A Department of Justice official took a jab at a California state senator on Friday after the lawmaker, a Democrat running to succeed retiring Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., erroneously claimed his state began enforcing a mask ban against federal immigration officers.

Jesus Osete, the No. 2 official in the DOJ Civil Rights Division, pointed out that Gov. Gavin Newsom’s administration agreed in court to temporarily hold off on enforcing the ban while a lawsuit over it plays out.

Osete’s remark came in response to San Francisco-based state Sen. Scott Wiener, who posted a video Thursday boasting that the ban was active.

“That’s not what @CAgovernor told a federal judge, my man,” Osete wrote on X.

CALIFORNIA LAUNCHES MISCONDUCT PORTAL FOR REPORTING FEDERAL AGENTS DURING ICE DEPORTATION OPERATIONS

The Trump administration sued California in November, arguing that two bills, including the No Secret Police Act introduced by Wiener, violated the Constitution’s supremacy clause, which says that when federal and state laws conflict with one another, federal laws win out.

The No Secret Police Act attempted to bar ICE officers from wearing masks in certain circumstances after a series of high-profile immigration raids in the state that involved some officers fully concealing their faces with ski masks. 

As part of the lawsuit, California officials agreed in December to hold off on enforcing the mask ban against ICE agents until the court could hear arguments in the case.

Wiener claimed the mask ban went into effect on Jan. 1 in a video he shared online, contradicting what California’s attorneys told the court.

NEWSOM ON COURTROOM COLLISION COURSE WITH TRUMP OVER ICE MASK BAN

“It’s now illegal for ICE and other law enforcement to cover their faces in the state of California. Starting today, my new anti-masking law goes into effect,” Wiener said.

A federal judge is weighing whether to grant the Trump administration’s request for a preliminary injunction against the mask ban. But the briefing schedule stretches through next week, and a hearing on the matter is set for Jan. 12.

The judge could make a decision soon after the hearing, and if he were to rule in favor of California, the state could begin enforcing its ban at that point.

Bill Essayli, the first assistant U.S. attorney in central California, also chided Wiener for his claim that the state law was enforceable.

“This isn’t true. California has no authority to regulate federal agents. This state law violates the federal Supremacy Clause. … California has agreed to put the law on hold and not enforce its unconstitutional mask ban, which is designed to allow radical leftists to dox federal agents enforcing immigration laws,” Essayli said.

Wiener doubled down on his remarks in a statement to Fox News Digital, saying Essayli was a “clueless Trump Administration lackey” making a “meaningless royal decree.”

“While the agents of the state did agree to hold off on enforcing the law until the injunction hearing, the No Secret Police Act is still very much in effect, and ICE agents who appear masked in California are still subject to civil suits for violating the laws of our state,” Wiener said.

California attorneys have been fighting the lawsuit, arguing in court papers that “armed, masked individuals” carried out arrests of alleged illegal immigrants and, in doing so, “caused terror throughout California, with the public unsure whether they were interacting with legitimate law enforcement or impostors.”

The Trump administration’s lawsuit “ignores [the] careful balance of power between the federal and state governments, seeking to invalidate two California laws. … Each law exercises the State’s historic and long-established police power,” state attorneys wrote.

Editor’s note: special thanks to all our Streetsblog supporters! We fulfilled our 2025 fundraising goals. If you’d like to help us do even more, it’s not too late to donate.

I was on my way to dinner with friends on Christmas Eve when my westbound K Ingleside train was turned back at West Portal without explanation. I waited for the next train. It was turned back too. I asked one of the Muni drivers what was going on, and he said no M Ocean View or K Ingleside trains were running past the station.

I guessed it had something to do with the weather—the rain was coming down in sheets. I realized getting an Uber or Lyft at the station, with everybody else doing the same thing, probably wasn’t going to work. I had a good umbrella and rain coat so I started to walk down West Portal Avenue, ducking under awnings as I looked for a good spot to call a Lyft.

I didn’t get far before I saw why the trains were stopped, as seen in the lead photo.

I don’t know exactly how this blundering driver managed to bottom out his car on the barrier between the tracks. But, for me, it symbolized everything that’s wrong with San Francisco’s auto-uber-alles policies that continue to put the needs of individual drivers above buses and trains full of people. Mayor Lurie reiterated San Francisco’s supposed transit-first policy in his end-of-year directive. But if it’s a transit-first city, why are motorists still prioritized and permitted to drive on busy train tracks in the first place?

Why isn’t the barrier in West Portal positioned to keep drivers from using the tracks, as it was historically? Why do we even have pavement on the tracks? And why haven’t we banned drivers from using West Portal Avenue and Ulloa Street as thoroughfares in the first place, where they regularly interfere with and delay trains?

I should have stopped walking and summoned a Lyft. But being forced by the shitty politics of San Francisco, combined with a shitty driver, to call yet another car, pissed me off. I thought about all the people who got off those trains who can’t afford to call a ride-hail. I thought about the hundreds of people trapped inside trains that were stuck between stations. I continued walking and thinking about all the times I’ve visited Europe and been through similarly busy, vibrant merchant corridors such as West Portal with one major difference: no cars.

