The impact of Washington’s bill banning law enforcement from wearing face masks 

Washington’s bill banning law enforcement from wearing masks has had little impact on the actions of law enforcement. 

By Kai Lee

On March 19, Governor Bob Ferguson signed Washington’s Senate Bill 5855, banning law enforcement from wearing face masks and coverings while working. It aims to make law enforcement officers’ actions more transparent. 

This bill includes all law enforcement, and bans any “opaque mask, garment,” or other items that cover the face in a way in which a person’s identity is concealed.  

However, it does not include medical masks used to limit transmission of an infection or a mask, such as air-purifying respirators, designed and used to protect against environmental conditions. It also excludes helmets that are used to protect the user on a bicycle or other mode of transportation, religious head and face coverings and face shields. 

To add, the ban does not apply to officers in undercover operations. 

This bill was brought up after concerns over law enforcement agents wearing masks and evading accountability for their actions against civilians and other individuals. Yet, there are some complications to enforcing the law. 

If someone is detained by an officer wearing a face covering in violation of the bill, they can, in theory, file a complaint against the officer to start a civil case. However, as King 5 reported, this is hard because much of the time, individuals being arrested by masked agents do not know the identity of the agent. Furthermore, individuals who are part of groups arrested for being in the country illegally often have difficulty obtaining legal assistance. 

According to the same article, despite masked federal agents continuing to make arrests, there has been little to no repercussions. As King 5’s article notes, this is likely because it is difficult to enforce the law because of the Supremacy Clause of the US Constitution. This law states that judges should prioritize federal law over state law, King 5 reported. This means it will be difficult for Washington to assign consequences to federal officers. However, this does not apply to state and local law enforcement agencies. 

There is a divide within Washington State’s political arena. Democratic Senators Javier Valdez of legislative district 46, Mike Chapman of district 24 and John Lovick of district 44 are three of the senators who sponsored the bill. 

However, there was opposition to the bill. Republican Representative Brian Burnett of legislative district 12 said on Radio Report, the official broadcast by Washington State House Republicans, that banning law enforcement from wearing face coverings could put officers in a position that forces them to face retaliation. 

Some students at UW Tacoma are critical of ICE wearing face coverings. Brady Lynch, a junior majoring in Education at UW Tacoma, thinks wearing face masks hides law enforcement officers’ identities. “I don’t usually see it as okay,” he said. 

Similarly, Isabelle Monjaraz, a junior majoring in Environmental Science at UW Tacoma, thinks that it’ll impact the safety of others, specifically people at risk of being targeted by ICE.   

The impact ICE has had on people and families is noticeable to some students. 

“People have been killed by ICE unjustly,” Monjaraz said. “And families are affected by that. Children have been impacted by parents being either harmed or detained unjustly.” 

There is support for individuals in the Tacoma area and for students at UW Tacoma. Tacoma Community House has immigration resources for people living in Tacoma. Also, UW Tacoma has student resources that immigrants can use, such as Student Legal Services, which offers legal counseling to students.  

“It has been really encouraging to see the support for immigrants on campus—like radical support for immigrants regardless of documentation status or immigration status or anything like that,” Monjaraz said. “I feel like visible support for immigrants is encouraging for myself.”  

While Senate Bill 5855 has good intentions, it may end up being largely ineffective due to the Supremacy Clause, a lack of accessible legal resources for victims and potential challenges in federal courts.  

California’s No Secret Police Act, Senate Bill 627, which bars some law enforcement from wearing face coverings, was challenged in federal court. This is because it only specified federal and local law enforcement, excluding state agents. It has since been announced that it is being revised to include state law enforcement.  

It is unclear as of yet what the long-term impacts of Washington’s law will be.