Real officers don’t hide their identities — neither should ICE | Opinion

California is the first and, so far, the only state in the union with the moral courage to prohibit U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents from hiding behind masks and refusing to identify themselves.

Predictably, the state now faces a lawsuit filed by the U.S. Attorney’s Office.

Equally predictable: Certain law enforcement organizations and conservative officials in California — including San Luis Obispo County District Attorney Dan Dow — stand behind the Trump administration’s decision to allow immigration enforcement agents to roam our streets as a clandestine police force.

Perhaps no one has been more outspoken than Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco, who is one of the leaders in the California governor’s race.

“They didn’t ban criminals from wearing masks, they didn’t tell criminals that they had to identify themselves,” Bianco said on a campaign stop. “Every single person that voted for that needs to be eliminated in the next election. Anyone that votes for those people are absolute idiots.”

In other words, if the bad guys can do it, the good guys should be allowed to as well — accountability and transparency be damned.

1000% increase in assaults on ICE officers?

The Justice Department’s lawsuit claims that California’s mask ban, set to take effect in January, would “further endanger our brave men and women protecting our community.”

“ICE officers alone ‘are facing a more than 1000% increase in assaults against them’ and ‘an 8000% increase in death threats against them,’” the lawsuit states, quoting from news releases from the Department of Homeland Security (though the news releases offer no hint as to how Homeland Security came up with those figures).

In a more recent news release, Homeland Security said that agents “clearly identify themselves as police, typically by wearing vests marked with “ICE/ERO” or “Homeland Security.”

Then why object to a law requiring what is already common practice?

Ignoring risk to the public

In attacking California’s laws, the Justice Department says nothing about the dangers members of the public face from the chaos surrounding the immigration crackdown, exacerbated by ICE agents who remain anonymous as they carry out raids at Home Depot parking lots, on farms, outside courthouses and in front of schools.

That creates a volatile situation that has resulted in protests, which can put both the public and law enforcement in danger.

And then there’s this: ICE’s covert operations offer perfect cover for impersonators who prey on victims, simply by putting on an intimidating show and claiming to be federal immigration agents.

Real ICE agents have already set the precedent — they don’t need to show an ID or even their faces — so is it any wonder that fake agents are easily able to mimic them?

FBI warns of ‘broader negative consequences’

Reports of impersonations are not “fake news.” Even the FBI addressed the problem in a bulletin issued to law enforcement.

It summarizes five cases committed by alleged ICE impersonators, including a robbery and assault, a kidnapping, an attempted rape and a sexual assault.

Additional alleged crimes committed by ICE imposters have been reported by local law enforcement and media outlets — including reports of fake immigration officers stopping Latinos and threatening them with deportation.

The bulletin suggests that law enforcement agencies conduct community outreach programs and public awareness campaigns “to educate and train the community on common impersonation tactics.”

Such efforts “boost the law enforcement’s image,” it says.

No secret police. No vigilantes.

Several agencies, including California Attorney General Rob Bonta, have issued tips on how to recognize ICE imposters.

First on the list: Ask for identification.

Sensible advice, yet the federal government is fighting even that. The lawsuit against California doesn’t just challenge the No Secret Police Act, which prohibits masks. It also opposes the No Vigilantes Act.

That law requires all law enforcement officers to visibly display identification that includes their agency and either a name or badge number. (Both laws allow exemptions in some circumstances, such as undercover operations.)

Not every federal law enforcement agency appears to agree.

The FBI bulletin gently suggests that law enforcement personnel “adequality (sic) identify themselves and cooperate with individuals who request further verification.”

The U.S. Deputy Marshal’s Office in Memphis, Tennessee, issued a public service announcement under the headline, “Real Officers Have Nothing to Hide.”

“Real officers will identify themselves, state their agency, and explain the reason for the stop,” it says. “They carry both a badge and agency‑issued ID — always ask to see both.”

ICE agents have been getting away with ignoring those guidelines, which is why California passed bills banning masks and requiring identification. Other states are considering similar legislation.

What the Constitution and case law say

The Justice Department points out that under the U.S. Constitution’s Supremacy Clause, federal laws take precedence over conflicting state laws. That principle has been upheld in court cases involving federal laws enforcement officers who broke state laws but escaped prosecution because they were acting in the performance of their duties.

A notable case occurred in 1962, when a U.S. marshal ordered tear gas thrown into a crowd of thousands attempting to prevent a Black student, James Meredith, from entering the University of Mississippi. An ensuing riot left two people dead and more than 200 injured, including nearly 100 law enforcement officers. The marshal was later indicted by the state for breach of peace and inciting a riot, but a federal court found he had acted in the performance of his duties.

That doesn’t mean that federal officers have license to trample over states, which have a duty to protect their citizens.

That was noted by a federal court noted in a 1988 case, Kentucky v. Larry Long.

Long was an FBI agent accused of involvement with two burglaries. The court ultimately decided in Long’s favor, but with this caveat:

“The national government cannot be made to tolerate undue interference from the states in the enforcement of federal law. But neither should any state be made to tolerate unwarranted interference with its duty to protect the health and welfare of its citizens.”

By attempting to rein in ICE, the state of California is acting to protect the health and welfare of its citizens, as is its duty.

It is demanding that this particular branch of law enforcement be accountable for their behavior in our cities and towns Otherwise, it leaves us open to the potential for abuse.

If these officers are not prepared to operate at the levels expected of professional law enforcement, they are in the wrong line of work.

The fact is, we would expect nothing less from our local cops. And we should expect nothing less from ICE.

California is right to pass the minimum standards that agents not hide behind intimidating coverups.

Every state should do the same.