OCA Mulls Rule Requiring Judicial Warrants for ICE Arrests in NY Courts
“We've been asked to require that and it's something we've considered. We haven't taken that step yet, but it's something we've considered," Chief Administrative Judge Lawrence Marks said.
January 29, 2019 at 04:26 PM
6 minute read
The Office of Court Administration, which oversees New York state courts, is considering making a rule that would prohibit federal immigration officers from arresting undocumented immigrants in state courthouses without a warrant signed by a federal judge.
Chief Administrative Judge Lawrence Marks told state lawmakers at a hearing in Albany on Tuesday that while court officials do no support banning officers with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement from entering state courthouses, they may consider the warrant requirement to add an additional layer of protection for immigrants.
“They would come in with a warrant signed by a [federal] judge,” Marks said during an interview after his testimony. “We've been asked to require that and it's something we've considered. We haven't taken that step yet, but it's something we've considered.”
The rule would be similar to a bill currently being considered in the state Legislature, which would block those officers from arresting an undocumented immigrant in a state courthouse without a judicial warrant. An administrative warrant from ICE would not be enough to permit an arrest under the legislation.
The bill is sponsored by Assemblywoman Michaelle Solages, D-Nassau, and State Sen. Brad Hoylman, who raised the issue with Marks at the hearing. Marks was in Albany to testify on the Unified Court System's budget proposal, which is requesting a 2 percent increase in state funds.
“This has been an ongoing problem for several years now,” Marks said of ICE officers in state courts. “We are concerned about the impact it may have on people being likely to return to court. Courts can't do the business that they're obligated to do unless people come to them.”
But there's little the Office of Court Administration can do to prevent those arrests, Marks said. They have chosen not to prohibit ICE officers from entering state courthouses, citing constitutional concerns over public access to those buildings, regardless of affiliation.
“Courthouses are open buildings and, absent some extreme circumstance or someone gets into a fight in a courthouse, courthouses are open to everyone,” Marks said. “We don't ban people from coming into courthouses.”
Federal immigration officers are currently not required to have a judicial warrant to make an arrest in a state courthouse, but they do have to follow a certain procedure implemented by court officials. For one, they are not allowed to make an arrest in the actual courtroom where an immigrant is scheduled to appear, but they may make an arrest within the building itself.
When officers from ICE show up at a state courthouse, they're asked to tell the court officers at the entrance of the building why they're there. Those court officers then notify the judge presiding over the immigrant's case. The judge has discretion on whether to notify the attorneys in the courtroom that immigration officers have arrived to make an arrest.
The new rule, if considered by OCA, would still allow those officers to make an arrest in a state courthouse, but they would have to have a warrant signed by a judge to do it.
The change would be important for advocates who have pushed for tighter restrictions on access to state courthouses for officers with ICE, but it will also do nothing to curb the number of arrests happening just steps away from those buildings. Marks said that, in recent months, the number of arrests by ICE happening inside state courthouses has dropped, which may indicate more arrests happening after an individual has left the property.
“The trend over the last six to eight months is that there have been very, very few arrests in the courthouses, which may be—but we don't know for sure—because they're arresting people outside of the courthouses,” Marks said.
But that is very much the opposite trend from what's happened in state courts since early 2017, according to a report released this week from the Immigrant Defense Project, an immigration advocacy group. The report claimed there was a 1700 percent increase in documented reports of either sightings of or arrests by ICE officers in state courts from 2016 through the end of last year.
“This report shows that ICE is expanding surveillance and arrests in courthouses across the state, creating a crisis for immigrants who need access to the courts,” said IDP Executive Director Alisa Wellek. “We cannot allow ICE to turn New York's courts into traps for immigrants.”
Marks acknowledged that there's been an uptick in arrests by federal immigration officers in state courthouses since the beginning of the Trump administration, even though the frequency of those arrests has been lower in recent months.
“ICE has made appearances in the state courthouses for a number of years, but it's accelerated since 2016 with the new administration in Washington,” Marks said.
Before they decide whether or not to require a judicial warrant for immigration-related arrests in state courthouses, Marks said he and Chief Judge Janet DiFiore first have to view the issue from an impartial standpoint. The courts, Marks said, are an independent branch of government from Gov. Andrew Cuomo and the leaders of the Legislature, all of which support limiting the reach of ICE in state buildings, including courthouses.
“It's a very, very difficult question for us,” Marks said. “We're the court system, we have to be neutral around the Legislature and the governor.”
State lawmakers could choose to deal with the issue legislatively, taking court officials out of the decision-making process on the issue. The bill was first introduced last year, but is more likely to pass this year after Democrats took majority control of the state Senate, giving them power over both houses of the Legislature. Solages said she's confident in the bill's chances.
“We want to make sure we protect the judicial system for all individuals, all New Yorkers, regardless of their immigration status,” Solages said. “I'm confident we can get this done by passing it through both houses.”
READ MORE:
Lawmakers Eye Further Steps to Benefit Immigrants as NY 'Dream Act' Approved
NY State Judicial Conduct Watchdog Requests 6 Percent Budget Increase
NY Lawmakers Approve Bill Opening Window for Child Sex Abuse Cases, Cuomo's Signature Expected
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllRelaxing Penalties on Discovery Noncompliance Allows Criminal Cases to Get Decided on Merit
5 minute readBipartisan Lawmakers to Hochul Urge Greater Student Loan Forgiveness for Public-Interest Lawyers
'Playing the Clock'?: Hochul Says NY's Discovery Loophole Is to Blame for Wide Dismissal of Criminal Cases
So Who Won? Congestion Pricing Ruling Leaves Both Sides Claiming Victory, Attorneys Seeking Clarification
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1‘The Decision Will Help Others’: NJ Supreme Court Reverses Appellate Div. in OPRA Claim Over Body-Worn Camera Footage
- 2MoFo Associate Sees a Familiar Face During Her First Appellate Argument: Justice Breyer
- 3Antitrust in Trump 2.0: Expect Gap Filling from State Attorneys General
- 4People in the News—Jan. 22, 2025—Knox McLaughlin, Saxton & Stump
- 5How I Made Office Managing Partner: 'Be Open to Opportunities, Ready to Seize Them When They Arise,' Says Lara Shortz of Michelman & Robinson
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250