Nearly everyone who testified at a public hearing Tuesday afternoon at the state capitol was in favor of a Juneau representative’s bill that seeks to ban law enforcement officers from wearing face masks on duty in Alaska.
But one person who spoke against the bill happened to be the chief of police for Alaska’s largest city.
Juneau Democrat Sara Hannan’s House Bill 250 would ban anyone acting as a law enforcement officer in Alaska from wearing a mask while on duty — including federal, state and local agents — with some exemptions like medical masks, transparent safety shields, cold-weather masks or masks worn by undercover officers.
Hannan promotes it as being “pro-law enforcement.” She prefiled the bill in January, following public outrage after a masked Immigration and Customs Enforcement officer shot and killed a Minnesota woman on camera. A U.S. Customs and Border Patrol officer killed another man in Minneapolis just weeks later.
At the bill’s second hearing in the House State Affairs Committee on Tuesday afternoon, the bill received support from eight of the nine public testifiers. That’s after a chilly initial reception from a couple of legislators the week before.
Bridget Smith of Juneau said while she respects law enforcement, she doesn’t respect anyone who hides their identity.
“A peace officer wearing a mask to conceal his face would immediately lead me to question that person’s motives and distrust whether that officer was really there to protect and serve me, or whether they wish to be unaccountable for their behavior,” she said.
As the bill is currently written, an officer who violates the ban would be charged with a Class B misdemeanor per violation, which is punishable by up to 90 days in jail and a $2,000 fine. Some testifiers ask for the charges to be harsher.
Laura Lucas, also from Juneau, said she supported the bill because she believes it could prevent what’s currently happening in Minnesota, where federal immigration officers have ramped up deportations amid widespread public protests, from happening in Alaska in the future. Other states across the U.S. have sought to impose similar bans in recent months.
“Within the past year, we’ve seen changes in this country that we’ve never imagined would happen before,” she said. “I see this legislation as potentially proactive for an issue that might arise in Alaska.”
The main dissent against the bill came from Anchorage Police Chief Sean Case. He said while he opposes police officers wearing masks to conceal their identity, he argued the bill is trying to address a problem that doesn’t exist in Alaska.
“Masking is not a practice in Alaska, and enforcing this bill would be impractical, giving its numerous exemptions,” he said. “It attempts to solve a nonexistent issue, while inserting local law enforcement into a debate about federal immigration enforcement, something outside our role and responsibility.”
He said the Anchorage Police Department already has other accountability measures in place, like requiring uniformed officers to wear their badges and identify themselves upon request.
“Despite real risks of harassment and violence, officers have continued to serve openly with visible name tags and badges,” he said. “That visibility is part of our responsibility to protect and serve our communities.”
While Case was the only one who verbally testified against the bill, the committee received written testimony as well — that included a couple of comments against, while most were in favor.
Hannan’s bill is slated to be heard again by the House State Affairs Committee and has been referred to the House Judiciary Committee. It’s unclear if it will have enough support to advance in the Legislature.