Immigration agent mask ban passes in California Legislature


A lawmaker stands in front of a microphone as they speak in a room packed with other lawmakers sitting at their desks. The desks are decorated with small American flags. The room is adorned with mint green and beige fixtures.
Assemblymember Juan Carrillo speaks during an Assembly floor session at the state Capitol in Sacramento on Aug. 21, 2025. Photo by Fred Greaves for CalMatters

After a summer characterized by masked federal agents detaining immigrants in Los Angeles, the California Legislature passed two measures Thursday that seek to force law enforcement officers to identify themselves.

Senate Bills 627 and 805 were among the most controversial to pass in the final days of this year’s legislative session. They would ban local, out-of-state and federal law enforcement officers from wearing face coverings, as well as require officers to be readily identifiable, respectively. 

  • State Sen. Scott Wiener, a San Francisco Democrat and lead author of SB 627: “As we go through this horrific era of mass deportation and a Supreme Court that allows this authoritarian regime to do whatever the heck it wants to do — including straight-up racial profiling of Latino people — California should lead and put a stop to the secret police.”

The measures passed along party lines, with Republicans in opposition. Police unions also oppose the proposed mask ban.

  • GOP Sen. Tony Strickland of Huntington Beach, in a statement: “This is a reckless anti-law enforcement proposal that puts law enforcement officers and their families at real risk, undermining the safety of the men and women who bravely protect our communities.”

Though today should be the last day of session, lawmakers are expected to extend their work through Saturday to give final votes to some last-minute deals they struck this week. Those that pass will head to Gov. Gavin Newsom’s desk for his signature or veto, and those that don’t are dead for the year.

Other proposals awaiting Newsom’s decision, include: 

  • Higher car dealer fees: SB 791 would raise the cap car dealers can charge to process documents from $85 to $260.
  • Abortion pill protections: AB 260 would help protect California pharmacists, doctors and hospitals from penalties for dispensing the abortion pill mifepristone to out-of-state patients, and remove the names of patients and providers from abortion medication prescriptions.
  • Kill mute swans: AB 764 would make it easier for hunters and landowners to kill the invasive species.
  • Save the bees: AB 1042 would create a health program for managed honey bees that would provide grants to beekeepers, farmers and others for projects and research supporting the struggling population.

Watch your legislators like a hawk: Sign up for beta access to My Legislator, your weekly report on what your state legislators said, voted on, introduced and more. Our beta version runs weekly until Sept. 15, and we’d love your feedback on what works, what doesn’t, and what you want to see.

CalMatters events: Join us Sept. 24 in Sacramento for a special event celebrating CalMatters’ 10th anniversary and Dan Walters’ 50th year covering California politics. Hear directly from Dan as he reflects on five decades watching the Capitol. Plus, attendees can enter a raffle and win a private dinner with Dan. Members can use the code “MEMBER” at checkout for a discounted ticket. Register here.



Google pulls the strings behind the scenes

A tilted view of a person's silhouette as they walk in front ofa gray building with the Google logo in front, on a clear day.
A man walks past a building on the Google campus in Mountain View on Nov. 12, 2015. Photo by Jeff Chiu, AP Photo

As one of the top spenders in California lobbying last year, Google has poured millions of dollars to influence the state government. But its involvement in some proposals isn’t always clear-cut, underscoring the stealthy ways the tech giant goes about trying to shape policies, report CalMatters’ Khari Johnson and Yue Stella Yu.

It quietly orchestrated a campaign to water down a proposed California regulation, and it was so stealthy that lawmakers didn’t see the company’s fingerprints until CalMatters informed them.

In April the company began reaching out to small businesses using email lists, urging them to sign a petition opposing a measure that would require browsers to give users a way to automatically tell websites not to share their personal information with third parties. 

This outreach campaign, however, did not look like it came directly from Google, but rather the “Connected Commerce Council,” which Google backs financially. Google itself also never took a public position on the measure.

Though Google’s tactics aren’t illegal, it raises concern among some advocates who are critical of big tech’s influence.

  • Brandon Forester, an organizer for the nonprofit MediaJustice: “None of us wants to enter a surveillance marketplace every time that we go on the internet. Part of the reason they need to do the shadow lobbying is because the things that they want to do to achieve their infinite growth model is not good for the public.”

Read more here.

Less food, more solar

An aerial view of a solar farm amongst farmland with a mountain range spread out on the horizon in the distance.
An aerial view of a solar farm on the Woolf Farming & Processing property outside of Huron on Aug. 29, 2025. Photo by Larry Valenzuela, CalMatters/CatchLight Local

In stretches of the San Joaquin Valley that rarely get enough water to grow food, farmers and ranchers faced with barren, parched land have the opportunity to generate a new crop: solar energy. But a bill that aims to incentivize more farmers to install solar panels has farmers split, writes CalMatters’ Rachel Becker.

Under a 60-year-old law known as the Williamson Act, farmers can enter into contracts with local governments that allow them to pay less on their property tax as long as they use their land for farming. To cancel the contract before the end of its term results in steep penalty fees.

But AB 1156, if passed, would enable farmers to suspend contracts and avoid fees if they use their land to capture solar energy, although their property tax would still increase. The bill would help the state reach its clean energy goals since generating solar power requires hundreds of thousands of acres.

Though some farmers welcome an alternative use for their dried-out land, others argue that the bill undermines farming regions and chips away at the adjacent economies that help the agriculture industry operate.

Read more here.



Other things worth your time:

Some stories may require a subscription to read.


CA moves to close overdose protection loophole that deters students from seeking emergency help // Los Angeles Times

Controversial CA bill to combat antisemitism in schools races against legislative clock // KQED

Forest Service reverses decades-long ban, allows wildfire firefighters to use N95 masks // Los Angeles Times

Trump administration seeks to roll back rule prioritizing conservation on public lands across CA, nation // San Francisco Chronicle

Trump administration to end grant funding for Hispanic-Serving Institutions, affecting many CA colleges // EdSource

California Forever’s latest plan for Solano County: A ‘drone ship’ factory on the shoreline // San Francisco Chronicle

Trump fires another judge in SF’s immigration court, impacting people’s ability to seek asylum // San Francisco Chronicle

City of LA looking into creating its own agency to coordinate homeless housing and services // Los Angeles Daily News

Could Orange County join a new state? That’s one GOP legislator’s proposal // The Orange County Register

Lynn La is the newsletter writer for CalMatters, focusing on California’s top political, policy and Capitol stories every weekday. She produces and curates WhatMatters, CalMatters’ flagship daily newsletter…



Source link

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *