Protesters question masked ICE agents as they demonstrate against an attempted stop by ICE in South Burlington on Wednesday, March 11, 2026, Photo by Glenn Russell/VTDigger Members of the House Judiciary Committee gutted a bill, S.208, that attempted to unmask federal immigration agents operatin g in Vermont. The newest version of the bill — filled with other provisions — no longer applies to federal agents and stops short of definitively banning state and local law enforcement agents from concealing their identities.  The original bill penned in the Senate sought to prevent all law enforcement officers operating in Vermont from wearing a mask or disguise for the purpose of concealing their identity. It also would have required officers to display the name of their agency, along with their name or identifying number.  Those provisions are absent from a new draft of the bill, which merely requires a Vermont law enforcement board to create a model statewide policy on standards for law enforcement identification and masking.  Vermont lawmakers introduced the bill as masked federal officials made arrests in some of the Department of Homeland Security’s largest-ever immigration enforcement operations in cities across the country.  The issue became more urgent for many Vermonters last month following the daylong immigration operation in South Burlington, during which local and state police officers who responded sometimes concealed their faces and lacked identification.  Lawmakers’ sharp change in approach comes after a federal appeals court ruled last week that a similar California law was unconstitutional.  California’s law, similar to Vermont’s original bill, required all law enforcement officers — whether federal agents or local officers — to wear identification.  “It would be a big risk proceeding with this bill,” Rep. Martin LaLonde, D-South Burlington, told a group of reporters Wednesday.  In the 9th Circuit ruling, a panel of three judges said the law violated the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution. That clause prevents states from discriminating against the federal government or attempting to regulate it directly. California can still ask the court to reconsider its decision. The version of S.208 passed by the Senate was engineered to weather a constitutional challenge — so lawmakers thought — by making its provisions apply to all officers, rather than singling out federal agents.  Then last week’s court ruling poked holes in that logic.  Julio Thompson, director of the Vermont Attorney General’s Office’s civil rights unit, told the House Judiciary Committee on Tuesday that his office would be able to defend the law in court, though “we don’t know what the outcome would be.”  LaLonde, a former federal prosecutor focused on environmental issues and chair of the committee, said he wasn’t confident enough in the state’s defense to support the bill. “I think our arguments are weak, and I don’t think it would be found constitutional,” LaLonde said.  LaLonde said he requested a new draft, which the committee reviewed Wednesday.  Rep. Ian Goodnow, D-Brattleboro, said he supports changing the bill given the constitutional concerns.  Goodnow said he’s heard from many constituents who are concerned about local and state police concealing their identities. Creating a statewide policy would be a reasonable way to ensure continuity in departments across the state.  Many representatives on the committee who caucus with Republicans said they didn’t support the bill because it attempted to micromanage local police. Rep. Thomas Oliver, R/D-Sheldon, who has worked in law enforcement for about 40 years, said local police departments are the best experts on how they should operate. He argued that concerns about identification have always been about federal agents, not Vermont law enforcement.  LaLonde said the committee is set to vote on the newest version of the bill Friday.  In the know Gov. Phil Scott charged that legislative leaders were “fear-mongering” over the possibility of a state government shutdown in remarks at his weekly press conference Thursday. House Democrats discussed what would happen in the event of a shutdown — a scenario the Joint Fiscal Office says could have “extreme” consequences — at a caucus meeting last week.  The state government would shut down if legislators and Scott haven’t agreed on a state budget by the start of the new fiscal year, which is July 1. Scott has threatened to veto this year’s budget bill, H.951, if legislators don’t send him an education bill that forces school districts to consolidate, a prospect laid out in last year’s Act 73. But many lawmakers have grown hesitant to pursue that policy goal as the session has dragged on. “I find it hard to believe the majority of the Legislature is willing to risk a government shutdown to preserve a failed system that has given us double-digit property tax increases and declining results year after year after year,” Scott told reporters. “But, we’ll see.”  — Shaun Robinson On the move The Senate on Thursday passed the annual “yield bill,” which helps set property tax rates. H.949 will now go back to the House and is likely to be hashed out by the chambers in a conference committee.  To understand the differences between the Senate and House’s property tax proposals, read our full story here.  — Ethan Weinstein On the trail Rob LeClair, a former House member and former Barre Town selectboard member, announced Wednesday he’s running for a Washington County Senate seat as a Republican.  Washington County’s three Senate seats are currently held by Democrats or Democrat/Progressives.  Caroline Bright, a Unitarian Universalist minister and flight attendant, is running for a Franklin-1 House seat as a Democrat. The district includes part of Bright’s hometown of Georgia as well as Fairfax. The two-seat district is currently represented by lawmakers who caucus with Republicans: Carolyn Branagan of Georgia and Ashley Bartley of Fairfax.  — Ethan Weinstein Crowd-pleaser During the Thursday presser, WCAX’s Calvin Cutler asked Scott whom the governor would like to see play at the planned UVM sports and events complex that’s been the subject of debate in recent weeks. The debate turns on whether legislators, for the upcoming fiscal year, will approve a Scott- and UVM-backed proposal to help pay for the building with a state student aid fund. Right now, Scott said he’d like to see a show from Strafford’s Noah Kahan, who released a new album last week. No doubt that’d be a crowd-pleaser. Maybe he’d like to see the Vermont Symphony Orchestra do a few film music concerts in the space. After all, the governor is a big fan of movie soundtracks, as this newsletter has previously reported. VTDigger even made a Spotify playlist featuring some of his favorites — among them, “Braveheart” and “Dances With Wolves,” both of which Scott owns on CD. — Shaun Robinson Read the story on VTDigger here: Vermont lawmakers no longer plan on unmasking ICE. ...read more read less