What message does ICE send while hiding behind a mask?
ICE agents are currently wearing masks, raising questions about transparency and accountability.
In a special episode of the Exterpt podcast (first released on July 31, 2025): An ice attack is being carried out by an agent wearing a mask. Mike German, a former FBI agent and fellow at the Brennan Center of Justice, will be taking part in an excerpt from USA Today to discuss this trend and masked law enforcement optics.
Hit play on the players below to listen to the podcasts and follow the transcript below. This transcript was automatically generated and was clearly edited in its current format. There may be some differences between audio and text.
Podcast: True Crime, in-depth interviews and other USA Today podcasts are here
Dana:
Hello, I’m Dana Taylor. This is a special episode of The Exterpt from USA Today.
Law enforcement officers working in normal clothes and undercover investigations are nothing new. What’s new is that some executives have hidden their faces behind masks and refuse to show identification. Following a surge in arrests by masked federal immigration agents armed with unmarked cars, some California Democrats are supporting a new bill in Congress that will prohibit officials from covering their faces while raids unless masks are needed for safety or health. What led to the rise of masked police? Does this mean what law enforcement should look like in democracy?
To dig into these questions and more, we have Mike German, a former FBI agent who is a fellow at the Brennan Center for Justice. Thank you for taking part in the microphone.
microphone:
Thank you for taking me.
Dana:
In a recent social media post about X, the Department of Homeland Security is having trouble with a proposed law in California that prohibits federal law enforcement from wearing masks. DHS claims ICE agents are facing assault and dox. What do you think about why some executives decided to wear masks? Was there any official guidance that officers should mask?
microphone:
I haven’t seen official guidance go outside, but I have seen DHS officials justify the use of agents’ masks and give their activities a green light through essentially their public rhetoric.
Dana:
And what do you think about why some officers made that decision for themselves?
microphone:
I think there are probably as many reasons as there are executives. I think one of the problems is that they have detailed federal agents from other agencies to do this kind of immigration work, and they are probably respected in their community and want to maintain their reputation with the work they are doing. So I think I might be a bit hesitant to be publicly linked to this kind of immigration enforcement action that diverts resources from true, important law enforcement missions.
And I think part of that is creating fear in the community. That is, masked law enforcement is a hallmark of a police state, especially when masked agents, not specifically identified as law enforcement agencies that do not identify law enforcement, are actually seen to create a greater threat to law enforcement. These DHS officials are trying to justify it as a safety measure for officers, but in reality they are against it. If those who are arrested or arrested cannot clearly identify you as a law enforcement, their tendency will resist.
And certainly for the public, when they see some sort of altercation going on, they may want to be involved in trying to protect the person being attacked. And the threat to law enforcement rises when agents are not properly identified. So, as FBI agents, when we undertook the assault, we wore these jackets in the bright yellow letters of FBI, making it very clear that we are law enforcement agencies acting in our official capabilities. That’s part of the protection an agent gets.
Dana:
As you said, is there a risk in having officers from other agencies?
microphone:
In particular, there is a serious risk as the FBI agents may be dependent on terrorism cases differ from the authorities that ICE ERO agents enforce civil law. So it’s important to bring together a lot of people without very clear instructions, very clear guidance, especially the public, without understanding what’s going on. And much of this is because law enforcement agencies are unable to operate in places they no longer trust the public to actually enforce the law, rather than engage in any kind of misconduct or abuse.
Dana:
Here, is there a risk that there is no way to know if the person behind the mask has a badge, especially in ice targeted communities?
microphone:
Certainly there is a serious risk. As we have seen, it is dangerous for those targeted because unfortunately there are people who try to impersonate agents and use the natural respect that the public gives to those who are enforcing the law to exploit and sacrifice the person. So, since it’s actually real, it’s natural to fear someone dressed in militia equipment that isn’t properly identified as law enforcement, especially if they’re masked and don’t want to show badges. There are also a lot of very aggressive behaviors.
And many studies dating back to civil unrest in the 1960s and 1970s have shown that when law enforcement engages in arbitrary, intentional or targeted violence, it often produces more violence. In other words, when they indiscriminately attack the crowd, the crowd becomes more violent. So this is a dangerous escalation that occurs in many of these attacks that have not actually followed appropriate law enforcement protocols.
