California passed accountability bills targeting immigration enforcement. Now what?

Now that Gov. Gavin Newsom has signed the No Secret Police and No Vigilantes Acts, the question left to answer is whether state and federal officers will actually comply. 

On Saturday, Gov. Gavin Newsom signed into law Senate Bill 627, a law prohibiting law enforcement from wearing masks to cover their identity and SB 805, one making it mandatory for officers to display identification when carrying out operations. While the bills have built-in provisions detailing how agencies must comply and the consequences of not doing so, the enforceability of the two bills is still murky.

“These masked men had no identification, these masked men did not provide any information, name, badge number, hidden from accountability, any transparency, any oversight,” said Newsom when he signed the bills last Saturday. He added, “That’s Trump’s America but it's not the America we've grown up in and so we're pushing back against this.”

SB 627 was authored by Democratic State Senators Jesse Arreguin, Sasha Perez, Aisha Wahab and Scott Wiener. Perez and Wiener were the sole authors of SB 805. Both bills were in response to the uptick in immigration raids following President Donald Trump’s promise to crackdown on illegal immigration.

During many of the raids, however, legal residents, citizens and immigrants going through the lengthy process of securing legal residency were caught in the crosshairs of these raids. Such is the case of Adrian Martinez, a U.S. citizen who was taken into custody by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in Pico Rivera back in June. 

Amanda Trebach, a member of Unión del Barrio, which is part of the Community Self-Defense Coalition, was participating in an observation effort at Terminal Island when she was forcibly tackled to the ground and detained by assumed federal agents. In both Trebach’ and Martinez’ cases, the agents arresting them were masked and armed. 

“The impact of these policies all across this city, our state and nation are terrifying,” said Newsom on Saturday, adding "It's like a dystopian sci-fi movie. Unmarked cars, people in masks, people quite literally disappearing … immigrants have rights and we have a right to stand up and push back.”

Through a post on X, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has already stated it will not be complying with the masking law. Under the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution, federal law is given precedence over state law, meaning federal officers do not necessarily have to comply with all state laws.

“To be clear: We will NOT comply with Gavin Newsom’s unconstitutional mask ban. At a time that ICE law enforcement faces a 1,000% increase in assaults and their family members are being doxxed and targeted, the sitting Governor of California signed unconstitutional legislation that strips law enforcement of protections in a disgusting, diabolical fundraising and PR stunt,” said the post on Monday.

“It's really important for our state to stand up to the illegality of what the federal government is doing right now,” said Cristine Soto DeBerry, executive director of the Prosecutors Alliance, a reform-oriented law enforcement association that works with local and state leaders to advance public safety. The Prosecutors Alliance worked on SB 627 and 805.

“While this is starting with immigrants and the Latino community, we'd be foolish to think it will stop there …
it is critical that we know who's engaged in law enforcement and that we have recourse if they violate the rules,” said Soto DeBerry.

Both bills include a provision requiring local and state agencies to publicly post written policies as it relates to the two bills. To be in accordance with SB 627, any law enforcement agency operating in California must post their policy in relation to the use of facial coverings as specified within the bill by July 1, 2026. 

There are exemptions written into the bill. If there are circumstances where officers need to wear masks or helmets for safety reasons, such as wildfires or SWAT operations, the agency must specify that within its written policy. If an officer was wearing a mask and working within the parameters of their agency, they would not be subjected to criminal penalty, according to Soto DeBerry.

Violations of both bills that fall outside of the written policy would result in a misdemeanor. 

SB 805, the No Vigilantes Act, would require any law enforcement officer operating in California that is not uniformed, to visibly display identification that includes their agency and either a name or badge number. The bill includes an urgency statute, meaning it went into effect as soon as Newsom signed it. 

The bill aims to crack down on the possibility of unauthorized people or bounty hunters from conducting raids. Bounty hunters, under this bill, would also be prohibited from disclosing information of bail fugitives to immigration enforcement officers without a valid judicial warrant. 

The presence of masked agents with no identification has led to many calling these arrests “kidnappings,” as it's nearly impossible to tell at the moment which agency is carrying out what are often violent arrests.

“These bills are trying to address the public safety issues and concerns that we have heard from the public, as well as from families who have had their loved ones kidnapped or arrested or detained by individuals that are masked and not wearing identifying clothes,” said Jeannette Zanipatin, the policy director for the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights (CHIRLA). 

“These two bills are really trying to pierce the veil and ensure that there is more transparency and accountability by individuals who are engaging in different types of arrest and detention throughout Southern California,” said Zanipatin.

CHIRLA worked closely with law enforcement to get SB 805 to a place they could support the bill. After negotiations, including exceptions for officers at the state level working undercover, the Peace Officers Research Association of California, the largest statewide law enforcement association, did move to support it.

Individuals will also be able to bring a case against state officers under these laws if they feel their rights have been violated or if there is proof the officer was not following the rules of their agency’s policy under SB 627 and 805.

While it so far looks as though federal officers will be directed to ignore the two bills, local and state officers will be at the discretion of state law to comply. Proponents for the bills believe creating more transparency around what law enforcement is doing and how they do it, will benefit communities in the long-run.

“It takes big strides in ensuring that the public can have trust in our law enforcement officers and agencies here in the state, either at the local level or at the state level,” said Zanipatin.