Unmasking Hamas Act of 2025
HB2065, titled the Unmasking Hamas Act of 2025, would amend federal criminal law to add penalty enhancements when certain offenses are committed while the offender is in disguise, including while wearing a mask. The bill creates a new offense in title 18 for interfering with protected rights while in disguise, making it a federal crime to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate a person in the free exercise of constitutional or federal statutory rights while masked, with a penalty of up to 15 years in prison, a fine, or both. It also adds a two-year sentencing enhancement for destroying buildings or property within special maritime and territorial jurisdiction while in disguise.
The bill’s findings frame the legislation around masked protests, campus unrest, vandalism, threats to synagogues, and anti-Israel demonstrations associated with Hamas or Hamas sympathizers. It expressly states that the new provision should not be read to deter law enforcement officers from lawfully performing their duties, and it defines law enforcement officers for that purpose. In practical terms, the bill would expand federal criminal exposure for masked conduct tied to certain civil-rights and property offenses and would create a new statutory hook for prosecutors in those cases.
If enacted, HB2065 would amend chapter 13 of title 18 and section 1363 of title 18 of the U.S. Code by adding a new federal offense and a sentencing enhancement. The bill would affect individuals who commit covered intimidation, oppression, threats, or property-destruction offenses while disguised, including while wearing a mask, and would potentially increase penalties in federal prosecutions involving protests, vandalism, or civil-rights interference on federal property or in other federal jurisdictions. It would also add a new section to the title 18 table of contents and could influence how federal authorities charge masked conduct in protest-related or hate-crime-adjacent cases.
There is no recorded committee transcript or vote history in the provided materials, so formal legislative sentiment cannot be measured from debate or roll call. The bill text itself reflects a strongly supportive and punitive posture toward masked protest activity, especially where the sponsors associate such conduct with Hamas, antisemitism, vandalism, and threats to public safety and property. Based on the bill’s framing and sponsor list, the measure appears to be backed by members seeking stronger federal deterrence against masked intimidation and destruction.
The main points of contention likely concern the bill’s broad treatment of masking as an aggravating factor and its linkage of masked protest activity to Hamas and antisemitism. Critics could argue that the language may sweep in lawful protest activity or chill anonymity in demonstrations, while supporters would emphasize the need to deter violent, intimidating, or destructive conduct and to protect civil rights, public property, and religious communities. The explicit law-enforcement carveout suggests an effort to address concerns about ordinary policing, but the scope of “while in disguise, including while wearing a mask” remains the central issue likely to draw debate.