this post was submitted on 27 Jun 2025
462 points (99.4% liked)

politics

24382 readers
3624 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News

• World News

• Business News

• Political Discussion

• Ask Politics

• Military News

• Global Politics

• Moderate Politics

• Progressive Politics

• UK Politics

• Canadian Politics

• Australian Politics

• New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
outrageousmatter@lemmy.world
aidan@lemmy.world
jordanlund@lemmy.world
little_cow@lemmy.world
Theonetheycall1845@lemmy.world
JuBe@lemmy.world
Lasherz12@lemmy.world
462
'No Secret Police Act': Democratic Bill Would Ban Trump's Masked Federal Agents (www.commondreams.org)
submitted 1 day ago by tonytins@pawb.social to c/politics@lemmy.world
17 comments fedilink hide all child comments
top 17 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] fodor@lemmy.zip 16 points 23 hours ago

Look, if we're serious about having transparency and accountability in law enforcement, it's going to take a lot of work. The starting point would be to require these officers to have their names in large text on the front and back of their shirts, like professional athletes do. They need to be named openly all the time, not just when they're arresting someone, not just in tiny text on a badge that you can't even see when you're 6 ft away.

And most importantly, they need to be locked up or massively fined when they violate their own policy or people's civil rights. When cops are not accountable for their actions, of course they're going to behave like rat bastards.

[–] Sterile_Technique@lemmy.world 35 points 1 day ago* (last edited 23 hours ago) (1 children)

Even if it passes, this administration and its brown shirts don't give a flying fuck about the law. They'll ignore it, it won't be enforced, Dems will write more angry letters, rinse and repeat.

[–] gaja@lemm.ee 9 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

But then you might have a chance to argue your second amendment right when you shoot a masked kidnapper.

[–] Sterile_Technique@lemmy.world 5 points 23 hours ago

Bombs and bullets do be the cure for Nazism.

[–] adespoton@lemmy.ca 28 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

This is great, but a) it isn’t going to pass, and b) what about cops going under cover and plainclothes officers? So they get a carve out, or are they made illegal?

How about SWAT teams in gas masks? Sheriffs working in dusty areas wearing bandanas? Riot visors?

[–] halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world 44 points 1 day ago

They're basically extending an existing law making wearing a disguise while committing a crime a separate offense, to cover law enforcement while in the performance of their duties. It's already illegal for you to do this as a regular civilian, they're making it the same for law enforcement.

There is an exception for undercover officers. There is zero reason outside those situations for an officer to disguise themselves. SWAT aren't usually disguised, they are very clearly identified as police already and aren't trying to disguise themselves.

Plainclothes officers outside undercover assignments are already a grey area to be honest, too easy for them to purposefully escalate conflicts while making it look natural, and then justify a response to an escalation they created. ICE is just using that to their advantage here.

Existing law makes it a misdemeanor to wear a mask, false whiskers, or any personal disguise, as specified, with the purpose of evading or escaping discovery, recognition, or identification while committing a public offense, or for concealment, flight, evasion, or escape from arrest or conviction for any public offense. This bill would make it a crime for a law enforcement officer to wear any mask or personal disguise while interacting with the public in the performance of their duties, except as specified. The bill would exempt an officer engaged in an undercover assignment from these provisions. The bill would define law enforcement officer as any officer of a local, state, or federal law enforcement agency, or any person acting on behalf of a local, state, or federal law enforcement agency. By creating a new crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would declare its provisions to be severable. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

SB627 | California 2025-2026 | Law enforcement: masks. | TrackBill https://trackbill.com/bill/california-senate-bill-627-law-enforcement-masks/2670575/

This actually is not a particularly vague law. It's pretty clear cut, and requires an intent to disguise. With the ICE bitches there is a clear intent to disguise there and not identify themselves as law enforcement, they've even admitted that is the case.

The mask itself isn't the issue, it's the mask alongside not being not identifying themselves as police via something like a uniform or vest.

[–] peteyestee@feddit.org 9 points 1 day ago

Oh cool a soggy bandaid fix.