Skip to content

Immigration & BorderBreaking

Appeals court blocks California law requiring federal agents to wear ID

By

Coverage spectrum

Covered by 12 outlets, mostly right-leaning (84%).

15 articles in total, 2 of them opinion. The spectrum counts each outlet once and leaves opinion out. How we measure bias

Masked officer in tactical vest marked POLICE ICE standing on a street, with a bystander behind.
Image via Breitbart NewsHow images are chosenReport this image

Outlets across the spectrum report that the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Wednesday against a California law requiring federal immigration agents to display identification. The No Vigilantes Act, signed by Governor Gavin Newsom last year, requires nonuniformed officers to show their agency and name or badge number during arrests and crowd control. The New York Times reports that the court said California cannot impose such requirements on federal operations. The Hill reports that the court entered a preliminary injunction after earlier placing the law on hold. Right-leaning outlets say the law violates the Supremacy Clause.

Headline and summary written by Mantle’s AI from the coverage below, under published rules. How this works

What happened

Key points

Each point shows who reports it, from Far Left to Far Right.

  1. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that California cannot enforce its law requiring federal immigration agents to wear identification.

    Reported byLeft1Center1Right3Far Right7See the outletsHide the outlets
    Left
    The New York Times
    Center
    The Hill
    Right
    The Washington Times, New York Post, Reason
    Far Right
    Just the News, The Epoch Times, The Daily Signal, Fox News, TheBlaze, Breitbart News, The Federalist

  2. The court held that the law violates the Supremacy Clause, reasoning that Congress has not authorized such a requirement and that the state cannot impose it on federal operations.

    Reported byLeft1Right1Far Right4See the outletsHide the outlets
    Left
    The New York Times
    Right
    Reason
    Far Right
    Just the News, The Epoch Times, The Daily Signal, The Federalist

  3. The No Vigilantes Act, signed by Governor Gavin Newsom last year, requires nonuniformed officers to display their agency and name or badge number during arrests, detentions and crowd control.

    One outletThe Daily Signal· Far Right

  4. The court earlier placed the law on hold and then remanded with instructions to enter a preliminary injunction against California.

    Reported byCenter1Right1See the outletsHide the outlets
    Center
    The Hill
    Right
    Reason

  5. The Justice Department first sued to block the identification requirement, along with a related law banning masks.

    One outletNew York Post· Right

How each side tells it

Compare views

Every side present reports that the Ninth Circuit blocked California's law requiring federal immigration agents to show identification. The sides differ mainly in emphasis: the right's headlines frame it as a defeat for California and Newsom, while the center and left headlines report the ruling itself.

  • the left

    1 outlet

    The one left-side headline states plainly that the appeals court blocks the law, naming the court and federal agents without adjectives or verbs of judgement.

    Appeals Court Blocks California Law Mandating I.D. for Federal Agents
    The New York TimesLeftAll left-leaning headlines

  • the center

    1 outlet

    The center headline reports the ruling in plain terms, using the agency name and the phrase can't require, with no loaded words.

    Appeals court rules California can't require ICE to show visible ID
    The HillCenterAll center headlines

  • the right

    10 outlets · 2 opinion

    Most right-side headlines frame the ruling as a rebuke to California or Newsom, with verbs like slap down; Far Right outlets go furthest, while The Washington Times states the ruling plainly.

    Ninth Circuit Loaded verb“SLAPS DOWN”Slaps down presents a court ruling as a rebuke rather than a decision.More neutral: BLOCKSDisagree with this highlight? Newsom law restricting ICE operations
    TheBlazeFar RightAll right-leaning headlines

The words they chose

Language to notice

Words that carry a judgement beyond the facts. Tap a highlighted word anywhere on the page to see why.

  • Left0

    No loaded words in its own voice.

  • Center0

    No loaded words in its own voice.

  • Right16

    slaps downsemi-refreshing levels of sanityso-calledDecisive Win

In the outlets’ own words

  • Loaded verb

    slaps downMore neutral: blocks

    Slaps down presents a court ruling as a rebuke rather than a decision.

    Court slaps down California attempt to unmask ICE in bombshell ruling

    Used byNew York Post (Right)TheBlaze (Far Right)

  • Loaded modifier

    semi-refreshing levels of sanityMore neutral: The Ninth Circuit ruled in the administration’s favor.

    Passes a value judgement on the court’s judgment rather than describing the ruling.

    (Yes, the 9th — they're showing semi-refreshing levels of sanity these days.)

    Used byRedState (Far Right)

  • Delegitimizing label

    so-calledMore neutral: California’s No Vigilantes Act

    Casts doubt on the name of the law without evidence that the name is inaccurate.

    …panel reversed a lower court's refusal to block enforcement of California's so-called "No Vigilantes Act" against federal officers, concluding that the law's application…

    Used byRedState (Far Right)

  • Sensational language

    Decisive WinMore neutral: Ruling Favors Trump Administration

    Calls a preliminary appellate ruling a decisive win for one party, which goes beyond the court’s interim decision.

    9th Circuit Hands Trump Administration Decisive Win Over California's 'No Vigilantes Act'

    Used byRedState (Far Right)

Show 12 more phrasesShow fewer

  • Sensational language

    Major SetbackMore neutral: Court blocks

    The word Major adds drama and a judgement of the law’s impact that the ruling itself does not state.

    9th Circuit Delivers Major Setback to California’s Anti-ICE Law, Finds Trump ‘Certain’ to Prevail

    Used byThe Daily Signal (Far Right)

  • Partisan shorthand

    Anti-ICEMore neutral: law regulating ICE agents

    Anti-ICE is a label that describes the law by its opponents’ framing rather than by its text.

    9th Circuit Delivers Major Setback to California’s Anti-ICE Law, Finds Trump ‘Certain’ to Prevail

    Used byThe Daily Signal (Far Right)

  • Loaded modifier

    liberal-leaningMore neutral: federal appeals court

    Labels the court by its perceived politics, which pre-judges the ruling and is not a fact about the case.

    The Trump administration scored a victory at a liberal-leaning appeals court Wednesday, which temporarily blocked a section of a California law…

    Used byFox News (Far Right)

  • Sensational language

    showdownMore neutral: legal dispute

    “Showdown” frames a court ruling as a confrontation, which the reported ruling does not describe.

    Trump scores win from liberal-leaning Ninth Circuit in ICE enforcement showdown

    Used byFox News (Far Right)

  • Loaded verb

    permanently nixedMore neutral: permanently blocked

    Nixed is informal and dismissive, while blocked describes the same legal effect.

    A federal appeals court has permanently nixed a California law that would have forced ICE agents to wear identification,…

    Used byNew York Post (Right)

  • Loaded verb

    unmask ICEMore neutral: require ICE agents to show identification

    Unmask suggests ICE agents were hiding their identity improperly, while the law only requires identification.

    Court slaps down California attempt to unmask ICE in bombshell ruling

    Used byNew York Post (Right)

  • Sensational language

    bombshellMore neutral: major

    Bombshell adds drama that the ruling itself does not establish.

    Court slaps down California attempt to unmask ICE in bombshell ruling

    Used byNew York Post (Right)

  • Dehumanizing label

    illegal alienMore neutral: immigrants without legal status

    The term labels people by legal status in the writer’s own voice, while neutral wording describes them without that label.

    …Enforcement operations say masked and unidentifiable agents pose a risk to illegal alien targets as well as the greater public.

    Used byTheBlaze (Far Right)

  • Loaded verb

    ForcingMore neutral: Requiring

    The verb “forcing” implies coercion, while the law is a display requirement that the court ruled on, so a neutral verb describes the same mandate.

    Federal Appeals Court Blocks California Rule Forcing Agents to Show ID

    Used byBreitbart News (Far Right)

  • Loaded verb

    Tried to PoliceMore neutral: Sought to Regulate

    Describes the governor's action as policing federal agents before any ruling, which presumes the state's conduct was improper.

    Newsom Tried to Police Federal Agents, but the Ninth Circuit Said No

    Used byPJ Media (Far Right)

  • Loaded verb

    Smacks DownMore neutral: Rules Against

    Adds drama and judgement to a routine appellate ruling.

    9th Circuit Court Smacks Down California Law Unmasking ICE Agents For Violence-Hungry Leftists

    Used byThe Federalist (Far Right)

  • Dehumanizing label

    Violence-Hungry LeftistsMore neutral: Critics of the law

    Attaches a violent motive to a political group without evidence in the supplied text.

    9th Circuit Court Smacks Down California Law Unmasking ICE Agents For Violence-Hungry Leftists

    Used byThe Federalist (Far Right)

See the full language guide

See for yourself

Side by side

What each side leads with and what it leaves out. Open a side to read its headlines.

From the left

1 outlet

Leads with

  • the court blocking the law
  • the limit on state rules for federal operations
See the headline from the leftHide the headlines

From the center

1 outlet

Leads with

  • the court's ruling against the law
  • the procedural history after the law was put on hold
See the headline from the centerHide the headlines
  • The HillCenter

    Appeals court rules California can't require ICE to show visible ID

    A federal appeals court on Wednesday ruled against a California law requiring Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers to show visible identification, a final ruling after previously placing the law on hold. The U.S. …

    Read at The Hill (opens in a new tab)

From the right

10 outlets · 2 opinion

Leads with

  • California and Newsom's defeat
  • the Trump administration's position
  • the Supremacy Clause and federal authority
See the 12 headlines from the rightHide the headlines
  • ReasonRight

    California Law Generally Requiring Federal Law Enforcement Officers to Display ID Violates Supremacy Clause

    The Ninth Circuit so held yesterday, reaffirming what it had said on a preliminary basis (in deciding on an injunction pending appeal) in April.

    Read at Reason (opens in a new tab)
  • The FederalistFar Right

    9th Circuit Court Loaded verb“Smacks Down”Adds drama and judgement to a routine appellate ruling.More neutral: Rules AgainstDisagree with this highlight? California Law Unmasking ICE Agents For Dehumanizing label“Violence-Hungry Leftists”Attaches a violent motive to a political group without evidence in the supplied text.More neutral: Critics of the lawDisagree with this highlight?

    A federal appellate court shot down a California law on Wednesday that sought to require ICE agents to show identification while conducting immigration operations in the state. …

    Read at The Federalist (opens in a new tab)
  • Breitbart NewsFar Right

    Federal Appeals Court Blocks California Rule Loaded verb“Forcing”The verb “forcing” implies coercion, while the law is a display requirement that the court ruled on, so a neutral verb describes the same mandate.More neutral: RequiringDisagree with this highlight? Agents to Show ID

    A federal appeals court ruled that California cannot force federal immigration agents and other federal officers to display identification during enforcement operations.

    Read at Breitbart News (opens in a new tab)
  • TheBlazeFar Right

    Ninth Circuit Loaded verb“SLAPS DOWN”Slaps down presents a court ruling as a rebuke rather than a decision.More neutral: BLOCKSDisagree with this highlight? Newsom law restricting ICE operations

    A new California law requiring federal immigration agents to wear identification during their operations was permanently slapped down by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. …

    Read at TheBlaze (opens in a new tab)
  • New York PostRight

    Court Loaded verb“slaps down”Slaps down presents a court ruling as a rebuke rather than a decision.More neutral: blocksDisagree with this highlight? California attempt to Loaded verb“unmask ICE”Unmask suggests ICE agents were hiding their identity improperly, while the law only requires identification.More neutral: require ICE agents to show identificationDisagree with this highlight? in Sensational language“bombshell”Bombshell adds drama that the ruling itself does not establish.More neutral: majorDisagree with this highlight? ruling

    The Justice Department first sued to block the ID requirement alongside a related law attempting to ban masks.

    Read at New York Post (opens in a new tab)
  • Fox NewsFar Right

    Trump scores win from Loaded modifier“liberal-leaning”Labels the court by its perceived politics, which pre-judges the ruling and is not a fact about the case.More neutral: Ninth CircuitDisagree with this highlight? Ninth Circuit in ICE enforcement Sensational language“showdown”“Showdown” frames a court ruling as a confrontation, which the reported ruling does not describe.More neutral: legal disputeDisagree with this highlight?

    The Ninth Circuit ruled the Trump administration is "certain to succeed" against California's No Vigilantes Act, dealing a blow to Gavin Newsom.

    Read at Fox News (opens in a new tab)
  • The Daily SignalFar Right

    9th Circuit Delivers Sensational language“Major Setback”The word Major adds drama and a judgement of the law’s impact that the ruling itself does not state.More neutral: Court blocksDisagree with this highlight? to California’s Partisan shorthand“Anti-ICE”Anti-ICE is a label that describes the law by its opponents’ framing rather than by its text.More neutral: law regulating ICE agentsDisagree with this highlight? Law, Finds Trump ‘Certain’ to Prevail

    An appeals court Wednesday rejected California’s mandate that federal immigration agents wear identification, asserting it violates the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution. California’s No Vigilantes Act, signed by Gov. …

    Read at The Daily Signal (opens in a new tab)
  • The Epoch TimesFar Right

    Appeals Court Blocks California Law Requiring Federal Agents to Identify Themselves

    ‘Because Congress has not authorized such legislation, it is barred by intergovernmental immunity,’ judges said.

    Read at The Epoch Times (opens in a new tab)
  • The Washington TimesRight

    California can't make ICE wear ID, federal appeals court rules

    A federal appeals court issued an injunction Wednesday blocking California's law requiring national law enforcement officers to wear identification tags so their activities can be tracked.

    Read at The Washington Times (opens in a new tab)
  • Just the NewsFar Right

    9th Circuit blocks California from making ICE agents wear ID

    California's "No Vigilantes Act," the court found, violated the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution.

    Read at Just the News (opens in a new tab)
    1 more from Just the News
  • PJ MediaFar RightOpinion

    Newsom Loaded verb“Tried to Police”Describes the governor's action as policing federal agents before any ruling, which presumes the state's conduct was improper.More neutral: Sought to RegulateDisagree with this highlight? Federal Agents, but the Ninth Circuit Said No

    Governor Gavin Newsom wanted California to dictate how federal officers identify themselves while enforcing federal law. On Wednesday, the Ninth Circuit delivered an unmistakable answer: the governor’s authority stops well short of directing federal law enforcement operations. …

    Read at PJ Media (opens in a new tab)
  • RedStateFar RightOpinion

    9th Circuit Hands Trump Administration Sensational language“Decisive Win”Calls a preliminary appellate ruling a decisive win for one party, which goes beyond the court’s interim decision.More neutral: Ruling Favors Trump AdministrationDisagree with this highlight? Over California's 'No Vigilantes Act'

    California's effort to dictate how federal law enforcement officers identify themselves while carrying out their duties has run headlong into a constitutional brick wall, courtesy of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. …

    Read at RedState (opens in a new tab)

Articles you open from here build My Mix, a private picture of how your reading spreads across the spectrum, kept on this device. What is My Mix?

The left is Far Left and Left together. The right is Right and Far Right together. Every outlet keeps its own five-point rating.

Who reported it when

How the coverage built up

  • Left

    6 hr 26 min later

    Its first report, Oct 14, 7:43 PM EDT

  • Center

    51 min later

    Its first report, Oct 14, 2:08 PM EDT

  • Right

    First to report

    The Washington Times, Oct 14, 1:17 PM EDT

See the order the outlets reported inHide the order
  1. The Washington TimesRightOct 14, 1:17 PM EDT
  2. The HillCenterOct 14, 2:08 PM EDT
  3. The Epoch TimesFar RightOct 14, 3:25 PM EDT
  4. The Daily SignalFar RightOct 14, 4:50 PM EDT
  5. Fox NewsFar RightOct 14, 5:01 PM EDT
  6. New York PostRightOct 14, 6:09 PM EDT
  7. TheBlazeFar RightOct 14, 6:20 PM EDT
  8. The New York TimesLeftOct 14, 7:43 PM EDT
  9. Breitbart NewsFar RightOct 14, 9:41 PM EDT
  10. The FederalistFar RightOct 15, 12:34 PM EDT
  11. ReasonRightOct 15, 1:08 PM EDT

Times are the ones the outlets published in their own feeds, in Eastern time. Opinion is left out. Just the News gave only a date, so it is not placed.

Read next

Help someone else find the truth beneath the surface

Most people see one side of a story. Share this one, so they can see how every side is telling it and decide for themselves.

Email it

Seen a mistake? Tell us what is wrong with this page