Key facts
- The Justice Department has filed a lawsuit in the Eastern District of Virginia challenging state laws.
- The laws in question ban law enforcement officers from wearing face masks while on duty and restrict 287(g) agreements with federal immigration enforcement.
- The DOJ argues these laws illegally regulate the federal government and pose a risk to federal officers.
- Virginia's governor has stated that officers wearing masks erodes public trust and accountability.
- The lawsuit claims the legislation restricting federal immigration agreements is unconstitutional.
The U.S. Justice Department has filed a lawsuit challenging two Virginia laws that target the work of federal immigration enforcement officers. The complaint, lodged in the Eastern District of Virginia, contests a state law that prohibits law enforcement officers from wearing face masks while on duty and another that restricts the ability of state and local law enforcement agencies to enter into 287(g) agreements with federal immigration authorities.
The Justice Department argues that the face mask ban unlawfully attempts to regulate federal officers and could expose them to prosecution, thereby threatening their safety and ability to perform their duties. Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche stated that Virginia's policies are "anti-law enforcement" and "designed to create risk for our agents."
Regarding the 287(g) agreements, the federal government contends that Virginia is attempting to override federal law, which permits the Department of Homeland Security's Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to train and authorize local officers for immigration enforcement.
Governor Abigail Spanberger, who signed the bills into law, has defended the policies, emphasizing the importance of transparency, accountability, and public trust in law enforcement. Her office stated that officers wearing masks "undercuts these basic expectations of accountability, sows fear and confusion, and erodes the public trust."
Del. Alfonso Lopez, who sponsored one of the bills, stated the purpose was to protect Virginians and maintain trust between communities and law enforcement, allowing local agencies discretion in participating in federal operations. State Sen. Saddam Azlan Salim, who introduced the Senate versions, noted that his bills were crafted to be consistent with state and federal constitutions.
This legal challenge follows Governor Spanberger's earlier veto of separate legislation that would have limited federal immigration agents' ability to conduct civil arrests in sensitive public places like courthouses and schools. An accompanying executive order directed state agencies to prohibit federal access to state property for civil immigration enforcement without a warrant.