Skip to main content
Independent and nonpartisan. SaveYourState is a civic information resource. It is not a government website and is not affiliated with any government agency, party, or campaign.

California · 2025–26 Regular Session · Senate Bill

SB 1004: Law enforcement: masks.

Enacted Official data

  1. Introduced
  2. In committee
  3. Passed one chamber
  4. Passed both chambers
  5. Enacted

Last official action: ·Record last updated:

Plain-language summary

SB 1004 is a senate bill introduced in the California Senate on February 9, 2026. According to its official title, it concerns: Law enforcement: masks. Primary sponsor: Scott Wiener (D), Jesse Arreguín (D), Sasha Renée Pérez (D), Aisha Wahab (D). It lists 18 additional sponsors. Most recent recorded action (September 29, 2026): Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 757, Statutes of 2026.

Generated automatically from the official title, sponsor list, and status record only. It does not characterize the bill’s purpose or effects. How summaries are written

Official summary

Legislative Counsel’s Digest (official, as of the latest version). Written by nonpartisan legislative staff; reproduced verbatim.

Existing law makes it a crime for a law enforcement officer to wear a facial covering in the performance of their duties, except as specified. Existing law defines law enforcement officer for these purposes as anyone designated by California law as a peace officer who is employed by a city, county, or other local agency, and any officer or agent of a federal law enforcement agency, agency or law enforcement agency of another state, or any person acting on behalf of a federal law enforcement agency.

This bill would add peace officers employed by a state agency to the definition of law enforcement officers, thereby making those law enforcement officers subject to those criminal penalties. The bill would specify that facial coverings does not include certain items, including, among other things, sunglasses. The bill would, for all of the items excluded from the definition of facial coverings, limit that exclusion if the items are combined or otherwise used in a manner intended to conceal or obscure an officer’s identity. By expanding the scope of a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

Existing law prohibits any person who is found to have committed an assault, battery, false imprisonment, false arrest, abuse of process, or malicious prosecution, while wearing a facial covering in a knowing and willful violation of these provisions, from asserting any privilege or immunity for their tortious conduct against a claim of civil liability, and makes that person liable for the greater of actual damages or statutory damages of not less than $10,000, whichever is greater.

This bill would instead make a person who is found liable for false imprisonment or false arrest liable for those damages if the trier of fact finds that the person knowingly and willfully concealed their identity through the use of a facial covering at the time of the conduct giving rise to liability.

Existing law requires a law enforcement agency operating in California to, by July 1, 2026, maintain and publicly post a written policy limiting the use of facial coverings, as specified. Existing law defines a law enforcement agency for these purposes as any entity of a city, county, or other local agency, that employs anyone designated by California law as a peace officer, any federal law enforcement agency, or any law enforcement agency of another state.

This bill would add to the definition of law enforcement agency, a state entity that employs a peace officer and would change the date any law enforcement agency has to comply with that requirement to January 1, 2027. The bill would also require those policies to exempt certain surveillance operations related to enforcement of the Fish and Game Code, or similar federal law.

Sponsors

Sponsors by party (alphabetical): Democratic 22

NameRolePartyChamberDistrict
Scott WienerPrimary sponsorDemocraticSenate11
Jesse ArreguínPrimary sponsorDemocraticSenate7
Sasha Renée PérezPrimary sponsorDemocraticSenate25
Aisha WahabPrimary sponsorDemocraticSenate10
Isaac BryanCo-sponsorDemocraticAssembly55
Juan CarrilloCo-sponsorDemocraticAssembly39
Damon ConnollyCo-sponsorDemocraticAssembly12
Sade ElhawaryCo-sponsorDemocraticAssembly57
Robert GarciaCo-sponsorDemocraticAssembly50
Lena GonzalezCo-sponsorDemocraticSenate33
Mark GonzálezCo-sponsorDemocraticAssembly54
Ash KalraCo-sponsorDemocraticAssembly25
Alex LeeCo-sponsorDemocraticAssembly24
Jerry McNerneyCo-sponsorDemocraticSenate5
Caroline MenjivarCo-sponsorDemocraticSenate20
Liz OrtegaCo-sponsorDemocraticAssembly20
Akilah Weber PiersonCo-sponsorDemocraticSenate39
Sharon Quirk-SilvaCo-sponsorDemocraticAssembly67
Nick SchultzCo-sponsorDemocraticAssembly44
LaShae Sharp-CollinsCo-sponsorDemocraticAssembly79
Lola Smallwood-CuevasCo-sponsorDemocraticSenate28
José Luis SolacheCo-sponsorDemocraticAssembly62

“Support” is shown only as formal sponsorship recorded by the legislature. Roll-call votes are available on the official bill page.

Recent official actions

  1. Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 757, Statutes of 2026.
  2. Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 757, Statutes of 2026.
  3. Approved by the Governor.
  4. Approved by the Governor.
  5. Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 3 p.m.
  6. Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 3 p.m.
  7. Assembly amendments concurred in. (Ayes 29. Noes 11. Page 6024.) Ordered to engrossing and enrolling.
  8. Assembly amendments concurred in. (Ayes 28. Noes 11.) Ordered to engrossing and enrolling.
  9. In Senate. Concurrence in Assembly amendments pending.
  10. In Senate. Concurrence in Assembly amendments pending.
  11. Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 44. Noes 22. Page 6611.) Ordered to the Senate.
  12. Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 44. Noes 22. Page 6611.) Ordered to the Senate.

Sources

  1. California Legislative Information — pubinfo database export
  2. Official bill page