HR 2065: Harsh penalties for protesters who conceal their identity

Would make it a federal crime, subject to a lengthy prison sentence, to wear a mask or other disguise while protesting in an "intimidating" or “oppressive” way. Under the “Unmasking Hamas Act,” anyone "in disguise, including while wearing a mask" who "injures, oppresses, threatens, or intimidates any person" exercising their constitutional rights could be sentenced to up to 15 years in prison as well as fined. The bill does not define “oppress,” nor does the bill specify what is meant by “disguise,” other than that it includes a “mask.” The bill’s substantive provisions are identical to the “Unmasking Antifa Act,” which lawmakers have introduced in several previous sessions. Sponsors of the bill made clear that it is a response to pro-Palestine protesters, some of whom have worn masks to avoid retaliation.

Status: pending

Introduced 11 Mar 2025.

Issue(s): Face Covering

HB 2862: New penalties for masked protesters

Would create a new offense that could cover peaceful demonstrators who wear masks. The bill would criminalize wearing a mask “while present at a public assembly” if the wearer intended to conceal their identity. The offense would be a Class 3 misdemeanor, punishable by up to 30 days in jail and $500, but second and subsequent violations would be a Class 1 misdemeanor, punishable by up to six months in jail and $2,500. The bill exempts certain face coverings, including holiday costumes worn to celebrate the holiday, religious coverings, and “medical devices” if prescribed by a doctor. The bill does not exempt masks worn for expressive purposes, medical masks without a prescription, or masks worn to protect the wearer’s privacy. If enacted, a demonstrator wearing a mask to avoid retaliation for their participation in a peaceful protest could face jail time.

Status: pending

Introduced 20 Jan 2026; Approved by House 2 March 2026

Issue(s): Face Covering

HB 2007: Harsh penalties for protesters who conceal their identity

**Note: HB 2007 was signed into law following amendments that removed the most restrictive  provisions.** As originally introduced in the House, the bill made it a felony to wear any kind of disguise at a protest. The introduced bill broadly prohibited disguises, "whether partial or complete," that an individual wore at a protest, political event, or any other public event in order "to evade or escape discovery, recognition or identification." Under the introduced bill, police would have had authority to detain any individual wearing a disguise in order to verify his or her identity and determine if the person had committed a crime; violation of the disguise ban would have been a Class 6 felony, subject to one year in prison. The sponsor of the bill said it was inspired by clashes between police and protesters, some of whom were masked, outside a 2017 rally for President Trump. Following widespread criticism, the bill was comprehensively revised to a single provision that would allow courts to consider it an aggravating factor, for sentencing purposes, if an individual wore a mask or other disguise to hide their face while committing a criminal offense.

Status: enacted with improvements

Introduced 21 Nov 2017; Governor Ducey signed it 23 March 2018 but the most problematic provisions were defeated.

Issue(s): Face Covering

SB 1800: New restrictions on campus protest

Would require public colleges and universities to adopt significant new limitations on campus protests, and bar state student financial aid for some demonstrators who violated campus policy. The bill requires all public colleges and universities to adopt an expressive activity policy that among other things prohibits: a) engaging in “expressive activities” on campus between 10pm and 8am; b) erecting tents or otherwise “camping” on campus; c) using sound amplification while engaging in “expressive activities” on campus during class hours; d) engaging in “expressive activities” in the last two weeks of a school term by inviting speakers or using sound amplification or drums; and e) wearing a mask or other disguise while engaging in “expressive activities” on campus with certain intent, including intent to "intimidate others." Under the bill, students who engage in “materially and substantially disruptive conduct” on campus and either violate the school’s policies or commit any criminal offense would be ineligible for state student financial aid for two years. The bill creates a broad definition of “materially and substantially disruptive conduct” that includes simply violating the school’s “time, place, and manner” restrictions on expressive activity if someone “reasonably should know” that the violation “would significantly hinder another person’s or group’s expressive activity.” For example, participation in a noisy protest in violation of the school’s policies that makes it difficult for counterprotesters to be heard, could seemingly result in a two-year ban on financial aid under the bill.

Status: pending

Introduced 26 Feb 2026.

