A California Democrat introduced a bill on Monday that would ban law enforcement officers who operate in the position from wearing face covering.
If passed, the legislation would render the West Coast express the first in the country to lock down on federal agencies and authorities from concealing their eyes. It comes as clips of raids showing veiled officials in unknown vehicles grabbing people off the roads circulate on social media.
“We are seeing more and more law enforcement officers, especially at the provincial level, covering their faces completely, not identifying themselves at all and, at times, even wearing military vests where we can’t tell if these are law enforcement officers or a vigilante army, ” Wiener said. “They are grabbing people off our streets and fading citizens, and it ’s terrifying. ”
Wiener’s act would involve law enforcement officers to keep their eyes obvious and wear clothes displaying their brands or another form of identification. The estimate exempts the National Guard, SWAT team, and soldiers responding to natural disasters.
Democrats have criticized the process of law enforcement officers covering their eyes, arguing that it erodes clarity as Trump steps up his usage of federal law enforcement to carry out his immigration plan. California Republicans countered that concealing protects soldiers from being targeted or doxxed, which takes place when a person’s data, such as household names, is posted website.
But Wiener believes his expenses will help rebuild trust in law enforcement.
“The recent federal operations in California have created an environment of profound terror, ” he said. “If we want the government to respect law enforcement, we don’t allow them to behave like surprise authorities in an authoritarian position. ”
He added that law enforcement may become “proud to show their heads. ”
Harmeet Dhillon, U. S. assistant attorney general for the civil rights division , pushed up on Wiener’s act.
“Scott, come check with a lawyer if this is a factor, and get back to us. ( Hint— it is n’t — states can’t regulate what federal law enforcement wears ), ” Dhillon, who was previously based in California, wrote on X.
Tracy McCray, mind of the San Francisco Police Officers Association, told the San Francisco Standard her coalition is reviewing the bill’s details.
TWO COURT Commanders STABBED AT MANHATTAN CRIMINAL COURT
“ While clarity is important, there are circumstances — such as military operations, undercover assignments, or group handle situations — where face coverings are necessary for the safety of our soldiers and the public, ” McCray said.
Jake Johnson, president of the California Association of Highway Patrolmen, wrote in a speech that his party may look at the costs “closely as we work toward a good goal for all Californians. ”
