Pending appeal, the Ninth Circuit has blocked Gov. Gavin Newsom from enforcing a state law that would criminally prosecute federal law enforcement officers for not visibly displaying identification while performing their duties—signaling the measure likely violates the Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution.
The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals on Wednesday granted the Trump administration’s request for an injunction against Section 10 of California’s No Vigilantes Act. The unanimous three-judge panel said the United States is likely to succeed on its claim that the provision violates the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution.
“We previously granted the United States’ request for a temporary administrative injunction,” the ruling states. “We now address the merits of the United States’ motion for an injunction pending appeal.”
The court granted the administration’s request for an emergency administrative stay in February. Wednesday’s order, which specifically enjoins the State of California, Gov. Gavin Newsom and Attorney General Rob Bonta, extended that stay, blocking enforcement for the duration of the broader appeals process.
Section 10 of the state law, enacted in September 2025 as Senate Bill 805, mandates that any non-uniformed “federal law enforcement officer” operating in California must “visibly display identification” – including their agency and either a name or badge number – during enforcement duties such as arrests, detentions or crowd control. The law also attempted to attach a penalty of criminal misdemeanor for violations.
According to the Supremacy Clause, however, the states are subordinate to the authority of the federal government, including the way that agencies operate. Over decades of established case law, the courts have consistently held that the Supremacy Clause of the U.S Constitution applies equally to federal agencies.
That’s because agencies – though they serve under the executive branch – operate under statutory mandates from Congress, with deference given to agency experts to adopt best practices.
Huge legal victory this morning in the Ninth Circuit, where the court permanently enjoined California’s unconstitutional mask law targeting federal agents.
“We conclude that § 10 of the No Vigilantes Act attempts to directly regulate the United States in its performance of… pic.twitter.com/fZNjG9QepO
— F.A. United States Attorney Bill Essayli (@USAttyEssayli) April 22, 2026
Since the Jim Crow era, the courts have consistently held that the Constitution forbids the states from telling the federal government what to do. In addition, states are forbidden from passing laws that conflict with the Constitution, federal statutes, or agency rules.
“We conclude that § 10 of the No Vigilantes Act attempts to directly regulate the United States in its performance of governmental functions,” the court wrote.
“The Supremacy Clause forbids the State from enforcing such legislation,” wrote Judge Mark J. Bennett in the opinion, joined by Judges Jacqueline H. Nguyen and Daniel P. Collins. The panel also concluded that other factors for granting preliminary relief favored the federal government.
In spite of the Constitution, decades of established case law, and an 8,000% increase in death threats, Newsom signed not one, but two separate laws in an attempt to doxx federal law enforcement officers. The No Secret Police Act, which was halted earlier by a district court judge, was not part of Wednesday’s ruling.
This morning, my office unsealed several indictments charging 47 Mexican Mafia members and associates with federal charges for operating a criminal enterprise in Orange County, California.
43 defendants have been taken into custody so far and will face significant time in… https://t.co/Vslhr4UPaK
— F.A. United States Attorney Bill Essayli (@USAttyEssayli) April 23, 2026
Concerningly, Democrats in Congress have sponsored a bill similarly titled the No Secret Police Act. Should the party regain power during the midterms, enacting the legislation, the Trump administration would be forced to comply—fully exposing the names, badge numbers, insignia, and faces of federal law enforcement officers to the worst of the worst.
For now, however, both laws have been blocked from being enforced, with Wednesday’s ruling hailed as a decisive victory.
“Today’s legal victory in the 9th Circuit halts enforcement of California’s mask ban for ICE agents and is a big win to protect law enforcement,” Acting A.G Todd Blanche said.
“Congratulations to DOJ’s Civil Division on this major win in the 9th Circuit—another decisive victory in this administration’s effort to remove illegal aliens from this country.”
