Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Montgomery County committee advances bill to bar masks for on-duty officers, adds reporting and limited enforcement
Loading...
Summary
The Public Safety Committee advanced Bill 5-26, the "Unmask Act," 3-0 on April 17, 2026, adding a local sunset tied to state policy issuance, identification requirements, an online reporting portal and an enforcement framework that could include civil citations and a $500 fine.
The Montgomery County Public Safety Committee on Friday advanced Bill 5-26, known as the "Unmask Act," sending the measure to the full council after a 3-0 committee vote. The bill would prohibit federal, state and local law-enforcement officers from wearing masks or facial coverings while on duty, while listing exceptions for medical respirators, fire- and rescue-related masks, exposure to biological or chemical agents, SWAT operations and cold-weather protection tied to county guidance.
McCartney Green, who prepared the staff report, told the committee: "The bill would seek to prohibit federal, state, or local law enforcement agencies from wearing, masks or facial covers while on duty." She said about 20 speakers at a March 3 public hearing had largely supported the measure.
Why it matters: the county measure is intended to preserve public identification of officers and to address community concerns about federal agents operating without visible badges. Committee members and staff repeatedly warned that the county cannot directly compel federal agencies but said local law and reporting tools can create a record and, in some cases, support enforcement referrals.
Key changes approved or discussed in committee included an amendment to automatically sunset the county law when the Maryland Police Training and Standards Commission issues a uniform statewide policy; a requirement that uniformed officers display identification on the outermost layer of clothing; creation of an online reporting portal to collect photo and incident information; and an enforcement path that could allow the county attorney to pursue civil citations. Committee discussion cited a class A penalty set in the draft at $500 for violations and characterized certain violations as potential police misconduct where locally applicable.
Chair Katz and multiple members emphasized caution about direct confrontation with federal officers. "We do not want our officers to be put in that position," the chair said when the committee discussed whether local patrol officers should physically confront agents to serve citations. Instead, members favored a portal and a county-attorney review to determine whether to issue civil citations or make referrals to prosecutors or accountability boards.
Committee members and staff also considered legal context in other jurisdictions. McCartney Green briefed the panel on litigation in California and on Maryland Senate Bill 1, which similarly would ban face coverings and require the training commission to develop policy; staff noted the state provisions would not take effect until Oct. 1, 2026 and, practically, not until the commission issues its uniform policy.
The committee debated exceptions and reasonable accommodations at length, including whether to base a cold-weather exception on the county's extreme-temperature/cold-alert thresholds and to reference OSHA or workplace-accommodation language so that temporary protective gear (for example during helicopter landings or prolonged outdoor details) would not be penalized. Assistant Chief Darren Frank urged careful drafting to avoid punishing officers who use protective equipment in hazardous conditions.
The committee recorded its support in committee for the amendments and to move the bill to full council by a 3-0 vote. Committee members said the matter will return to the full council for additional consideration and possible legal review before final adoption.
What happens next: Bill 5-26 will go to full council. Staff said they will refine exception language to reference county emergency and OSHA guidance, and to align the sunset trigger with issuance of the statewide uniform policy by the Maryland Police Training and Standards Commission.
Reported details and clarifications: the staff report references approximately 20 public commenters who supported the bill at an earlier hearing; the draft enforcement provision cites a $500 fine for a class A violation; and the state bill requires a training-commission policy that staff said is not expected to be in force until after Oct. 1, 2026, pending the commission's rulemaking.
