Ninth Circuit Strikes Down California's 'No Vigilantes Act'

A unanimous three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit has struck down California's "No Vigilantes Act" (NVA), ruling that the state law attempted to impose unconstitutional restrictions on federal immigration enforcement.

The NVA, enacted in October, required non-uniformed federal law enforcement officers operating in California to visibly display identification while carrying out federal duties. Violators of this requirement could face criminal prosecution by the state. The Ninth Circuit's decision, issued in the case of U.S. v. California, enjoined the law, finding it conflicted with federal authority.

The court cited the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution, which establishes federal law as the supreme law of the land. It highlighted the principle of intergovernmental immunity, stating that states may not directly regulate the federal government's operations. This legal principle dates back to the Supreme Court's 1819 decision in McCulloch v. Maryland, which established that states cannot impede the actions of the federal government within its own sphere.

California had argued that the NVA did not "substantially burden" federal law enforcement. However, the Ninth Circuit rejected this argument, asserting that any state law attempting to directly regulate the conduct of the United States is void, regardless of the degree of interference with federal functions.

The ruling also referenced the Supreme Court's 1890 decision in In re Neagle. In that case, the Supreme Court prevented California from prosecuting a U.S. Marshal for murder while he was acting under federal law to protect a Supreme Court justice. The Ninth Circuit drew a parallel, stating that California cannot criminally prosecute federal agents now for enforcing immigration laws, just as it could not prosecute the marshal then.

The court noted that another California law, the "No Secret Police Act," which made it a criminal offense for federal agents to wear facial coverings that concealed their identity, was already enjoined by a lower court for similar reasons. This law targeted federal agents who have faced harassment and threats, according to the notes.

The decision serves as a rebuke to the state's efforts to regulate federal immigration enforcement, which Governor Gavin Newsom and other state officials have publicly criticized. The notes suggest that the Ninth Circuit's ruling underscores the constitutional limits on state interference with federal law enforcement activities.