ALBANY, N.Y. — New York Attorney General Letitia James said a federal judge has rejected a lawsuit filed by a group of sheriffs seeking to block the state’s ban on agreements with Immigration & Customs Enforcement (ICE). The ruling keeps the “Local Cops, Local Crimes Act” in force, reinforcing the state’s stance that local police should focus on protecting New Yorkers rather than assisting a federal deportation program.
Background of the ban
The ban, enacted on May 27, prohibits local governments and law‑enforcement agencies from participating in civil immigration enforcement. Governor Kathy Hochul and Attorney General James sent letters to every county sheriff in late July, demanding that any existing ICE contracts be terminated and that proof of termination be submitted.
Sheriffs’ challenge
On August 25, fifteen sheriffs filed a lawsuit against Hochul and James, arguing that the ban interferes with public safety and violates the New York Constitution’s Home Rule guarantees. The plaintiffs claimed that sheriffs, as independently elected officials, have the authority to decide whether to cooperate with federal immigration enforcement.
The complaint named three Central New York sheriffs as petitioners: Madison County Sheriff Todd Hood, Oswego County Sheriff Don Hilton, and Cayuga County Sheriff Brian Schenck. The suit asserted that Congress encourages written agreements between local, state, and federal agencies to identify, detain, and remove illegal immigrants who violate federal law.
Judge’s decision
The federal judge denied the sheriffs’ request for an injunction, effectively upholding the state law. James posted the decision on X (formerly Twitter) on November 4, the day after she won reelection, stating, “Local law enforcement should be focused on keeping New Yorkers safe, not carrying out the administration’s cruel mass deportation agenda. We will continue to defend our laws in court.”
Local response
Following the letters, Madison County Sheriff Todd Hood announced in mid‑August that his office had terminated its ICE agreement, though he did not release further details. Madison County was among twelve counties that received the state’s termination demand.
Critics of the ban, including the suing sheriffs, argue that cooperation with ICE helps remove individuals who pose a threat to community safety. They contend that the ban limits the tools available to local officers to address crime linked to illegal immigration.
State’s rationale
Attorney General James and Governor Hochul maintain that the ban protects constitutional rights, prevents racial profiling, and keeps local resources focused on crimes that directly affect residents. They cite the state’s authority to set its own public‑safety priorities and to shield immigrant families from what they describe as a “cruel mass deportation agenda” pursued by the federal administration.
What’s next?
The lawsuit may still proceed on other grounds, but the immediate injunction request has been denied. The state says it will continue to enforce the law and monitor compliance across all New York counties.
For residents concerned about public safety or immigration enforcement, the Attorney General’s office encourages contacting local officials to verify whether their county has terminated any ICE agreements.
Original reporting: CNY Central WSTM (Sinclair) – local — read the source article.
