Law enforcement: masks.

Removed the broad civil liability provision (former subdivision (g)) that stripped privileges and immunities and imposed a $10,000 minimum damages floor for any person found to have committed assault, battery, false imprisonment, false arrest, abuse of process, or malicious prosecution while wearing a facial covering in violation of the section. Only the narrower false imprisonment/false arrest damages provision remains.

Consolidated a duplicated exemption clause (which appeared as both subdivision (c) and subdivision (g) in the amended-in-assembly version) into a single subdivision (g) covering officers under Section 7289 exemptions and active SWAT personnel.

Reorganized subdivision lettering to remove drafting artifacts from the amendment process, including an empty (d) label and renumbered subsequent subdivisions for a clean enrolled format.

The standard for when excluded items (sunglasses, clear shields, etc.) are no longer exempt was narrowed. Previously, exclusions were lost if items were combined in a manner that 'results in, or is intended to result in' concealing identity. Now the exclusion is only lost if items are combined in a manner 'intended to conceal or obscure' identity, removing the objective results-based test.

A new subdivision (f)(1) adds that any person found liable for false imprisonment or false arrest is liable for statutory damages of at least $10,000 (or actual damages, whichever is greater) if the trier of fact finds the person knowingly and willfully concealed their identity through a facial covering at the time of the conduct.

A new subdivision (f)(2) adds a savings clause stating that nothing in the section abrogates any privilege, justification, or defense based on lawful authority (including Penal Code Sections 836 and 836.5), or a defense that an arrest was made in obedience to a warrant that appeared valid on its face. It clarifies this does not preserve immunity from civil liability or no cause of action provisions.

The exemption for 'Protection of identity during prosecution' was expanded to explicitly include the time 'immediately before and after appearances,' broadening when officers may use facial coverings in that context.

A new subdivision (g) explicitly states that the section does not apply to officers subject to Government Code exemptions or SWAT team members while actively performing SWAT responsibilities, making these exclusions more prominent in the statute itself.

A new Section 3 adds a severability clause stating that if any provision is held invalid, it will not affect other provisions or applications that can be given effect without the invalid provision. The former Section 3 (no reimbursement) was renumbered to Section 4.

Section 4, which declared the bill an urgency statute to take effect immediately, was entirely removed. The bill will now follow the standard effective date rather than going into force immediately upon passage.

The legislative vote requirement changed from a two-thirds majority (required for urgency statutes) to a simple majority, reflecting the removal of the urgency clause.

In Section 185.5(b)(2), the phrase 'concealing or obscuring an officer's identity' was corrected to 'conceal or obscure an officer's identity,' fixing a grammatical error in the language describing when excluded items lose their exemption.

Assembly Member Mark Gonzalez was added to the list of coauthors.

The exemption for surveillance operations in Section 7289(b)(3)(F) was expanded to include 'a federal agency or officer conducting surveillance operations pursuant to similar federal law,' not just state-level Fish and Game Code enforcement. This means federal wildlife officers can now use facial coverings during surveillance without violating the policy requirement.

The motorcycle helmet exemption in Section 185.5(b)(2)(E) was changed from 'A motorcycle helmet' to 'A helmet,' broadening the type of headgear an officer may wear while on a vehicle that requires a helmet, including after dismounting if they intend to remount imminently.

The deadline for law enforcement agencies to maintain and publicly post a written facial covering policy was extended from July 1, 2026 to January 1, 2027.

A new exemption was added for surveillance operations related to enforcement of the Fish and Game Code or its regulations, allowing officers to wear facial coverings during such operations.

A new definition of 'opaque' was added, specifying that it includes dark-tinted, mirrored, smoked, or reflective materials that substantially obscure or distort facial visibility. This closes a potential loophole where tinted or mirrored gear might not have been considered opaque.

The list of items excluded from the 'facial covering' definition was expanded to include: sunglasses; helmets with clear face shields or visors worn solely for safety; and protective equipment used during academy or in-service training activities. The motorcycle helmet exclusion was also broadened to cover officers who have dismounted but reasonably intend to remount imminently.

A new catch-all condition was added stating that any item on the exclusion list can still be treated as a facial covering if it is combined with other items in a manner that results in, or is intended to result in, concealing or obscuring an officer's identity.