going online, taking [ICE agents’] photos, posting their families, their kids’ Instagrams, their kids’ Facebooks, and targeting them. So let me ask, is that the issue here that anyone is upset with masks, or is anyone upset that an ICE officer’s families were labeled terrorists?”
Neither you nor he seem to want to address my concerns, so I don’t have any more … to give.
You cited an opinion piece by the left leaning Washington Post where the author said there were no substantiated claims of threats against ICE agents. I’ve pointed out the article was wrong, there have been several threats made to ICE agents and their CHILDREN. Are you going to address that concern?
And you cited the head of the gestapo.
Your comment is way over the top and uncalled for.
Not really. If anything, based on recent historical work, the Gestapo wasn’t all it was made out to be, ICE may actually be worse.
The Vanguard, where it’s okay to call ICE the gestapo but you can’t use a widely used term like TDS.
Read it David, you might learn something.
“The Political Left Increasingly Parallels Nazism”
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/the-political-left-increasingly-parallels-nazism/ar-BB1rjOhp
That was a very bad historical analysis.