Senate Judiciary Passes Bill Forbidding Masks on Law Enforcers
New Jersey lawmakers today took action to protect New Jerseyans against deadly, inhumane and frightening overreach by Donald Trump's version of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Agency, seeking a ban on masks covering the faces of people who wear badges and carry guns.
To be clear, the bill that passed went through to the full senate without accompanying regulatory penalties, placing the burden of policy interpretation on the state AG, while apparently avoiding a constitutional collision with the Trump Administration. That steamed critics of the bill as written.
The intensity of the times felt like an electric charge at the outset of the hearing, diminished somewhat by the end once lawmakers unpacked some of the diluting details (see below).
"What we are witnessing are constitutional and human rights violations," said state Senator Britnee Timberlake (D-34), whose bill, S-3521, fits into today's package of protective bills before the state Senate Judiciary Committee, which includes the mask bill (see below).
The bills that passed out of the Democratic-controlled committee (along party lines, with the exception of Senator Jon Bramnick [R-21], who broke from the GOP when he backed the mask bill and abstained on the others) are:
Codifies AG directive, "Strengthening Trust Between Law Enforcement and Immigrant Communities."
Requires law enforcement officer to reveal facial identity during certain public interactions and to present sufficient identification prior to arresting or detaining person.
"Transparency in Federal Law Enforcement Activities Act"; establishes law enforcement officer identification requirements under certain circumstances.
Establishes "Privacy Protection Act"; concerns collection and sharing of certain personal information.
Timberlake objected to the argument that her bill handcuffs law enforcement.
"I haven't heard anything more ignorant than that," she said. "If we care about police departments, we will make sure our local police departments are not participating in civil rights, constitutional or human rights violations. When the dust settles on this very issue, we will see the impact this has had on our nation. Your children and grandchildren will read about what we did in this very moment: a party line or our constitution."
Chief Andrew Caggiano, president of the NJ State Association of Chiefs of Police, supported the mask bill to the extent that it might reduce the possibility of crooks impersonating police officers. He quibbled with language that might limit officers having discretion about covering their faces in certain instances.
Senator Bramnick jumped into the conversation.
"You think when a state trooper pulls me over in the middle of the night, they should have a mask on?" Bramnick asked Caggiano.
No.
"Why would your position change with respect to ICE? You're a human being, you represent the chiefs of police, you have no gut on whether police officers should be wearing masks and jumping out of vans?"
Caggiano was cagey on the question.
"The folks on the ground have concerns - why aren't we listening?" Senate Republican Leader Tony Bucco, Jr. (R-25) asked.
Bucco, it turned out, wasn't the only one worried about the bills, albeit for divergent reasons.
Amy Torres, executive director of the New Jersey Alliance for Immigrant Justice, bashed the legislation as written. "We are not opposed to the spirit of these bills," she said, but did not approve of the process and late changes made in a political vein, especially the immigrant trust directive.
She noted dire circumstances - and the need for tougher teeth.
"Since Dec. 5th, DHS [Department of Homeland Security] officials admitted they violated court orders 52 times," said Torres. "We are not restricting anyone by asking the fed government to do their job."
She pointed out, too, DHS' designs on an ICE warehouse in Roxbury.
Half measures won't stem ICE, she argued.
Bramnick batted the issue with Torres, trying to make the case that the perfect should not be the enemy of the good.
"Unmask everybody," the senator said later, additionally arguing - as an aside - for the prohibition of masked protestors.
"Parity," said Senator Paul Sarlo (D-36).
Speaking to some of the criticisms of the immigrant trust directive and activists' desire to see greater protections supposedly already guaranteed by the Constitution, state Senator M. Teresa Ruiz (D-29) said she is paying attention.
"As a civilian who doesn't have an attorney's license, today, Feb. 19th, 2026, when we are talking about due process, I have to sit back and worry," she said. "Due process in this country only exists for the very few. I hope we can close every loophole that will uphold the Constitution."
Democrats on the committee mostly shuffled out of the hearing room, leaving "aye" votes in their wake, which lent credence to the bills' critics, and blunted the impact of the legislation, which again, sets policy without punishment, thereby apparently avoiding a cops-versus-cops collision course while giving the state AG greater discretion.
