This opinion was contributed by San Benito County resident Steve Smith. The opinions expressed do not necessarily represent BenitoLink or other affiliated contributors. Lea este artículo en español aqui.
Sacramento is sending veterans a message. Under Assembly Bill 1896—authored by Assemblymember Mark Gonzalez and Speaker Robert Rivas—the so-called “Get the Feds Out” or GTFO Act, the state is telling veterans, especially Coast Guard members, exactly what the acronym really means: get the f*** out.
AB 1896 would bar anyone who participated in federal immigration enforcement from most public jobs in California—including police and firefighter positions—if their service occurred between Jan. 20, 2025, and Jan. 20, 2029.
This ban applies not just to ICE or Border Patrol, but to any Department of Homeland Security employee—including the United States Coast Guard. It would also terminate USCG reservists, who are state or local government employees, if they find themselves involved in an immigration operation.
The bill’s language is broad and indiscriminate: “Immigration enforcement includes any efforts to investigate, enforce, or assist in the investigation or enforcement of any federal civil immigration law, including…any federal criminal immigration law that penalizes a person’s presence in, entry, or reentry to, or employment in, the United States.” There are only narrow exceptions for a few California-based agencies.
There is no question that immigration enforcement in America is controversial. The pain and fear experienced by many immigrant communities is real, and the Legislature is right to take those concerns seriously. Elected officials should be sensitive to the impact of federal policies on vulnerable families and communities—and should demand accountability for actual misconduct or abuse.
But in the legislation it doesn’t matter if a Coast Guard member spent their career rescuing migrants from drowning, patrolling for drug smugglers, protecting our fisheries and our environment, or simply working in an administrative office in San Pedro. The bill’s blanket exclusion means that any Coast Guard veteran who contributed to immigration enforcement—even indirectly—would be swept up in the ban. The state’s message is clear: your service is not only unappreciated, but disqualifying.
The Coast Guard is unique among the armed services and its statutory missions include maritime safety, port security, migrant interdiction, search and rescue, and environmental protection. Since 2003, it has operated under the Department of Homeland Security, making Coast Guard veterans collateral damage in Sacramento’s increasingly hostile relationship with the federal government.
Many Coast Guard veterans and reservists now serve as teachers, firefighters, and law enforcement officers across California, bringing with them mission-tested skills and a commitment to public service. The legal conflicts are glaring. California law provides hiring preference for veterans—including the Coast Guard—under the Government Code and related civil-service provisions. Yet AB 1896 would nullify those protections, undercutting statutes designed to recognize and support veterans’ transition to civilian life. In effect, the state would be telling Coast Guard veterans their federal service makes them unfit for public employment—no matter how bravely or honorably they served.
The timing of this legislation is especially tone-deaf. As the nation pauses to recognize those who have worn the uniform, California’s lawmakers are moving to punish a whole class of veterans for carrying out federal policy. The GTFO Act’s title itself is an immature play on words, unworthy of the state’s highest legislative body.
If Sacramento wants accountability, lawmakers should target proven wrongdoing, not sweep up thousands who served honorably. The net effect of AB 1896 is scapegoating, not justice. It signals to veterans: you’re not welcome here.
BenitoLink invites all community members to share their ideas and opinions. By registering as a BenitoLink user in the top right corner of our home page and agreeing to follow our Terms of Use, you can write counter opinions or share your insights on current issues.