DOJ Sues Maryland, Two Counties Over Federal Officer Mask Bans and ID Rules

The U.S. Department of Justice filed a lawsuit Oct. 1 challenging Maryland state and county laws that restrict federal law enforcement officers from wearing masks and require them to identify themselves while performing official duties.

The lawsuit names the State of Maryland, Attorney General Anthony G. Brown, the Maryland Police Training and Standards Commission, Prince George’s County and Montgomery County as defendants. Federal officials argue the requirements improperly regulate federal operations and could expose officers and their families to harassment, threats and violence.

Filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland, the complaint seeks a declaration that the challenged provisions are unconstitutional and an injunction blocking their enforcement against federal officers.

The dispute centers on whether state and local governments can prescribe masking and identification rules for federal officers. DOJ bases its challenge on the Constitution’s Supremacy Clause and the related doctrine of intergovernmental immunity, arguing that the requirements directly regulate the federal government. Those arguments are allegations in the lawsuit, rather than a ruling on the Maryland laws.

According to the department’s announcement, the challenged laws include provisions in Maryland’s public safety code, Prince George’s County’s code and Montgomery County’s code.

Associate Attorney General Stanley E. Woodward Jr. said state and local governments lack authority to impose rules that interfere with federal operations. He also argued that requiring officers to reveal their identities could increase risks to them and their families.

Assistant Attorney General Brett A. Shumate, who leads the department’s Civil Division, said decisions about equipment worn by federal officers belong to the federal government.

DOJ alleges that officers have faced harassment, the publication of personal information and violence. The department contends that potential penalties under the Maryland laws could discourage federal enforcement and compromise sensitive operations.

The complaint also cites a May 12 letter in which Brown warned that applying Maryland’s face-covering prohibition and identification requirement to federal officers would likely violate the Supremacy Clause. That earlier legal assessment does not establish how the defendants will respond to this lawsuit.

The department described Maryland as the eighth state it has sued over regulation of federal agents. Its announcement cited related litigation involving New York, Virginia, Connecticut, New Jersey, California, Philadelphia and Milwaukee.

DOJ said it has obtained preliminary relief in every case involving mask bans or identification requirements in which a court has ruled so far. Preliminary relief can restrict enforcement while litigation continues; it does not necessarily represent a final resolution.

The department’s announcement did not include responses from Maryland or the two counties.