The American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California (ACLU) and the First Amendment Coalition (FAC) have sent a new letter to the city of Modesto, setting deadlines for action on the city’s ban on face coverings during protests. The organizations are demanding that the City Council provide a written update by October 23 and place the issue on its agenda for discussion by November 4. If these deadlines are not met, the ACLU and FAC have stated they will pursue legal action.
“Despite outreach from leading First Amendment legal organizations, sustained engagement by your constituents, and an unequivocal recommendation from the CPRB, you have yet to engage with the Ordinance in a public meeting,” the letter states. “We thus call on the City Council to agendize discussion of the Ordinance’s repeal or amendment as soon as possible. Failure to do so may compel us to initiate legal action against the City in order to protect residents’ constitutional rights.”
The letter also warns that the ordinance “poses an ongoing threat to constitutional freedoms, especially in light of upcoming national protests.” Another protest, known as “No Kings,” is scheduled in Modesto for October 18.
“Because we believe Modesto’s resources would much better serve the community if not spent defending an unconstitutional law, we urge you to take the concerns raised herein seriously,” according to the letter.
Modesto enacted its mask ordinance in 2019 at the request of its Police Department before a planned straight-pride rally. During protests on June 14, five individuals were arrested for allegedly violating this ordinance. Criticism of how police enforced this law began soon after, with public comments at City Council and Community Police Review Board meetings voicing opposition.
On July 18, the ACLU sent its first letter asserting that Modesto’s mask ban is unconstitutionally vague and overbroad and violates state and federal protections for free speech, privacy, disability rights, and religious freedom. The letter also claimed officers enforced the ban in a way that was discriminatory and raised further constitutional concerns.
A separate letter was sent on behalf of FAC, along with other media organizations, expressing concern about how the ordinance could impact lawful newsgathering.
In August, Modesto announced it would drop charges against those arrested under the mask ordinance but maintained it had legal authority to enforce it. Calls from public speakers at City Council meetings have continued urging repeal or amendment of the law. However, some officials argued that any changes should first be reviewed by the Community Police Review Board (CPRB), which delayed further action and led to continued criticism at council meetings.
The police review board received a letter from ACLU and ultimately recommended repealing the ordinance in September. The city responded that it would consider what steps should be taken next.
City Manager Joe Lopez wrote to review board members stating that Modesto would continue working with First Amendment counsel and consult experts “to ensure we provide safe and legal environments for individuals to exercise their rights to peacefully protest.” Lopez added, “It is important that we do our due diligence, given that the City has experienced violent protests in recent years. We anticipate this work being completed in the coming months.”
Mayor Sue Zwahlen said Thursday that no decision had been made about next steps and that she was seeking more information and legal advice before proceeding. “I continue to conscientiously study all sides of this situation. I take it seriously,” Zwahlen said. “Our council will decide next steps once we have all the information we need to make an informed decision.”
Zwahlen indicated she expected the matter would be added to an agenda soon but was unsure if this would happen before the November 4 deadline set by ACLU and FAC. She said she had not taken a firm position on the ordinance.
The next scheduled City Council meeting is Tuesday. The council previously discussed ACLU’s first letter during a closed session on September 23.
