A three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit has blocked California's "No Vigilantes Act," ruling that its requirement for non-uniformed federal law enforcement officers to display identification while on duty violates the Supremacy Clause. The decision, authored by Judge Mark Bennett and joined by Judges Jacqueline Nguyen and Daniel Collins, affirms an earlier injunction pending appeal and concludes the United States is certain to succeed on its facial challenge.
The court applied the doctrine of intergovernmental immunity, which bars states from directly regulating the federal government's operations. It found that Section 10 of the act "lays hold of" federal officers in their specific attempt to obey orders and imposes qualifications beyond those the federal government has deemed sufficient. Because the law applies expressly to federal officers and controls how they conduct law enforcement, the court said it regulates inherently sovereign functions without congressional authorization.
The panel also rejected California's argument that a state law only runs afoul of the doctrine when it imposes substantial burdens on federal operations. That standard, the court explained, applies to regulation of federal contractors and third-party employers, not to direct regulation of the federal government itself. Citing Supreme Court precedent, the panel emphasized that even universally applicable state laws, such as those concerning murder, cannot control the conduct of a U.S. marshal acting under federal law. The ruling means the statute is invalid in all applications as to federal agencies and officers.