Face Masks: A Matter Of Law And Order?

The question of whether or not wearing a face mask is breaking the law has been a topic of debate in various parts of the world. While some countries and states have implemented laws that require individuals to wear face masks in certain settings, such as shops and public transportation, there are also places that have introduced anti-mask laws. These laws ban individuals from wearing masks in public places or during protests, with the aim of preventing harassment, intimidation, or the concealment of criminal activity. The enforcement and impact of these laws vary, and they have sparked discussions about the balance between public health, privacy, and freedom of expression.

Face masks are mandatory in shops and on public transport in England

As of June 15, 2020, face coverings have been mandatory on public transport in England. This includes buses, trains, tubes, and other modes of public transportation. The UK Transport Secretary Grant Shapps announced that people would be required to wear face coverings to help contain the transmission of the novel coronavirus. Non-compliance with this law can result in fines of up to £100, reduced to £50 if paid within 14 days.

On July 24, 2020, it also became mandatory to wear face coverings in shops and supermarkets in England. This rule was announced by Health Secretary Matt Hancock and is enforced by the police, with fines of £100 for those who do not comply. Retail staff are not expected to enforce this rule but are encouraged to prompt customers to comply.

It is important to note that face coverings refer to any item that conceals both the mouth and nose, made of cloth or other textiles through which one can breathe. Medical-grade masks, such as those worn by hospital staff, are not required and should be left for those who need them most.

These laws regarding face coverings in England are subject to change and updates, so it is always a good idea to stay informed about the latest guidelines and regulations.

People not wearing masks in indoor public spaces can be fined £100 in England

In England, it is mandatory to wear a face mask in indoor public spaces. This includes shops, supermarkets, shopping centres, coffee shops, retail and grocery stores, public transport, and taxis. People who do not comply with this law can be fined £100. The fine is reduced to £50 if paid within 14 days.

The UK government initially advised the public to wear face coverings in enclosed public spaces in May 2020 but did not make it mandatory until July 2020. The law was enforced by police officers, who were expected to issue fines to those who refused to wear masks. This decision was made to prevent the spread of COVID-19, as scientific evidence suggests that face coverings help prevent the transmission of the virus.

There are some exemptions to the rule; children under the age of 11 are not required to wear face coverings. Additionally, those who cannot wear a face mask due to physical or mental disabilities are also exempt. It is important to note that face coverings do not provide protection from the virus unless they are full-blown pieces of medical PPE, which are not recommended for the general public. Therefore, social distancing should be practised in conjunction with wearing face masks.

Other countries have also implemented fines for not wearing masks in indoor public spaces. For example, in British Columbia, individuals can be fined $230 for not wearing a mask in indoor public spaces. In Sydney, Australia, people who do not follow the mandatory mask rules can be fined up to $200. These measures are in place to help limit the spread of COVID-19 and protect public health.

New York lawmakers are considering a bill to increase penalties for mask-wearing criminals

In January 2025, New York lawmakers were weighing a bill to increase penalties for criminals who wear masks. The bill, which was reintroduced, does not constitute a blanket ban on mask-wearing but instead seeks to establish the low-level crime of "masked harassment". This violation-level penalty would specifically apply to those who harass others while wearing a mask with the "primary purpose of menacing or threatening violence".

The bill also includes mask-wearing as a criterion for an escalated penalty of "aggravated harassment", which would apply when a masked person physically attacks another. It is important to note that the proposed legislation outlines exceptions for medical and religious purposes, holidays, performing arts, sporting competitions, and professional occupations that require masks, such as welders.

Support for the bill has come from various anti-hate groups, including the NAACP, the National Urban League, and the Anti-Defamation League. These groups argue that the bill is critical to protecting public safety and stopping the use of masks to evade consequences for harassing and menacing others.

The effort to increase penalties for mask-wearing criminals in New York is not an isolated case. In May 2024, lawmakers in North Carolina also pushed for a bill to ban most public mask-wearing, citing concerns about crime. The North Carolina bill aimed to repeal a pandemic-era law that permitted mask-wearing in public for health reasons. It also sought to increase penalties for those who committed crimes while masked and included provisions that further criminalized the blockage of roads or emergency vehicles during protests.

Anti-mask laws were originally passed in response to the Ku Klux Klan

In the United States, anti-mask laws were originally passed in response to the Ku Klux Klan (KKK), a white supremacist hate group. Before the COVID-19 pandemic, more than a dozen states had laws banning masks that concealed the wearer's identity, most of which were enacted primarily to deter the KKK. The KKK's members often hid their identities as they terrorized their victims.

The laws were not enacted to protect the victims of the KKK but because political leaders wanted to defend segregation as part of a "modern South" and felt that the KKK's violent racism was making them look bad. The laws were also used to target other groups, such as pro-Palestine protesters, Occupy Wall Street protesters, anti-racism protesters, and police violence protesters.

As the COVID-19 pandemic hit, several states repealed or waived their anti-mask bans to allow for masks to limit the spread of the coronavirus. For example, Georgia waived its anti-mask law at the beginning of the pandemic, and New York, which had the oldest anti-mask law dating back to 1845, repealed its law in May 2020.

However, as mask mandates expire, some states are now weighing how to address the longstanding anti-mask laws. In Virginia, for instance, the governor is looking for ways to ensure the state's mask ban from 1950, which included a public health emergency exemption, doesn't prevent people from wearing masks. Legal experts predict challenges in repealing the mandates now that mask-wearing has become so politicized.

Anti-mask laws are being used to target pro-Palestine protesters

In many places, wearing a face mask is mandatory in shops, supermarkets, and on public transport. People who do not comply with these rules can be fined. However, there are exemptions for children, people with certain disabilities, and people with breathing difficulties.

In the United States, anti-mask laws are being used to target pro-Palestine protesters. In the 1940s and 50s, many U.S. states passed anti-mask laws in response to the Ku Klux Klan, who often hid their identities while terrorizing their victims. These laws were enacted to defend segregation, not to protect victims. Now, these laws are being used to target disfavored groups and movements, raising questions about selective prosecution.

For example, in Ohio, Attorney General Dave Yost sent a letter to the state's 14 public universities, warning that protesters could be charged with a felony under the state's anti-mask law, which carries penalties of between six to 18 months in prison. This law has rarely been applied in the past, even to bank robbers wearing masks. Similarly, administrators at the University of North Carolina have warned protesters that wearing masks violates the state's anti-mask law and "runs counter to our campus norms." At the University of Texas at Austin, Gov. Greg Abbott and university officials called in state troopers to break up pro-Palestinian protests after the school rescinded permission for a rally, citing protesters' "declared intent to violate our policies and rules".

At a time when invasive surveillance technologies are increasingly being used to identify protesters, mask-wearing is an important way to safeguard the right to speak out on issues of public concern. The use of anti-mask laws to target peaceful protestors raises serious concerns about constitutional freedoms in the digital age, especially with the emergence of face recognition technology.

Additionally, for those speaking out in support of the Palestinian people, being recognized in a crowd can have extreme consequences for their personal and professional security. During the Gaza protests, pro-Israel activists and organizations have posted the faces and personal information of pro-Palestine activists to intimidate them, get them fired, or shame them for their views. As such, anti-mask laws can have a significant chilling effect on some protesters' willingness to show up for causes they believe in.

Frequently asked questions