Dana:
What is the importance of some officers who probably view the American people as a threat?
microphone:
That is a major issue of democracy. In democracy, law enforcement officials are supposed to be under democratic control. Their guidelines should be made public, their activities should be closely supervised and concluded with strong guidelines. Unfortunately, what we’ve seen, especially since the 9/11 terrorist attacks, is that I’ve been working, as I play a bigger role in the federal law enforcement agency of the Task Force, Joint Terrorism Task Force, High-intensity Drug Clusters, locally known drug centres, which are local emergency task enforcement forces, and so on. This type of activity is a network of centers all over the country, where it is often very secretive. And everything that is secret is threatening democracy. And because of so little accountability, the public loses confidence in the police department and loses confidence that they are actually working to protect public safety rather than working for inappropriate purposes.
Why is the ice agent hiding behind the mask?
What is behind the trends of ice agents who wear masks and refuse to show identification?
Dana:
There is no shortage of photos and videos of recent ice raids. Social media allows for a surge in that and other policing activities. Does this normalize masking? Is this something the public needs to see? What are your thoughts here?
microphone:
Unfortunately, masking appears to be normalised, but there is not much about the fact that there is a camera, and I don’t think there is much about the fact that law enforcement leaders cite this type of behavior. I used to be an undercover FBI agent. I know that people who work in certain roles need to protect their identity and likeness. But they can make that choice and will not participate. And once again, it’s leadership and management. If there is someone you do not want to be identified in public for an important and dangerous undercover investigation, don’t let them go public and engage in activities that may attract public attention.
Dana:
Mike, you used to be undercover with white supremacists and militia groups. How will the current trends towards mass policing affect the work of actual undercover agents?
microphone:
It was extremely dangerous and we saw this happening significantly during the 2020 protests when these militia groups began to dress like soldiers. Unfortunately, police officers were dressed more and more like soldiers, with bulletproof vests and armor plaques, fatigue and camouflage, rather than regular police uniforms. The reason the militia group was doing that was to identify with police officers. They often argued that they supported the issue of blue living, and otherwise favored enforcement. Well, that was never true in reality. And certainly on January 6th, when many members of these militant groups went to the Capitol to attack police officers and injured more than 100 people, the love of law enforcement was not real. So they are also trying to act as if they were given some official authority to oppose their political enemies, which creates a very dangerous situation. Of course, there are many instances of law enforcement officials associated with these groups, so the lack of clearly identified law enforcement poses a risk that the public is not aware of whether this person is acting in a legal or illegal capacity.
Dana:
When federal officials conduct operations while masked and unclear, should the community demand both transparency and accountability?
microphone:
Well, it’s very important that our democratic processes work, and you should understand that this is what creates harm to your community, not just your federal representatives, but your state and local representatives alike. It creates a risk that would otherwise not exist. The last thing law enforcement should do is engage in actions that create a more lawless society. So it is up to these states and local leaders to make sure the police departments know their expectations, and it is up to the states and local police departments to make sure that when federal and federal agents are operating on the territory, they are doing it in an accountable way.
Dana:
Are there any reforms to prioritize now to restore federal and local policing accountability?
microphone:
Certainly, it is important that they have a properly identified agent when they are out in public and they may be arresting or empowering them. Again, there is a lot of research into crowd control dating back to the 1960s and 1970s, indicating a safer way to engage with the public who engage in protest. So these are things that law enforcement knew in the 1990s when I was an FBI agent. Somehow, they seem to have forgotten it or ignore all that advice. But they have to seek public opinion about what they are doing, and they understand why this activity is so harmful to our society.
Dana:
Thank you Mike for taking part in the excerpt.
microphone:
Thank you for welcoming me.
Dana:
We would like to thank senior producers Shannon Ray Green and Cary Monaghan for their production support. Our executive producer is Laura Beatty. Please send a note to podcasts@usatoday.com and let us know what you think about this episode. Thank you for listening. I’m Dana Taylor. Taylor Wilson will be back tomorrow morning on another episode of The Exterpt on USA Today.
