Capitol Alert

California cannot force federal agents to wear badges, appeals court rules

U.S. Border Patrol personnel gather in downtown Los Angeles in August 2025. A federal appeals court ruled Wednesday that California cannot enforce a new law requiring federal agents to wear identification, finding the measure unconstitutional under the Supremacy Clause.
U.S. Border Patrol personnel gather in downtown Los Angeles in August 2025. A federal appeals court ruled Wednesday that California cannot enforce a new law requiring federal agents to wear identification, finding the measure unconstitutional under the Supremacy Clause. Los Angeles Times

California is barred from enforcing a new law requiring federal agents to wear identification under an appeals court ruling issued Wednesday.

The order by a three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals extends a temporary ruling issued in February against the state’s No Vigilantes Act, which aims to ensure that immigration agents and other federal officers wear badges or other identification except in limited circumstances.

The judges — two appointed by President Donald Trump and one by former President Barack Obama — make their order effective only while the appeal is pending. But they say it is unconstitutional under the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution, which generally bars states from regulating the actions of the federal government.

“The No Vigilantes Act attempts to directly regulate the United States in its performance of governmental functions,” Circuit Judge Mark J. Bennett wrote in the opinion. “The Supremacy Clause forbids the state from enforcing such legislation.”

The ruling, which pauses enforcement of the measure while an appeal proceeds in court, marks the second blow to California’s efforts to force federal agents to identify themselves. A companion law to the No Vigilantes Act, which bans face coverings for federal agents with some exceptions, was struck down by a federal judge in Los Angeles in February.

That judge, Christina Snyder, allowed the badge and identification requirements to remain in effect, but finds the ban on face masks unconstitutional because it only applies to federal officers and not to state police agencies.

The Trump Administration appealed the part of that ruling that left the badge requirement in place, prompting Wednesday’s opinion.

California Attorney General Rob Bonta’s office, which is defending the law during the appeals process, is reviewing the 9th Circuit’s Wednesday opinion and said it would not comment on its potential legal strategy.

But Bonta’s office criticized the Trump administration for using agents who are not clearly identified in immigration sweeps and other actions.

“Transparency and accountability are the foundation of good law enforcement,” Bonta’s office said in a statement. “The Trump Administration has stepped well outside the boundaries of normal practice, deploying masked and unidentified agents to carry out immigration enforcement, despite the risks these tactics pose to public safety and basic civil liberties.”

Sharon Bernstein
The Sacramento Bee
Sharon Bernstein is a senior reporter at The Sacramento Bee. She has reported and edited for news organizations across California, including the Los Angeles Times, Reuters and Cityside Journalism Initiative. She grew up in Dallas and earned her master’s degree in journalism from UC Berkeley.
Get one year of unlimited digital access for $159.99
#ReadLocal

Only 44¢ per day

SUBSCRIBE NOW