New York state’s ban on agreements that allow local police to carry out federal immigration enforcement took effect on Aug. 25, and 15 county sheriffs have sued the state to overturn it.
The ban is part of the Local Cops, Local Crimes Act, which Gov. Kathy Hochul signed on May 27 as part of a package of immigration measures.
It bars local governments and law enforcement agencies from entering into or remaining in agreements under Section 287(g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, which deputize local officers to perform federal civil immigration functions. Hochul proposed the measures in January.
Under Section 287(g), local law enforcement officers can be authorized to question, arrest, and detain people suspected of civil immigration violations.
The new law gave agencies that already had such agreements 90 days to end them. Any agreement still in effect after Aug. 25 was declared void and unenforceable under state law.
“Here in New York, we need local police focused on keeping our communities safe—not serving as de facto ICE agents, not conducting civil immigration enforcement, and not carrying out the Trump Administration’s callous immigration agenda,” Hochul said in an Aug. 25 statement.
“That’s why I championed our new law banning 287(g) agreements and ensuring local cops remain focused on real crime in our communities. Starting today, ICE can no longer commandeer locally funded police to aid an out-of-control federal agency with an $85 billion budget.”
Twelve local agencies had 287(g) agreements with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) when the law passed. In late July, the attorney general’s newly created Office of Immigrant Trust sent all 12 letters, stating that state law required the agreements to be unwound by Aug. 25.
The sheriffs’ lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of New York, names Hochul, Attorney General Letitia James, and the state as defendants. The plaintiffs also filed an emergency motion asking the court to block the state from voiding the existing agreements and from forcing an end to contracts to house federal detainees by Nov. 25.
The Federation for American Immigration Reform is representing the sheriffs.
“New York’s law does not merely decline to cooperate with immigration enforcement priorities. It actively dismantles existing, congressionally authorized partnerships that sheriffs lawfully entered to protect their communities,” said Dale Wilcox, the group’s executive director and general counsel.
“Independently elected sheriffs should not be forced by Albany to abandon tools that keep dangerous criminal aliens from walking back onto their streets. This lawsuit seeks to restore the status quo and vindicate the independence of the Office of Sheriff.”
The complaint argues the restrictions nullify the ability of independently elected constitutional officers to enter into contracts authorized by federal law, and that doing so subjects their core law-enforcement judgments to state oversight.
Rensselaer County Sheriff Kyle Bourgault, the lead plaintiff, said at an Aug. 25 press conference that the dispute is broader than the program itself.
“This isn’t just about 287(g). This is about tools being taken away from law enforcement to safely protect the people they are closest to,” Bourgault said.
“I was elected by the people of Rensselaer County to serve as their sheriff and to make the difficult decisions on how we keep this county safe, and that is why I will continue to advocate for the independence of the office of sheriff, for local decision-making, and for every lawful tool that I believe will help us protect the citizens that we serve.”
Hochul and James called the lawsuit “nothing but a frivolous waste of taxpayer dollars,” in a joint statement that same day, adding that courts had already once declined to block the law.
Two days later, the state went after Bourgault directly. On Aug. 27, James and Hochul announced a lawsuit in Rensselaer County Supreme Court seeking to compel his office to terminate its 287(g) agreement, which it has held since March 2020.
Of the 12 agencies covered by the letters, the state says Rensselaer County’s is the only one that has not indicated it intends to dissolve its agreement. The attorney general’s office issued a subpoena on Aug. 19 seeking documents showing what steps the office had taken; it says it has received no confirmation of termination.
“All law enforcement agencies are expected to uphold New York’s laws,” James said.
“The Rensselaer County Sheriff’s Office has been given every opportunity to follow the law, yet has chosen not to. My office is suing to enforce New York’s laws and ensure that local law enforcement agencies remain focused on their most fundamental responsibility: keeping New Yorkers safe.”
Rensselaer County responded briefly in a statement posted on social media.
“We look forward to answering this legal action,” said Richard Crist, a spokesman for the county.
The federal government has also challenged the law.
The Justice Department sued in June, and on Aug. 3, the Northern District of New York denied its request to block the 287(g) ban, leaving the Aug. 25 deadline intact. In the same ruling, the judge ruled that New York cannot ban federal agents from wearing masks or balaclavas, or require them to wear visible identification.
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) defended the agreements when asked about the New York law.
“When politicians bar local law enforcement from working with DHS, our law enforcement officers have to have a more visible presence so that we can find and apprehend the criminals let out of jails and back into communities,” a DHS spokesperson said in a statement to The Epoch Times.
“Seven of the top 10 safest cities in the United States cooperate with ICE. Instead of working with us, Governor Hochul and Attorney General James are choosing to RELEASE violent criminals from their jails directly back into our communities to perpetrate more crimes and create more victims. Sanctuary politicians must stop putting politics above public safety.”
According to the governor’s office, only one of New York’s 62 counties had a 287(g) agreement before 2025, and 53 counties have never had one.
We had a problem loading this article. Please enable javascript or use a different browser. If the issue persists, please visit our help center.