CaliforniaLaw enforcement: masks.
What it does
Existing law makes it a crime for a law enforcement officer to wear a facial covering in the performance of their duties, except as specified. Existing law defines law enforcement officer for these purposes as anyone designated by California law as a peace officer who is employed by a city, county, or other local agency, and any officer or agent of a federal law enforcement agency, agency or law enforcement agency of another state, or any person acting on behalf of a federal law enforcement agency.
More detail
This bill would add peace officers employed by a state agency to the definition of law enforcement officers, thereby making those law enforcement officers subject to those criminal penalties. The bill would specify that facial coverings does not include certain items, including, among other things, sunglasses. The bill would, for all of the items excluded from the definition of facial coverings, limit that exclusion if the items are combined or otherwise used in a manner intended to conceal or obscure an officer's identity. By expanding the scope of a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program.
Existing law prohibits any person who is found to have committed an assault, battery, false imprisonment, false arrest, abuse of process, or malicious prosecution, while wearing a facial covering in a knowing and willful violation of these provisions, from asserting any privilege or immunity for their tortious conduct against a claim of civil liability, and makes that person liable for the greater of actual damages or statutory damages of not less than $10,000, whichever is greater.
This bill would instead make a person who is found liable for false imprisonment or false arrest liable for those damages if the trier of fact finds that the person knowingly and willfully concealed their identity through the use of a facial covering at the time of the conduct giving rise to liability.
Existing law requires a law enforcement agency operating in California to, by July 1, 2026, maintain and publicly post a written policy limiting the use of facial coverings, as specified. Existing law defines a law enforcement agency for these purposes as any entity of a city, county, or other local agency, that employs anyone designated by California law as a peace officer, any federal law enforcement agency, or any law enforcement agency of another state.
This bill would add to the definition of law enforcement agency, a state entity that employs a peace officer and would change the date any law enforcement agency has to comply with that requirement to January 1, 2027. The bill would also require those policies to exempt certain surveillance operations related to enforcement of the Fish and Game Code, or similar federal law.
The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.
This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Where do you stand?
Choose your position
Tell your reps
Take a position to see your representatives and ways to contact them.
Where it stands
- Introduced
- Passed Senate
- Passed Assembly
- To Governor
- Became Law
Looking ahead
No hearings or votes scheduled.
History
- 2026
- Sep 29Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 757, Statutes of 2026.Latest
- Sep 29Approved by the Governor Gavin Newsom.Became Law
- Sep 2Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 3 p.m.To Governor
- Aug 27Assembly amendments concurred in. (Ayes 29. Noes 11. Page 6024.) Ordered to engrossing and enrolling.Major
- Vote recorded Unfinished Business SB1004 Wiener et al. Concurrence. Result: pass.Upper
- Aug 26In Senate. Concurrence in Assembly amendments pending.
- Vote recorded SB 1004 Wiener Senate Third Reading By Schultz. Result: pass.Lower
- Aug 26Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 44. Noes 22. Page 6611.) Ordered to the Senate.Passed Assembly
- Aug 17Read second time. Ordered to third reading.Minor
- Aug 13Read second time and amended. Ordered to second reading.Major
- Vote recorded Do pass as amended. Result: pass.Lower
- Aug 13From committee: Do pass as amended. (Ayes 11. Noes 4.) (August 13).Major
- Aug 13Assembly Rule 63 suspended.
- Aug 5August 5 set for first hearing. Placed on suspense file.
- Jun 25Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.Major
- Jun 24From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 5. Noes 3.) (June 23).Major
- Jun 23
- Vote recorded Do pass as amended and be re-referred to the Committee on [Appropriations]. Result: pass.Lower
- Jun 11June 9 set for first hearing canceled at the request of author.
- May 26Referred to Com. on PUB. S.Minor
- May 20In Assembly. Read first time. Held at Desk.Minor
- May 19Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 28. Noes 9. Page 4358.) Ordered to the Assembly.Passed Senate
- Vote recorded 3rd Reading SB1004 Wiener et al. Result: pass.Upper
- May 18Read second time. Ordered to third reading.Minor
- May 14Read second time and amended. Ordered to second reading.Major
- Vote recorded Do pass as amended. Result: pass.Upper
- May 14From committee: Do pass as amended. (Ayes 5. Noes 2. Page 4260.) (May 14).Major
- May 8Set for hearing May 14.
- Apr 27April 27 hearing: Placed on APPR. suspense file.
- Vote recorded Placed on suspense file. Result: pass.Upper
- Apr 21Set for hearing April 27.
- Apr 16Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.Major
- Apr 15From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 5. Noes 1. Page 3871.) (April 14).Major
- Apr 14
- Vote recorded Do pass as amended, but first amend, and re-refer to the Committee on [Appropriations]. Result: pass.Upper
- Mar 27Set for hearing April 14.
- Feb 18Referred to Com. on PUB. S.Minor
- Feb 10From printer. May be acted upon on or after March 12.
- Feb 9Introduced. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.Introduced