\n<\/p>\n
California may struggle to enforce the new laws, some of which have already raised constitutional questions around the state\u2019s role in federal operations, but lawmakers maintain that they are legally defensible.<\/p>\n
California political consultant Mike Madrid said in signing the laws Newsom is showing that he can stand up and fight, whether or not he has a chance of winning.<\/p>\n
\u201cIn this moment, when there are very few cards to play for state governments and state legislatures, California has done what no other state has done: establish itself as the tip of the spear on resisting a lot of these efforts that are an affront to its values,\u201d said Madrid, a longtime Republican consultant who co-founded the anti-Trump Lincoln Project.<\/p>\n
\u201c99% of this is the purview of the federal government. So a lot of it is just symbolic, but symbolism matters. It\u2019s both politically astute but also morally right,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n
The package of bills Newsom signed included:<\/p>\n
California Democrats began drafting immigration-related bills almost as soon Trump took office in January. Those efforts accelerated after the Trump administration launched aggressive immigration sweeps<\/a> throughout Los Angeles, which led to weeks of protests and a subsequent National Guard deployment<\/a>.<\/p>\n \u201cAll of this legislative resistance is to protect Angelenos from their own federal government. That is profound,\u201d Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass said at a news conference with Newsom and other Democratic leaders.<\/p>\n Kevin Johnson, an immigration law professor and former dean of the UC Davis School of Law, said the legislation may have a marginal impact on federal immigration enforcement operations.<\/p>\n In 2018, for instance, California passed a law to restrict immigration arrests at superior court buildings<\/a>. That hasn\u2019t stopped the Trump administration from detaining people at those courts<\/a> this year.<\/p>\n \u201cThe federal government is going to continue doing what it\u2019s doing, in one form or another,\u201d he said. \u201cI do think the legislation gives some hope and optimism to communities that feel under fire, vulnerable and basically hated by the federal government.\u201d<\/p>\n Shiu-Ming Cheer, deputy director at California Immigrant Policy Center, remains hopeful that the package of bills will ensure safety for people attending school and accessing health care.<\/p>\n \u201cWith most laws, there has to be really vigorous monitoring, both by the state as well as by advocates to ensure that it\u2019s truly being implemented and followed,\u201d she said.<\/p>\n The most controversial bill in the package was Democratic Sen. Scott Wiener\u2019s proposal to widely ban federal and local law enforcement officers from wearing face masks while conducting their duties<\/a>. The law, also known as the \u201cNo Secret Police Act,\u201d does not apply to certain forms of face coverings, such as face shields, and it exempts some officers, including those who are undercover. Officers who violate the law will face an infraction or misdemeanor.<\/p>\n Wiener and Democratic Sens. Jesse Arregu\u00edn, Sasha P\u00e9rez and Aisha Wahab championed the legislation after seeing footage of masked and unidentifiable agents<\/a> carrying out operations.<\/p>\n<\/div>\nWill the laws make a difference?<\/h2>\n
California police opposed mask ban<\/h2>\n