express gazette logo
The Express Gazette
Wednesday, September 30, 2026

Newsom Criticized for Signing Bills Allegedly Targeting Federal Immigration Enforcement

California Governor Gavin Newsom has signed legislation that critics argue infringes upon federal authority and potentially violates the U.S. Constitution.

US Politics • 2 hours ago
Newsom Criticized for Signing Bills Allegedly Targeting Federal Immigration Enforcement

California Governor Gavin Newsom has signed legislation, Assembly Bill 1627, that critics contend targets federal immigration enforcement and may be unconstitutional. The law prohibits U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers from being employed as peace officers in California if they are accused of "serious misconduct" while enforcing federal immigration law.

The definition of "serious misconduct" is considered vague by critics, who argue that Democrats interpret any enforcement of law, particularly immigration law, as such. Newsom himself has previously referred to immigration enforcement as "state-sponsored terrorism," although he later retracted the remark.

This action follows a previous attempt by Newsom to enact legislation targeting federal law enforcement. Earlier this year, a federal judge blocked another California law signed by Newsom that prohibited federal law enforcement officers from wearing masks, while creating an exception for state officers. The judge ruled that this distinction discriminated against federal agents and violated the Constitution.

Newsom's office reportedly claimed the ruling upheld the law because it allowed a provision requiring federal agents to wear badges to stand. However, the Ninth Circuit later affirmed the lower court's decision, stating that the mask ban violated the Constitution's Supremacy Clause by asserting state control over federal officers in areas of federal jurisdiction.

Critics argue that Newsom's repeated efforts to regulate federal law enforcement activities demonstrate a pattern of challenging federal authority, which they believe is unconstitutional. Some suggest these actions are politically motivated, potentially aimed at appealing to a specific electorate or bolstering presidential ambitions, especially in light of recent polling data indicating declining approval ratings in California.


Sources