Issue(s): Campus Protests, Face Covering, Limit on Public Benefits

HB 2555: Registration and reporting requirements for protest organizers and donors, criminal penalties for protesters, and legal protections for drivers who hit protesters

Reporting requirements: The bill would require some protest organizers and nonprofits that support protests to register as lobbyists and report to the state, with criminal and civil penalties for failure to do so. Under the bill, individuals who receive “any thing of monetary value” as compensation for “or provided in association with” attending or organizing “protest activity” would have to register as a “general lobbyist.” Any person, nonprofit, or other organization that provides such compensation for “protest activity” would be required to register as a “general lobbyist principal.” Both the recipient and donor would be required to file reports to the state, to be made public, within one week of any protest activity. The reports would have to include detailed data including the amount of funding involved, the funding source and recipient, date and location of each protest activity, and the protest’s purpose. The state would be empowered to levy penalties of up to $1,000 per day for each day that a recipient or donor failed to file the requisite report or did so inaccurately. A recipient’s failure to file such a report more than once would also be a Class E felony under the bill. In addition to the likely chilling effect of potential penalties for failure to publicly report peaceful protest organizing, the administrative burden created by the reporting system would be significant for both protest organizers and donors. New criminal penalties for masked protesters and street protesters: The bill would create a new Class A misdemeanor for wearing any garment that masks or “obfuscates any part of a person’s face” during an unlawful assembly. A second violation would be a Class E felony. As written, a demonstrator wearing a winter scarf or a medical mask could face up to a year in jail for participating in a peaceful protest that was deemed unlawful for, e.g., blocking pedestrians in a public place. The bill would also create a broad new Class A misdemeanor of “false imprisonment” which could cover peaceful protesters. The offense is defined to include individuals who unlawfully “impede[] the movement of another unlawfully” by “participating as part of a group that blocks rights-of-way on sidewalks, roadways, or any other location in which another has a right to be.” As such, the offense could cover individuals protesting without a permit, for instance, who obstruct others’ movement on a street or sidewalk. Legal immunity for drivers who hit protesters: The bill would create civil and criminal immunity for a driver who kills or injures a protester in certain circumstances. Under the bill, a driver would not be criminally or civilly liable for killing or injuring someone who was participating in an “unlawful or riotous assemblage,” if the driver was “attempting to flee” the assemblage, “reasonable believe[d]” they were in danger, and exercised “due care.” If enacted, the bill could encourage vehicular violence against protesters and allow drivers to evade civil damages and criminal penalties for hitting demonstrators in a protest that had been deemed “unlawful."

Status: pending

Introduced 7 Jan 2026.

Issue(s): Civil Liability, Protest Supporters or Funders, Driver Immunity, Face Covering, Traffic Interference

S 1038 / A 1277: New penalties for protesters who conceal their identity

Would create a new disorderly persons offense "for a person, while congregating in a public place with other people who are also masked or disguised, to wear any mask or other facial obscurant or disguise with the purpose to conceal the person's identity while committing another crime or offense." The bill creates exemptions for activities related to Halloween, the weather, religious beliefs, medical purposes, or a public parade of an educational, religious, or historical character. However, it does not create an exemption for protests. As such, one engaged in identical conduct during a Halloween celebration and a protest would not face criminal liability under this proposed offense during the Halloween celebration, but could face criminal liability under this proposed offense during a demonstration. The penalty under the bill is up to 6 months in jail and a $1,000 fine. The same bill was introduced as S3578/A4804 in the 2024-2025 session.  

Status: pending

Introduced 13 Jan 2026.

Issue(s): Face Covering

S 6746: New penalties for protesters who wear a mask

Would create a new criminal offense, “concealment of identity during a protest,” that would cover peaceful protesters who wear a mask while demonstrating. Under the bill, a person who wears a mask or facial covering that disguises their face “so as to conceal the identity of the wearer” while “involved in a lawful assembly, unlawful assembly, protest, or riot” commits the offense. The bill provides an exception for masks and other face coverings worn as protection from weather, for religious reasons, for medical purposes, or as a costume for a holiday or exhibition. While only a violation, the new offense would restrict individuals’ ability to protest lawfully while remaining anonymous, for instance to avoid retaliation.

Status: pending

Introduced 21 Mar 2025.