Yes, even on “car-free” streets in Europe, typically cars and delivery vehicles can still cross and access the shops directly for deliveries. But some streets are just not meant to be a motoring free-for-all. Anybody who doubts that merchants flourish in car-free and car-lite environments should either get a passport, or they should take a look at the merchant receipts after a Sunday Streets event. On the other hand, Papenhausen Hardware, which helped block a safety plan that prioritized transit movements through West Portal, went out of business anyway in 2024.

As I walked in the driving rain, my thoughts drifted to 2024’s tragedy, in which a reckless driver wiped out a family of four when she crashed onto a sidewalk in West Portal. San Francisco had an opportunity to finally implement a transit-first project and prevent a future tragedy by banning most drivers from the tracks and preventing them from using West Portal as a cut through. And yet, a supposedly safe-streets ally, Supervisor Myrna Melgar, aligned with a subset of the merchants in West Portal and sabotaged the project.

Since then, I’m aware of at least one other incident in West Portal where an errant driver went up on the sidewalk and hit a building. Thankfully, there wasn’t a family in the way that time. Either way, West Portal Avenue, and a whole lot of other streets that have hosted horrible tragedies, are still as dangerous as ever thanks to the lack of political commitment and an unwillingness to change.

I finally got to my friends’ house, 35 minutes later. They loaned me some dry clothes and put my jeans in the dryer. We had a lovely meal and a great time. My friend drove me to BART for an uneventful trip home (not that BART is always impervious to driver insanity).

In 2026, advocates, allies, and friends, we all need to raise the bar and find a way to make sure politicians follow through on transit first, Vision Zero, and making San Francisco safe. Because the half-assed improvements made in West Portal and elsewhere aren’t enough. And the status quo isn’t working.

On a closely related note, be sure to sign this petition, demanding that SFMTA finish the transit-only lanes on Ocean Avenue.

Denver will be the site of the United States’ first-ever American Indian Cultural Embassy.

Funding for the project was approved by Denver voters in the Vibrant Denver Bond measure.

The vision is for the embassy to welcome Native people back home to Colorado.

On the snowy day of CBS News Colorado’s visit, Rick Williams observed the buffalo herd at the Rocky Mountain Arsenal National Wildlife Refuge.

“These animals are sacred to us,” said Williams, who is Oglala Lakota and Cheyenne. “This was our economy. They provided everything we needed to live a wonderful lifestyle.”

Williams is president of People of the Sacred Land and a leader in the effort to build an American Indian Cultural Embassy.

“‘Homeland’ is a special term for everybody, right?” Williams asked. “But for people who were alienated, for American Indians who were alienated from Colorado, they don’t have a home, they don’t have a home community that you can go to, this is it. And I think that’s sad.”

The First Creek Open Space — near 56th and Peña, near the southeast corner of the Arsenal — is owned by the City and County of Denver and is being considered for development of the embassy.

“To have a space that’s an embassy that would be government-to-government relations on neutral space,” said Denver City Councilmember Stacie Gilmore, who represents northeast Denver District 11. “But then also supporting the community’s economic development and their cultural preservation.”

Gilmore said $20 million from the Vibrant Denver Bond will support the design and construction of the center to support Indigenous trade, arts, and education.

“That sense of connection and that sense of place and having a site is so important if you’re going to welcome people back home,” added Gilmore.

“What a great treasure for people in Colorado,” Williams said as he read the interpretive sign at the wildlife refuge.

He said the proposed location makes perfect sense: “Near the metropolitan area, but not necessarily in the metropolitan area, we would love to be near buffalo. We would love to be in an area where there’s opportunities for access to the airport.”

The Denver March Powwow could one day be held at the embassy.

Williams dreams of expanding the buffalo herd nearby and having the embassy teach future generations Indigenous skills and culture.

The concept for the embassy is one of the recommendations emerging from the Truth, Restoration, and Education Commission, a group of American Indian leaders in Colorado who began to organize four years ago to study the history of Native Americans in our state.

And the work is just beginning.

“We have to think about, ‘how do we maintain sustainability and perpetuity of a facility like this?’” Williams said. “So there’s lots of issues that are going to be worked on over the next year or so.”

Williams added, “One day our dreams are going to come true, and those tribes are going to come, and we’re going to have a big celebration out here. We’re going to have a drum, and we’re going to sing honor songs, and we’re going to have just the best time ever welcoming these people back to their homeland.”

Denver Mayor Mike Johnston’s staff sent the following statement:

“We are excited about the passing of the Vibrant Denver Bond and the opportunity it creates to invest in our city’s first American Indian Cultural Embassy. We are committed to working hand-in-hand with the Indigenous community to plan and develop the future embassy, and city staff have already been invited to listen and engage with some of our local American Indian groups, like the People of the Sacred Land. We are not yet at the stage of formal plans, but we are excited to see the momentum of this project continue.”