Law enforcement face coverings ban moves forward in Olympia
Federal agents conduct immigration enforcement operations Thursday, Feb. 5, 2026, in Minneapolis. After Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers were involved in several controversial situations while wearing masks, the Washington Legislature began examining possible statutory options to end the practice of wearing masks.
AP Photo/Ryan Murphy, File
OLYMPIA — Washington’s state House advanced a bill Tuesday, March 3, that prohibits law enforcement officers, including federal agents, from covering their faces while interacting with the public.
Senate Bill 5855, sponsored by Sen. Javier Valdez, D-Seattle, arose in response to the Trump administration's immigration enforcement efforts, where U.S Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents have worn masks, concealing their identities. ICE leadership has claimed it is necessary for officers to wear the facial coverings to protect the officers from actions that might be taken by those who disagree with the department's actions.
After a more than two-hour floor debate, the House passed the legislation with a party-line vote, adopting only two amendments among dozens proposed by Republicans. One was spearheaded by Rep. Jim Walsh, R-Aberdeen, to include exemptions for head and facial coverings used for religious purposes.
The Senate now must approve of the amendments before passing the bill down to the governor to sign before adjournment next week.
As written, the bill defines facial coverings as an opaque mask, garment, or any material used to obscure a person’s identity but includes exemptions for undercover operations, personal protective equipment, and helmets worn during transportation. It also allows a person detained by an officer violating the law to bring a civil cause of action to court.
“The vast majority of officers serve honorably, professionally and with integrity," Rep. Julio Cortes, D-Everett said on the floor. “This bill helps to protect that integrity by ensuring transparency and preventing situations where anonymity undermines public trust or escalates fear and tension during encounters.”
Backers argue the measure is necessary to build trust between communities and law enforcement amid increased public scrutiny of masked federal immigration enforcement efforts, particularly following the high-profile deaths of Alex Pretti and Renee Good by federal agents in Minnesota that sparked nationwide protests.
Republicans and critics contend that the bill unfairly impacts local officials and conflicts with the United States Supremacy Clause that prohibits state law from superseding federal law.
“The underlying proposal rubs up against our ban against bills of attainder, our tradition of making sure that our public policy is fair and equitable to all groups,” Walsh said.
The bill models California's No Secret Police Act that was recently struck down during a preliminary court decision. California’s version did not include state peace officers and California Highway Patrol and only applied to local cops and federal agents.
Washington’s version applies to all levels of law enforcement operating in the state.
While legal challenges remain possible, Valdez assured that the legislation was drafted to protect constitutional rights while ensuring accountability.
The short session will adjourn March 12.