SAN FRANCISCO — In the wake of the fatal shooting of Renee Nicole Good by an Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent in Minnesota, California lawmakers are advancing legislation aimed at stripping federal officers of effective immunity when they violate constitutional rights, a move that could reshape the balance of power between states and federal law enforcement.
According to a press release from the office of Scott Wiener, California’s proposed No Kings Act, SB 747, would expand state civil rights law to allow individuals to sue federal officials in state court for unlawful conduct. Supporters say the bill responds to a growing pattern of aggressive federal enforcement actions, particularly in immigration operations, that they argue operate beyond meaningful accountability.
The legislation follows the killing of Renee Nicole Good and comes as officials in other states explore similar measures. Politico has reported that New York Gov. Kathy Hochul is seeking expanded legal tools to address harms caused by federal immigration enforcement under the Trump administration.
Wiener said the Minnesota shooting underscores the dangers of unchecked federal power. “If federal officers can shoot a woman in broad daylight and face no accountability, our rights are doing little to protect us,” Wiener said. He added that accountability is essential to preserving constitutional freedoms and said the No Kings Act is designed to provide a clear path to justice for people whose rights have been violated by government actors.
According to Politico, Hochul is expected to propose legislation allowing New Yorkers to file lawsuits in state court against federal officials accused of violating constitutional rights. “Let’s start holding these people accountable,” Hochul said, according to the report.
Wiener’s office said SB 747 is grounded in long-standing constitutional principles and is supported by prominent legal scholars from across the ideological spectrum. The press release argued that because the Constitution is the “fundamental and paramount law of the nation,” unconstitutional conduct cannot be authorized by federal statute and does not preempt state-level civil remedies.
The release included a statement from Anya Bidwell, a senior attorney at the Institute for Justice, who said the proposal builds on existing California law. “The Bane Act is a pathbreaking statute that already allows victims of government abuse to sue for violations of individual rights, whether under the California Constitution or the United States Constitution,” Bidwell said. She said the amendment would broaden the statute’s reach and reaffirm California’s role as a forum for accountability.
The statement also quoted Cristine Soto DeBerry, executive director of Prosecutors Alliance Action, who criticized federal enforcement practices. “More and more we’re seeing federal agents terrorize communities, rip families apart, and subject people to unconscionable conditions,” DeBerry said. She said California should not stand by while residents are brutalized and the law is ignored.
Wiener’s office said the bill reflects a broader effort to reinforce transparency and accountability as essential components of constitutional governance. Supporters argue that measures under consideration in California and New York are aimed at protecting free speech, equal protection, and other core civil liberties amid an expansion of federal enforcement authority.
Follow the Vanguard on Social Media – X, Instagram and Facebook. Subscribe the Vanguard News letters. To make a tax-deductible donation, please visit davisvanguard.org/donate or give directly through ActBlue. Your support will ensure that the vital work of the Vanguard continues.
We’ll see what the Feds have to say about this..
I think they’re busy annexing Venezuela and Greenland. Probably some kind of process/red tape involved with that. :-)
Also – territory, or states?