Issue(s): Face Covering, Riot

S 723: New criminal penalties for masked protesters

Would create two new crimes that could apply to masked protesters and people who support them. Under the bill, a person who is masked or “disguised by unusual or unnatural attire or facial alteration,” who engages in a protest or other public assembly with other masked or disguised people, commits the offense of “deceptive wearing of a mask,” a Class B misdemeanor punishable by up to 90 days in jail. The offense would likewise apply to anyone who “knowingly permits or aids” masked demonstrators who congregate in public. The offense does not require that an individual act unlawfully or have any intent to engage in unlawful behavior. A second offense, “aggravated deceptive wearing of a mask,” would apply to masked or disguised individuals engaged in a public assembly where property damage or injuries occur; the offense would be a Class A misdemeanor punishable by up to one year in jail. (As drafted, the bill does not make clear whether an individual need personally cause the damage or injury, or merely be part of a group where such damage or injury occurs, to commit the offense.) The bill provides exemptions for masks or disguises worn for religious purposes, or in connection with a government-authorized “masquerade party or like entertainment.” If enacted, the bill would give law enforcement broad discretion to arrest individuals who wear masks or other disguise at a public protest, as well as anyone who seemed to be “aiding” them. The same bill was introduced as S 9194 in the 2023-2024 session. 

Status: pending

Introduced 8 Jan 2025.

Issue(s): Protest Supporters or Funders, Face Covering

HB 237: Heightened penalties for street protesters and masked protesters

Increases penalties for protesters who block traffic and for masked protesters who break any law. The law makes it a Class A1 misdemeanor, punishable by up to 150 days in jail and a fine, to willfully impede traffic while participating in a demonstration on a street or highway. Second and subsequent offenses would be a Class H felony, punishable by up to 25 months in prison. Under the law, “organizers” of street protests can be held civilly liable for any injury resulting from delays caused by the obstruction of an emergency vehicle. The law does not define “organizer,” such that anyone involved in the planning of a protest might be covered, nor does it require that the “organizer” have any intent or knowledge that an emergency vehicle would be obstructed. Additionally, the law narrows the health-related exception to North Carolina’s ban on wearing masks in public, requiring that a mask worn for health or safety reasons must be a “medical or surgical grade” mask worn “to prevent[] the spread of contagious disease.” The law broadens the authority of law enforcement and third parties to require someone to remove their masks in such cases. Under the law, someone convicted of any offense, including nonviolent protest-related offenses, can face steeper punishment if they were wearing a mask or other face covering at the time, regardless of the reason for doing so. The bill’s sponsor cited recent pro-Palestine protests on college campuses, in which some protesters have worn masks.

Status: enacted

Introduced 7 May 2024; Approved by Senate 15 May 2024; Approved by House 11 June 2024; Vetoed by Governor Cooper 21 June 2024; Veto overridden 27 June 2024

Issue(s): Civil Liability, Face Covering, Traffic Interference

HB 1226: New criminal penalties for masked protesters

Creates a serious new crime that can cover peaceful protesters who choose to wear a mask. The law makes it a Class A misdemeanor, punishable by up to one year in jail and $3,000, to wear a mask “with the intent to conceal the identity” of the wearer while “congregating in a public place with other individuals wearing a mask, hood, or other device that covers, hides, or conceals any portion of the individual’s face.” The bill exempts public gatherings to celebrate “Halloween, a masquerade, or other similar celebration,” but does not include exemptions for masks worn during protests, or worn for health, religious, or other reasons. As written, the law can cover a protester wearing a mask to avoid retaliation for their political speech, if there are other individuals in the crowd also wearing a mask—for instance, a medical mask to avoid spreading or contracting a contagious disease.   

Status: enacted

Introduced 13 Jan 2025; Approved by House 10 February 2025; Approved by Senate 9 April 2025; Signed by Governor Armstrong 23 April 2025

Issue(s): Face Covering

HB 1304: New penalties for protesters who conceal their identity

Prohibits the wearing of masks, hoods, or other device that "conceals any portion" of an individual's face while committing a criminal offense, in order to avoid recognition or identification. As drafted, the offense could encompass, e.g., individuals wearing hooded clothing while participating in a protest and also committing a minor offense such as jaywalking. Under the law, commission of the offense comprises a Class A misdemeanor, punishable by up to one year in jail and a $3,000 fine. (See full text of bill here)

