Fifteen New York sheriffs have taken Democratic Governor Kathy Hochul, Attorney General Letitia James, and the State of New York to federal court over the state’s new restrictions on cooperation with Immigration and Customs Enforcement. The lawsuit was filed on August 25th, the same day the prohibition on 287(g) agreements took effect. The sheriffs are asking a federal judge to block enforcement of the law while their constitutional challenge proceeds. They argue Albany cannot strip independently elected sheriffs of their authority to enter agreements authorized by federal law.
The Local Cops, Local Crimes Act targets agreements made under Section 287(g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act. Those agreements permit trained state and local officers to perform certain immigration-enforcement duties under ICE supervision. New York’s law prohibits local agencies from maintaining those arrangements or entering new agreements to use local facilities to hold people solely for federal civil immigration violations; agencies with existing housing agreements must exercise any applicable termination provision by November 25th. Police may still assist ICE in criminal investigations and may detain someone wanted on a judicial warrant.
The case, Bourgault v. Hochul, was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of New York, with Rensselaer County Sheriff Kyle Bourgault serving as the lead plaintiff. The sheriffs are seeking a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction pending a final ruling, along with a permanent injunction. Their complaint also challenges a second statute establishing the Office of Immigrant Trust under James, which has authority to investigate suspected violations of the restrictions.
As the Daily Caller reported, the Federation for American Immigration Reform is representing the sheriffs. The plaintiffs lead departments in St. Lawrence, Wayne, Broome, Madison, Cattaraugus, Orange, Jefferson, Saratoga, Lewis, Franklin, Delaware, Fulton, Oswego, Cayuga, and Rensselaer counties. The lawsuit challenges two sections of New York’s Executive Law and argues that state officials are interfering with congressionally authorized law-enforcement cooperation.
“Together, these provisions do more than express a policy preference,” the complaint states, according to the Times Union. “They nullify the ability of independently elected constitutional officers to enter into contracts authorized by federal law.” The sheriffs said the provisions place their “core law-enforcement judgments” under centralized state control. “The resulting harm is imminent and irreparable,” the complaint states.
Broome County Sheriff Fred Akshar described the legislation as an unconstitutional attack on decisions traditionally made at the county level. Akshar argued that the state constitution establishes the office of sheriff as an elected position accountable to local voters. “It is not some bureaucrat in Albany—it is the good people in their respective communities,” Akshar said. He added that the lawsuit concerns “ensuring local decisions are made by local people like sheriffs elected by the people.”
Hochul responded by promising legal action against any department that refuses to terminate its ICE agreement. “Let me be clear: any police department or sheriff’s office that disobeys this law, that maintains any agreement with ICE, will face legal action,” she said. Hochul then challenged the sheriffs directly, declaring, “But if you’re trying it again, I say bring it on.” In a joint statement, Hochul and James called the lawsuit a “frivolous waste of taxpayer dollars” and said agencies must obey the law while the case proceeds.
"*" indicates required fields
The governor’s office said 12 New York law-enforcement agencies had active 287(g) agreements and were ordered to terminate them by August 25th. A federal judge previously denied the Justice Department’s request for a preliminary injunction against the 287(g) ban, concluding at that stage that the federal government had not shown it was likely to succeed on its obstacle-preemption or Contracts Clause claims. That preliminary ruling did not resolve the sheriffs’ separate claims concerning their authority as elected constitutional officers.
James issued subpoenas to agencies whose responses about terminating their ICE agreements were considered inadequate, including offices in Broome, Steuben, Nassau, and Rensselaer counties. Nassau County Executive Bruce Blakeman said his county would comply while preparing to join the challenge. Blakeman argued that local cooperation allowed authorities to hand criminal illegal aliens directly to ICE without releasing them into surrounding communities. “I believe in the rule of law, even when it’s a bad law,” he said, “and this is a very, very bad and dangerous law.”
Watch Hochul announce the law here: