Burnett criticizes Washington bill banning face coverings for law enforcement

WENATCHEE — Rep. Brian Burnett is criticizing recently passed legislation that would prohibit Washington law enforcement officers from wearing face coverings while interacting with the public.

Burnett, a Republican from Wenatchee and former leader of the Chelan County Sheriff's Office, said the measure overlooks the realities of policing and could put officers and their families at risk.

The legislation, Senate Bill 5855, would bar officers from wearing facial coverings while performing their duties and allow people detained during those interactions to file civil lawsuits seeking damages, attorney fees and other relief.

The debate has gained attention nationally after reports in several cities of masked or plainclothes agents with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) conducting arrests while declining to immediately identify themselves. A similar California law aimed at federal immigration agents was blocked in court after the Trump administration argued it unfairly targeted federal officers, while Washington’s measure applies to law enforcement more broadly.

Burnett said he believes the proposal prioritizes political considerations over officer safety.

“This bill isn't about transparency. It's about politics,” Burnett said. “When officers are sent into volatile situations involving riots, civil unrest, or organized hostility toward law enforcement, protective gear like face coverings can be the difference between doing the job safely and becoming a target for retaliation, harassment, or worse. Legislators were warned about these risks and chose to ignore them.”

Burnett said he proposed amendments he described as “common-sense protections” that would have allowed officers responding to riots, protests or civil unrest to wear face coverings when a reasonable person would consider it necessary. Another amendment would have clarified that officers working plainclothes assignments could continue wearing facial coverings while performing their duties.

Both amendments were rejected.

“Those amendments were common-sense protections,” Burnett said. “Law enforcement leaders understand the difference between routine policing and situations where officers are dealing with volatile crowds, organized agitators, or individuals intent on intimidation and violence. The majority party had an opportunity to acknowledge that reality and refused.”

Supporters of the bill say the measure is intended to improve transparency and public trust by ensuring officers are visible and identifiable during encounters with the public.

Burnett said Washington law already requires officers to be reasonably identifiable through uniforms, badges and other identifying information, and argued the legislation could expose officers to harassment or retaliation.

“Transparency matters,” Burnett said. “But transparency does not require exposing officers to doxing, harassment, or threats against their families. In today's climate, that danger is very real.”

Burnett also said he believes the legislation could worsen law enforcement staffing challenges by discouraging recruitment.

“When the Legislature continues to send signals that it does not trust or support law enforcement, people notice,” Burnett said. “The men and women who wear the badge already face enormous challenges. Passing laws that make their jobs more dangerous or expose them to new lawsuits only makes recruitment and retention worse.”

The state House passed the legislation along party lines with Democrats in support. The Senate approved it in January. It now heads back to the Senate, which will need to concur with minor changes the House made, before the bill can go to Gov. Bob Ferguson. The governor has indicated strong support for the policy.

Andrew Simpson: 509-433-7626 or andrew@ward.media