DOJ Sues St. Paul and Portland Over Federal Agent Mask Bans; Portland’s Own Lawyer Warned the Law Would Likely Fall

The Justice Department sued St. Paul, Minnesota, and Portland, Oregon, on Thursday, asking federal judges to strike down city laws that bar federal officers, including ICE agents, from wearing masks and require them to display identification while on duty. In Portland’s case, the government’s complaint quotes the city’s own lawyer warning council members last spring that the law would likely be ruled unconstitutional.

The two suits were filed Oct. 15: United States v. City of St. Paul, No. 0:26-cv-04498, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota, and the Portland case, No. 3:26-cv-02260, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon. St. Paul Mayor Kaohly Her, City Attorney Irene Kao and Police Chief Axel Henry are named in their official capacities, as are Portland Mayor Keith Wilson and City Attorney Robert Taylor. Both complaints make the same core argument: under the Constitution’s Supremacy Clause, cities cannot directly regulate how the federal government does its job.

WHAT THE CITY LAWS SAY

St. Paul’s City Council adopted two ordinances in February, according to the Minnesota complaint. The first, effective March 14, requires officers “performing Law Enforcement Duties in the city of St. Paul” to “Visibly Display” agency identification on the outermost layer of their uniform. The second, effective March 22, says no officer may “wear a Face Covering or Personal Disguise that conceals or obscures their facial identity,” with limited exceptions. Both expressly cover federal agencies, and an officer who willfully and knowingly violates either “is guilty of a misdemeanor,” punishable by a fine, jail or both, with each day counted as a separate violation.

Portland’s law, City Code § 23.30, was passed May 27 and took effect June 26, the Oregon complaint says. It requires officers to display “their agency-issued badge, and permanent identifying number or nametag (including their last name)” and bars them from “intentionally” concealing their faces, again with limited exceptions. Instead of criminal penalties, it lets the mayor or council authorize the city to sue for a court order forcing officers to comply.

The complaint quotes St. Paul council members’ own words. Council member Saura Jost said, “It should embarrass the federal government that we have to outline this baseline practice in law for them, but they appear incapable of shame.” Council member Cheniqua Johnson said, “ICE agents should not be able to terrorize our community under the comfort of a mask. Hiding their face shouldn’t be an option. Masks off. It’s that simple.”

‘IT IS LIKELY WE WILL FAIL’

The Portland complaint leans on what city officials said before the vote. It says Taylor told the council that a 2026 Ninth Circuit ruling against a similar California law “is binding on us” and that if the ordinance “is passed and it was challenged . . . that [it] would likely be held unconstitutional.” It says Mayor Wilson, in a memo reported by The Oregonian, predicted the law “would attract a court challenge and that the city would likely lose,” and that Councilmember Steve Novick said “it is likely we will fail.” Another member, the complaint says, argued that “people must push the limits.”

Portland’s city attorney warned the council the law would likely be struck down, the Justice Department’s complaint says. Background: ICE file photo, public domain.

The complaint says the Justice Department wrote to Wilson and Taylor on Oct. 9 seeking assurances that the law would not be enforced against federal officers, and warned that federal officers “will not comply with Portland’s unconstitutional ordinances and will continue to wear masks.” On Oct. 12, it says, Taylor answered that the city intended to enforce it and that legal concerns could be raised in any enforcement case. The complaint says Wilson did not respond.

THE GOVERNMENT’S SAFETY CASE

The Minnesota complaint argues masks protect officers from doxxing. It says ICE’s Office of Professional Responsibility investigated 39 doxxing or threat cases against ICE employees in Minnesota between January 2025 and March 2026, “approximately 28%” of such cases nationwide. It describes a Jan. 4, 2026, social media post that revealed the hotel where about 75 ICE officers were staying, and says 32 ICE employees in the Twin Cities reported 60 incidents of being followed, recorded or harassed between April 10 and June 17. It also cites HSI figures showing reported death threats against its personnel rising from 16 in fiscal 2023-2024 to 2,967 in the period from fiscal 2025 through September 2026.

These are the government’s allegations, and the cities have not yet responded in court.

A STRING OF SIMILAR SUITS

The cases are the latest in a series. The Justice Department said its Civil Division has brought similar challenges in New York, Virginia, Connecticut, New Jersey, California, Maryland, Philadelphia, Denver and Milwaukee, and the complaints say courts have blocked comparable laws in California, Virginia, Philadelphia and New York. The Portland complaint also cites a Ninth Circuit decision issued Oct. 14.

“The Federal Government, not state and local governments, gets to decide which equipment federal officers may or may not wear when performing their official duties,” said Assistant Attorney General Brett A. Shumate of the Civil Division. Associate Attorney General Stanley E. Woodward Jr. said the department “will never tolerate the doxxing or harassment of federal officers.”

The government asks both courts to declare the city rules invalid as applied to federal officers and to block their enforcement.

Sources: Complaint, United States v. City of St. Paul, No. 0:26-cv-04498 (D. Minn., filed Oct. 15, 2026); complaint, United States v. City of Portland, No. 3:26-cv-02260 (D. Or., filed Oct. 15, 2026), both posted by the U.S. Department of Justice; Justice Department press release “Justice Department Files Complaints Against the Cities of St. Paul and Portland Challenging Mask Ban and Identification Requirements for Federal Officers” (Oct. 15, 2026), justice.gov. Cover and in-post background: U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement file photos (New York, Jan. 28, 2025), public domain, via Wikimedia Commons.