Ninth Circuit Appeals Court rules ICE does not have to wear identifying markers in blow to Gavin Newsom

The US Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers do not have to display visible identification during enforcement operations, striking down California's 2025 "No Vigilantes Act." The three-judge panel unanimously decided on Wednesday that the law violated the supremacy clause of the US Constitution, which states that federal law takes precedence over state law when there's a conflict.

"Because the United States has shown that § 10 of the No Vigilantes Act violates the Supremacy Clause, it has also shown that both the public interest and balance of the equities tip 'decisively in...favor' of a preliminary injunction," the decision read, with the opinion written by Judge Mark Bennett, who was appointed by President Donald Trump.

The Ninth Circuit judges ordered the district court to block the Democrat law by issuing a preliminary injunction enjoining the state of California, Gov. Gavin Newsom, and Attorney General Rob Bonta from enforcing it. Judge Jaqueline Ngyuen, appointed by Barack Obama, and Judge Daniel Collins, appointed by Trump, joined Bennett in the opinion. 

The No Vigilantes Act, or Senate Bill 805, requires all law enforcement officers operating in the state of California to wear visible identification, while a similar bill passed blocked the wearing of facial coverings or masks. The Ninth Circuit Appeals Court had previously blocked the mask portion of the law from taking effect, also ruling that it violated the supremacy clause. Democratic lawmakers stated the legislation was intended to "boost transparency," but the Trump Justice Department claimed it would expose federal agents involved in US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) operations, putting officers at risk and leading to doxxing.

Bill Essayli, First Assistant US Attorney for the Central District of California, reacted to the decision on X. "Huge win for the Supremacy Clause," he wrote. "California continues to violate the US Constitution, and we will continue to hold them accountable."

The decision will likely impact other states within the Ninth Circuit jurisdiction that have adopted similar legislation. This includes Oregon and Washington.