December 14, 2025
Chris Pietsch/Imagn Images
A New Jersey bill that would ban Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents from wearing masks during raids advanced last week. Homeland Security officials say they won't comply with the measure. This file photo shows ICE agents in Springfield, Oregon.
A controversial bill that would largely ban immigration agents from covering their faces on the job advanced Thursday after nearly an hour of tense debate.
The bill, which passed along party lines, would require all law enforcement officers in the state, including federal agents, to keep their faces uncovered while performing official duties in public. Officers would be exempt during undercover assignments, while wearing protective equipment that doesn't intend to conceal their identities, or if supervisors say "stealth is necessary."
SIGN UP HERE to get PhillyVoice's free newsletters delivered to your inbox
The legislation comes amid a rise in episodes of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers and other federal agents concealing their identities during immigration raids. U.S. Department of Homeland Security officials defend agents masking by saying they and their families are targeted if their identities are known.
Ewing resident Georganne D'Angelo responds to ICE raids as part of Resistencia en Acción, a group focused on immigrant workers. D'Angelo told the Assembly's public safety committee Thursday that she has witnessed masked men who refuse to identify themselves "dragging" people off the streets, and fears that they could be impostors.
New Jersey residents deserve to know what agencies are enforcing federal laws, she said.
In one of several testy exchanges, Assemblyman Erik Peterson (R-Hunterdon) asked D'Angelo why she'd need to know who the masked agents are.
"Because I am witnessing what is happening, and in order to witness effectively, I need to know who is doing this. I walk right up to these people, and I say, 'Can you please identify yourself?' And they'll say, 'No,'" she said.
"Do you do this with the police in Ewing?" Peterson asked.
"If someone is in a police uniform and gets out of a police car, I have a feeling they're police," D'Angelo responded.
Madison Linton is a policy and research analyst at the New Jersey Alliance for Immigrant Justice, the state's largest coalition of immigrant organizations. Linton said immigrant communities across the state have faced an unprecedented escalation of enforcement tactics, both large-scale raids at warehouses and individual arrests.
RELATED: N.J. bill would ban ICE agents from wearing masks during enforcement operations
"Concealing the identity of officers contributes to the widespread fear and confusion that ICE perpetuates and furthers their agency's culture of rogue lawlessness and immunity from justice," she said.
Many activists who testified Thursday afternoon said the legislation doesn't go far enough. It does little to discourage bad actors from impersonating local, state, or federal officers, they said, and several urged the committee to advance the Immigrant Trust Act, which would codify a state directive limiting local police cooperation with federal immigration agents.
Assemblyman Paul Kanitra (R-Ocean) called the bill "blatantly unconstitutional," adding that the measure's supporters should not back it either because all of the exemptions in it make it "completely feckless."
"All this bill does is pander to you. It accomplishes absolutely nothing," he said.
While the legislation faces more hurdles before making it to the governor's desk – a Senate companion has not yet been heard and the current legislative session wraps up in four weeks – Homeland Security officials have already said they won't cooperate. When Gov.-elect Mikie Sherrill said she supports a ban on masked immigration agents, a Homeland Security spokeswoman called such a ban "unconstitutional" and said the agency will not abide by it.
At least one legal expert has agreed that the bill, if signed into law, would likely violate the Constitution's supremacy clause, which bars the state from regulating the actions of the federal government.
Similar legislation has been signed into law in California, which goes into effect Jan. 1. The U.S. Department of Justice sued the state over the law.
The committee approved the bill Thursday 5-3, with all Democrats on the panel who were present voting yes and all Republicans voting no. Assemblywoman Mitchelle Drulis (D-Hunterdon) acknowledged the constitutional concerns before voting yes.
"I also think we need to send a message that we are not OK with what is happening in our neighborhoods, in our streets, and to our fellow community members," she said.
New Jersey Monitor is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. New Jersey Monitor maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Terrence T. McDonald for questions: info@newjerseymonitor.com.
