After an emotional debate, the Montgomery County Council voted 7-4 Tuesday to reject a motion from council member Will Jawando to accelerate a bill that would prohibit federal, state and local law enforcement officers from wearing masks on the job.
The Unmask Ice Act, which already faces legal questions for its constitutionality, ignited a passionate debate, with council members expressing concerns about the bill’s legislative process, a similar bill in the General Assembly, and the ramifications of enacting legislation that could prompt a lawsuit from the federal government.
“If we’re sued, we’re sued,” said Jawando, who is running for county executive. “We’ll be doing what Thurgood Marshall did when he went around the country, attacking unjust laws and building a case.”
The Maryland attorney general’s office has warned that banning federal immigration officers from wearing masks would be “difficult and likely unconstitutional” in response to a state bill with a similar aim.
Jawando wanted to bypass an April 17 work session and have the council vote on his bill at the March 24 council meeting.
District 3 council member Sidney Katz, chair of the Public Safety Committee — the bill’s first stop on the council — said he supports it, but recommended waiting until the state makes a final decision on the General Assembly measure.
Katz said Tuesday that he wanted to avoid “a conflict between the county and state versions.”
Jawando argued that the bill would be constitutional if the county’s police force were held to the same standard as ICE and also required to remove masks. He pointed to a California case in which a judge struck down a similar mask ban but advised that it could be reconsidered if it was rewritten to apply to all law enforcement. Jawando noted that his own bill applies to officers at the federal, state and local levels.
He accused council members of “gaslighting” him in their remarks on Tuesday about the bill and threatened to publicly release text messages and emails he exchanged with them about the legislation.
Council President Natali Fani-González said Jawando shouldn’t have tried to bypass the Public Safety Committee‘s decision to schedule the work session on the bill for April 17, after the General Assembly session is over.
“Please don’t divide this council over something so important,” said Fani-González, a formerly undocumented immigrant. “I am the only person here who has faced deportation.”
She argued that Jawando was trying to politicize the issue during an election year.
Jawando said he wasn’t trying to bypass the system, but wanted to get the council to pay attention to the bill, which was introduced on Jan. 20 and had a hearing on March 3.
Council members Kristin Mink and Laurie-Anne Sayles were the only cosponsors of Jawando’s bill who supported his push to expedite a vote.
Council member Andrew Friedson, who supports the bill, said he voted for the motion, even though he didn’t feel the bill needed to be accelerated. He expressed his disappointment that the issue had been politicized.
Cosponsors Shebra Evans, Evan Glass and Kate Stewart did not vote to move it up. Evans noted that she would have considered voting for Jawando’s motion if a work session hadn’t been scheduled. But since it is on the docket, she supports waiting.
Stewart said Tuesday that Jawando had not consulted with her before he moved to expedite consideration of the bill, and that she learned of his plan from comments he made on a news radio show on Friday.
“I am angry,” she said. “If I thought for one moment that this bill was actually actively being blocked, I would do all I could to move it. But to accuse another colleague of blocking something when we all are against the actions of these federal agents ... that is mischaracterizing.”
Sayles argued that the county didn’t need to “kowtow” to other jurisdictions.
“We don’t wait for other people to tell us what to do,” she said. “We lead.”
This story has been updated.
Comments
Welcome to The Banner's subscriber-only commenting community. Please review our community guidelines.