A person confronts a U.S. Border Patrol officer on Wednesday, Jan. 14 in Minneapolis. Photo by Adam Gray/AP Senators in the Judiciary Committee are trying to thread a needle, hashing out a bill that could stop law enforcement officers — including federal agents operating in Vermont — from ma sking while also weathering a potential lawsuit from the feds.  They’re considering how to do things differently than California, which was sued by the federal government after it passed a law that specifically banned federal law enforcement officers from covering their faces.  Vermont’s version, S. 208, could prevent all law enforcement officers from wearing a mask or disguise for the purpose of concealing their identity, rather than solely banning federal agents from doing so.  That difference is an important legal distinction, according to Jessica Bulman-Pozen, a professor of constitutional law at Columbia Law School. A clause in the U.S. Constitution prevents states from discriminating against the federal government or attempting to regulate it directly, Bulman-Pozen told the committee last week. That clause gives the federal government a case against the California law, she explained.  But Vermont’s version would be stronger if it were challenged in court, Bulman-Pozen said, because it treats all law enforcement officers equally.  And she thinks Vermont’s bill could be enforced against federal agents, she said. In past rulings, courts have upheld state laws that incidentally affect how federal officers carry out their work, Bulman-Pozen said. Those rulings give Vermont’s bill something to stand on, she said.  On Tuesday, committee members continued to debate if the proposed crime should be a civil or criminal offense. If it became a civil penalty for officers to conceal their identities, it could create a tricky situation for local law enforcement, said Jennifer Morrison, the commissioner of the Vermont Department of Public Safety. State or local police officers would be tasked with citing federal officers for violating the law.  The bill could task local or state police officers with citing their peers for the violation, she said. And it would be up to the officer whether to give someone like an ICE agent a warning rather than a citation.  The state could also adopt rules about officer conduct without passing a new law, Morrison said, though those rules alone couldn’t be enforced against federal immigration agents.  If the law doesn’t apply to federal officers, it’s really just a “feel good” statute, Morrison said.  Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky, P/D-Chittenden Central, said Tuesday that she wants the bill to go into effect immediately upon passage, rather than a delayed launch: “The terror that’s happening can’t wait until July to be solved.”  In the know Gov. Phil Scott proposed a $9.4 billion budget to state lawmakers on Tuesday that he called a “disciplined” spending plan in the face of waning support — and more cuts likely to come — from the federal government.  Scott’s proposal, which lays out spending for the fiscal year starting in July, is about 3% larger than the budget he and the Legislature enacted last year. But he said his latest plan calls for fewer new initiatives, largely because the state no longer has Covid-19 pandemic-era federal relief funding available for new uses. He also pointed to how the state’s top economists lowered previous estimates, in a report last week, for the amount of revenue the state will bring in through June. That decrease, which is only about $8 million, nevertheless indicates that legislators need to be frugal, Scott told the joint address of the House and Senate. “It’s more important than ever to focus on the issues we can control, stay disciplined and set clear priorities so we make sure Vermonters get the most out of the resources we do have,” Scott said. Read more about the governor’s address here. — Shaun Robinson On the move The House Human Services Committee moved its immunization bill out of committee today, along a 10-1 vote, with Rep. Todd Nielsen, R-Brandon, casting the lone dissent.  The bill, H.545, broadens the state’s power to purchase vaccines from sources beyond the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and issue state-level immunization recommendations. Earlier this session, Health Commissioner Rick Hildebrant and others in his department testified to the committee in support of the bill.   “I just want to be clear, this does not impose any mandates. Vaccines are still at the discretion of the individual,” said. Rep. Theresa Wood, D-Waterbury, who chairs the committee. Several members noted having received concerns from constituents about whether the bill would require immunization.  If the bill moves along the expected path, Wood said it should go to the floor for second reading this Thursday and final reading by Friday. — Olivia Gieger No. 1 fan The award for Most Raucous Applause at Gov. Scott’s budget address goes to Communications Director Dustin Degree. Communication received.  It seems Degree’s enthusiasm for supporting his boss has earned him a bit of a reputation. Lt. Gov. John Rodgers, who emceed the joint assembly for Scott’s budget address, issued this warning as he opened the proceedings: “Before we begin, I want to remind you that the Senate rules apply to joint assemblies. So, although applause is permitted, in joint assemblies, whistling, hooting and yelling are not appropriate,” the LG said, before turning his gaze up toward the House gallery.  “Not sure why there’s a name in parentheses that says, ‘Dustin.’” — Shaun Robinson and Ethan Weinstein Waves of mutilation A new microwave, topped with a red bow, was available for public use in the cafeteria Tuesday. And because the re-heater has become so controversial, it included some baseline guidance. Microwave like your children live here, a sign warned, not like you’re a child. Microwaving is a privilege — not a right! — Ethan Weinstein Read the story on VTDigger here: Vermont lawmakers consider the tricky legality of unmasking ICE . ...read more read less