If a U.S. senator doesn’t work to alleviate the fears of his or her constituents, they probably are not doing their job very well.
This explains why, even when he knows the measure has no immediate chance for passage, California’s Democratic Sen. Alex Padilla the other day introduced new legislation requiring federal immigration enforcement agents to display clearly visible identification during their actions, except those involving stealthy approaches to hideouts of the undocumented.
In California, this should not strike anyone as new or dangerous to law enforcement officers. The state penal code already requires uniformed officers to wear badges or nameplates correctly displaying their identification number or name. It means on-duty police, sheriff’s deputies and Highway Patrol members cannot conceal either their badge or name.
A current state Senate bill called SB 627 would also make it a misdemeanor for any law enforcement officers to mask up while on duty, although this most likely could not be enforced upon federal officers working for Immigration and Customs Enforcement or the Border Patrol.
But in this case such symbolism is important, letting the host of mostly brown-skinned Californians now explicitly targeted by immigration agents, both legal residents and not, know that at least some public officials are on their side.
Said Padilla, “Without visible badges, names or insignia, members of the public often have no way to confirm whether they are interacting with legitimate government officials…causing widespread confusion and fear, especially in communities already subject to heightened immigration scrutiny,”
Padilla, like co-sponsor Cory Booker of New Jersey, knows this bill will not pass the Senate in this session, controlled by Republicans aligned with President Trump and his mass deportation campaign.
But it means something to many of the targeted – legitimately or not – for prominent senators to take their side.
Then there’s the whole issue of whether immigration agents should be permitted to wear masks or balaclavas in the first place while making arrests. If those under arrest aren’t sure their captors are really government officials, can they be blamed if they resist? So far, the arrested have not only been blamed in such incidents, but often beaten to a pulp.
California officers could not do that. They must be identifiable unless working undercover. Yes, they can be masked when conditions justify it, but their badges must still be visible.
The federal Department of Homeland Security has so far justified allowing masks and lack of any identifying markers during arrests – both individual and mass – by claiming that identification would expose agents and their families to danger.
But their danger would be no more severe than the supposed peril of California officers, who have been openly identified for years.
It’s true that California cops who opposed the current state laws while they were still mere proposals offered precisely the same arguments against identification now being purveyed by Homeland Security. Yet, there has been no wave of attacks on California officers.
In fact, several online search engines indicate there have been no reported incidents of targeting cops based on badge or name visibility. Not even one case where assailants singled out officers because their uniforms were identifiable as representing a particular agency.
So at least in California, there is no evidence for the kind of danger alleged by Homeland Security. But it is still possible that because of the fear and hatred thus far aroused by masked ICE agents, such incidents might occur.
Yet, federal rules and laws are not usually based on such conjecture. Rather, it usually takes some actual incidents for rules to become firm, as they appear to be today.
That’s why, said Padilla, “Our bill is grounded in law enforcement best practices that would prohibit immigration enforcement officers from wearing face coverings and require them to display name or badge number and the agency they represent. We must act to maintain trust between law enforcement and the communities they serve.”
That reasoning may prevail someday in the Senate, but certainly not while Democrats are in the minority there.
Email Thomas Elias at tdelias@aol.com.