A federal judge has blocked New York’s new law barring ICE officers from wearing masks while on duty in the state, but allowed another law that blocks localities from signing cooperation agreements with the deportation agency.
U.S. District Judge Mae D’Agostino, an Obama appointee, said the masking law was written with the intent to hinder federal immigration enforcement, and that runs afoul of the Constitution’s Supremacy Clause.
She issued a preliminary injunction blocking it, even as she suggested she sympathized with New York’s goal.
“Defendants’ perspective is grounded in unavoidable observations of recent troubling events which loom darkly over the public perception of the manner in which federal immigration law is enforced. New York appears to be well-intentioned in its pursuit of transparent policing,” she wrote. “However, the issue now before the Court is about constitutionality — not transparency or preferable policy decisions.”
Judge D’Agostino did deliver a victory to the state, however, on the cooperative agreements, known as 287(g) agreements because of the section of federal law that governs them.
Just as the federal government cannot be compelled by a state to alter its law enforcement tactics by requiring masks, she ruled the feds cannot force cooperation in immigration matters on a state that doesn’t want it.
That meant New York’s Termination Act, which revokes all current agreements between localities and ICE and forbids any new ones in the future, can take effect later this month as scheduled.
Thirteen New York jurisdictions currently have 287(g) agreements with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
A 287(g) agreement allows state or local officers to carry out some functions of immigration officers.
Usually it means officers are able to scour inmate lists in prisons or jails looking for deportable migrants, and then they can begin the paperwork to initiate the removal process. Some localities have gone further and signed agreements training officers out in the field to conduct immigration inspections during their regular duties.
ICE hails the agreements as a force-multiplier, allowing the feds to deport more people, particularly those with criminal entanglements.
Immigrant rights advocates, though, decry the agreements as too intrusive, saying they snare too many illegal immigrants with lower-level criminal cases.
Democrat-led states have rushed to pass legislation constraining ICE in the wake of President Trump’s mass deportation campaign.
Anti-masking laws have been a particular favorite — but have also been repeatedly blocked by federal judges.
Similar laws in Philadelphia, California and Virginia have met with judicial spankings.
The New York Immigration Coalition cheered the ruling allowing the end of 287(g) agreements but said it was “outraged” by the anti-mask law’s failure.
“Federal agents wearing masks create a dangerous environment where officers can operate with impunity and without transparency, putting New Yorkers in danger,” said Murad Awawdeh, the coalition’s president.
