suing

SACRAMENTO — The U.S. Department of Justice sued California on Monday to block newly passed laws that prohibit law enforcement officials, including federal immigration agents, from wearing masks and that require them to identify themselves.

The laws, passed by the California Legislature and signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom, came in the wake of the Trump administration’s immigration raids in California, when masked, unidentified federal officers jumped out of vehicles this summer as part of the president’s mass deportation program.

Atty. Gen. Pamela Bondi said the laws were unconsitutional and endanger federal officers.

“California’s anti-law enforcement policies discriminate against the federal government and are designed to create risk for our agents,” Bondi said in a statement. “These laws cannot stand.”

The governor recently signed Senate Bill 627, which bans federal officers from wearing masks during enforcement duties, and Senate Bill 805, which requires federal officers without a uniform to visibly display their name or badge number during operations. Both measures were introduced as a response to the Trump administration’s aggressive immigration raids that are often conducted by masked agents in plainclothes and unmarked cars.

The lawsuit, which names the state of California, Gov. Gavin Newsom and state Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta as defendants, asserts the laws are unconstitutional as only the federal government has the authority to control its agents and any requirements about their uniforms. It further argued that federal agents need to conceal their identities at times due to the nature of their work.

“Given the personal threats and violence that agents face, federal law enforcement agencies allow their officers to choose whether to wear masks to protect their identities and provide an extra layer of security,” the lawsuit states. “Denying federal agencies and officers that choice would chill federal law enforcement and deter applicants for law enforcement positions.”

Federal agents will not comply with either law, the lawsuit states.

“The Federal Government would be harmed if forced to comply with either Act, and also faces harm from the real threat of criminal liability for noncompliance,” the lawsuit states. “Accordingly, the challenged laws are invalid under the Supremacy Clause and their application to the Federal Government should be preliminarily and permanently enjoined.”

Newsom previously said it was unacceptable for “secret police” to grab people off the streets, and that the new laws were needed to help the public differentiate between imposters and legitimate federal law officers.

The governor, however, acknowledged the legislation could use more clarifications about safety gear and other exemptions. He directed lawmakers to work on a follow-up bill next year.

In a Monday statement, Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco), who introduced SB 627, said the FBI recently warned that “secret police tactics” are undermining public safety.

“Despite what these would-be authoritarians claim, no one is above the law,” said Wiener. “We’ll see you in court.”

A resurfaced video of BBC News Online’s Middle East editor Raffi Berg, who has launched legal action against journalist Owen Jones over allegations of pro-Israel bias, is seen expressing deep admiration for Mossad. Speaking about the Israeli spy agency, Berg said it makes him “tremendously proud.” The comments have drawn fresh scrutiny as Berg faces allegations of pro-Israel bias, first detailed in a widely shared article by Jones titled The BBC’s Civil War Over Gaza.

Jones’ article, published in December 2024 on DropSite News, accused the BBC, and Berg in particular, of downplaying Israeli actions in Gaza and sidelining critical voices. Now, nearly a year later, Berg has initiated legal proceedings, claiming reputational damage. He is reported to have hired the former director of the notorious UK Lawyers for Israel to sue Jones.

BBC editor hires former director of UK Lawyers for Israel to sue Owen Jones for alleging his pro-Israel bias. You couldn’t make it up! pic.twitter.com/6LGBVwL3dr

— Rivkah Brown (@rivkahbrown) January 14, 2025

Jones detailed accusations from 13 current and former BBC staffers who alleged that coverage of Israel and Palestine was being distorted under Berg’s editorial direction. Sources accused him of “aggressively pushing” pro-Israel framing, marginalising Palestinian perspectives, and undermining colleagues who tried to challenge editorial lines. The article suggested Berg exerted “wild” control over headlines and content related to Gaza.

The BBC’s surrender to pro-Israel lobbying: a history of censorship and bias

Claims of Berg’s pro-Israel bias was further compounded by revelations in Mint Press News, which uncovered Berg’s close ties to Israeli intelligence institutions. Berg is reported to have previously worked with the Foreign Broadcast Information Service — an entity long linked to the CIA — and authored a book (Red Sea Spies) about a Mossad operation, written in collaboration with senior Mossad operatives, including Dani Limor. The book has been praised by Mossad leadership and has been promoted as a success story of Israeli intelligence.

BBC’s online Middle East editor, Raffi Berg, seems to have a framed letter from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and a framed picture with former Israeli ambassador to the UK, Mark Regev, proudly displayed on his wall at home.

Here is the editor behind THOSE headlines. pic.twitter.com/eXbfImwbNA

— Lowkey (@Lowkey0nline) December 31, 2024

In the MintPress report, investigative journalist Alan MacLeod outlines how Berg has received support from top Israeli officials and prominently displayed memorabilia tied to Mossad and Israel in his BBC office. MacLeod argues this undermines any claim of neutrality, especially in the context of the BBC’s coverage of the Israeli genocide in Gaza.

Despite mounting questions about conflicts of interest, the BBC has remained largely silent on Berg’s affiliations. Meanwhile, the legal case against Jones is viewed by many observers as an attempt to silence journalistic scrutiny of the broadcaster’s internal dynamics.

The timing of the lawsuit, as global scrutiny of Israel’s actions in Gaza intensifies, has only added to concerns that critical voices are being targeted. Jones has defended his reporting, insisting that it was based on documented testimonies and internal sources, and called the legal action an attack on press freedom.