Status: enacted

Introduced 12 Jan 2017; Governor Burgum signed it 23 Feb 2017

Issue(s): Face Covering

HB 3581: Heightened penalties for blocking traffic, wearing a mask, or engaging in vandalism during a “riot”

Would increase penalties under Oklahoma’s anti-rioting law that could cover nonviolent demonstrators. Oklahoma law defines “riot” to include a group of three people who threaten to use force or violence, as well as those who actually use any force or violence. As such, demonstrators can be prosecuted for “riot” even if they didn’t engage in any violence. Under current law, it is a misdemeanor to “unlawfully obstruct the normal use” of any road while participating in a riot; the bill would make such obstruction a Class D3 felony, punishable by up to two years in prison and $5,000. Current law also makes it a felony to participate in a “riot” while “disguised.” The bill would amend this offense to cover anyone who wears a “mask, hood, covering, or disguise” “without lawful excuse” and “for the purpose of concealing his or her identity.” The bill does not specify what would constitute a “lawful excuse;” it is unclear whether, for instance, masks worn to avoid retaliation for political speech would be exempt. The bill would also expand criminal liability for demonstrators who “vandalize[]” or “deface[]” government-owned property, making such act a felony punishable by at least two and up to 10 years in prison.

Status: pending

Introduced 15 Jan 2026; Approved by House 11 March 2026; Approved by Senate 27 April 2026

Issue(s): Face Covering, Riot, Traffic Interference

HB 1831: New penalties for masked protesters

Would make it a crime to demonstrate while wearing a mask in some circumstances. Under the bill, it would be a third-degree misdemeanor to wear a mask or other device to conceal one’s face, voice, or identity while in a public place. The bill provides for certain exemptions, including “traditional holiday costumes,” masks worn for religious purposes, medical masks worn to prevent the spread of disease, as well as costumes and masks worn during a “parade, ritual, initiation, ceremony, celebration or similar type of gathering” for which a permit has been obtained. It is not clear whether the last category of exemptions would apply to masks worn during permitted protests, and no exemption in the bill would cover masks worn during spontaneous or otherwise unpermitted protests. If enacted, a demonstrator wearing a mask to avoid retaliation for their participation in a spontaneous protest could face up to a year in jail. Sponsors of the bill have said that the legislation is directed at pro-Palestine protesters who have worn masks.

Status: pending

Introduced 8 Oct 2025.

Issue(s): Face Covering

SB 2972: New restrictions on campus protests

**Note: After the law was enacted, several of its provisions were challenged on First Amendment grounds and preliminarily enjoined by a district court. These include the requirement that campuses prohibit "expressive activities" between 10pm and 8am, and prohibit "expressive activities" in the last two weeks of a school term if they involve invited speakers, sound amplification, or drums.**

Requires public colleges and universities to adopt new limitations on campus protests that among other things would ban protest encampments, limit protesters’ ability to wear a mask, and restrict vigils and other demonstrations at night. Under the law—which revises Texas’s 2019 law on campus speech—all public colleges and universities in the state must have policies that among other things prohibit: a) erecting tents or otherwise “camping” on campus; b) wearing a mask or other disguise while engaging in “expressive activities” on campus with certain intent, including intent to “intimidate others;” c) engaging in “expressive activities” between 10pm and 8am; d) engaging in “expressive activities” in the last two weeks of a school term by inviting speakers or using sound amplification or drums; and e) using sound amplification while engaging in “expressive activities” during class hours if it “intimidate[s] others.” Preexisting provisions of the law define “expressive activities” broadly as “any speech or expressive conduct protected by the First Amendment,” including but not limited to assemblies, protests, speeches, carrying signs, or distributing written material. As such, colleges and universities would seemingly be required to ban all kinds of expression between 10pm and 8am, from conversations in the dining hall to someone sending a text or wearing expressive clothing. The law repeals a provision in the 2019 law that established all common outdoor areas of campus as traditional public forums where anyone could engage in First Amendment activity, and replaced it with a provision authorizing the governing boards of schools to designate select areas as public forums. 

Status: enacted

Introduced 14 Mar 2025; Approved by Senate 14 May 2025; Approved by House 28 May 2025; Signed by Governor Abbott 20 June 2025

Issue(s): Campus Protests, Face Covering, Camping