A bill that would ban most law enforcement officers from wearing masks while interacting with the public cleared a key Washington Senate committee this week, as supporters argue it is needed to ensure accountability and transparency.
The Senate Committee on Law & Justice on Thursday advanced Senate Bill 5855, which would prohibit most law enforcement officers — including federal agents — from wearing face coverings while performing their duties and would require officers to be clearly identifiable, according to the bill text.
The measure was sponsored by Washington State Senator Javier Valdez and moved out of committee following a public hearing earlier this week.
After the committee vote, Washington Governor Bob Ferguson publicly urged lawmakers to act quickly on the proposal.
“ICE is out of control. Let’s get that bill to my desk immediately so I can sign it into law,” Ferguson said, referring to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
What the bill would do
Under SB 5855, law enforcement officers would be barred from wearing “facial coverings” while interacting with the public in the course of their duties.
The bill defines a facial covering as any opaque mask or garment that conceals or obscures a person’s facial identity, including balaclavas, tactical masks and ski masks.
The bill would also require officers to be “reasonably identifiable” through clearly displayed names or other identifying information on their uniforms that the public can see and agencies can use to identify them.
The definition of “law enforcement officer” in the bill includes not only Washington peace officers, but also employees or agents of the U.S. government who have authority to carry firearms and make warrantless arrests while enforcing criminal, customs or immigration laws.
Exceptions written into the proposal
The legislation includes several exceptions.
It would not apply to officers working as undercover operatives during authorized undercover operations, or to protective gear used by SWAT officers when face protection is necessary for safety, according to the bill language.
Certain health- and safety-related equipment would also be allowed.
The bill explicitly exempts medical masks, respirators and other protective devices needed to prevent disease transmission or protect against hazardous conditions.
Helmets used for bicycle or motor vehicle transportation would also be permitted.
Civil liability provision
SB 5855 would allow people detained by an officer who violates the mask prohibition to file a civil lawsuit against that officer in their official capacity.
If successful, a claimant could seek compensatory damages, punitive damages, attorney’s fees, injunctive relief or other remedies deemed appropriate by a court.
What happens next
With committee approval, the bill can move to the full Senate for further consideration.
If it passes both chambers of the Legislature, it would be sent to the governor for signature.
Ferguson has made clear he supports the proposal and wants it enacted quickly, tying his support to concerns about the conduct of federal immigration enforcement.
©2026 Cox Media Group
