Cuomo Signals Support for Bill to Protect Immigrants From ICE Raids at State Courthouses
Cuomo said in a radio interview that he would support any lawful action by the state to limit the authority of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement in New York, including the bill currently under consideration by state lawmakers in Albany.
April 23, 2019 at 01:32 PM
6 minute read
Legislation that would codify and expand a directive from the Office of Court Administration barring federal immigration officers from making civil arrests in state courthouses without a judicial warrant gained support from New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo on Tuesday.
Cuomo said in a radio interview that he would support any lawful action by the state to limit the authority of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement in New York, including the bill currently under consideration by state lawmakers in Albany.
That legislation, called the Protect Our Courts Act, would go beyond the directive issued by OCA last week by prohibiting civil arrests of undocumented immigrants in areas directly surrounding state courthouses, like sidewalks and parking lots. The OCA rule only prevents those arrests inside a physical courthouse when a federal immigration officer does not have a judicial warrant.
When asked about the bill, Cuomo said during a radio interview that he would support legislation to limit the authority of ICE as long as it's written to survive judicial review.
“I want to do nothing to cooperate with ICE and the less we can facilitate what they're doing the better, as far as I'm concerned. I think they've trampled on constitutional rights,” Cuomo said. “So you have federal supremacy clause but anything we can do short of breaking the law, I would do.”
The legislation hasn't moved since it was introduced by state Sen. Brad Hoylman, D-Manhattan, and Assemblywoman Michaelle Solages, D-Nassau, in January. The pair sponsored the bill last year as well, but it failed to gain support from Republicans who controlled the state Senate at the time.
Now, the bill is more likely to become law with Democrats in control of both the Assembly and Senate following last year's elections. It's the first time Democrats have controlled the entire Legislature in nearly a decade, and they've already passed a series of immigrant-focused bills in the first few months of this year's legislative session.
Cuomo, who has supported those initiatives, has been critical of federal immigration policy since President Donald Trump took office. The presence of ICE officers in and around state courthouses jumped as much as 1,700 percent between 2016 and last year, according to a report from the Immigrant Defense Project in January.
“I think they've been politicized by this president. Not only do I disagree with the policy, I disagree with the means,” Cuomo said.
He's supported several other proposals designed to benefit immigrants that lawmakers have moved on already this year. One reduced the maximum sentence for class A misdemeanors from one year to 364 days—which allows immigrants convicted on those charges to avoid triggering deportation proceedings. Another will allow undocumented immigrants to receive some financial aid from the state for college.
The Protect Our Courts Act would build on that agenda by enforcing new protections for immigrants who are scheduled for a court appearance. That includes immigrants appearing in court on criminal charges, but it's also intended to protect individuals who are seeking to resolve other matters through litigation. That could include an immigrant seeking relief through a lawsuit against their landlord, for example.
The directive from OCA requires ICE agents to state their purpose when they arrive at a state courthouse to arrest an immigrant. They also must have a warrant signed by a federal judge to make the arrest, not only an administrative warrant.
The Protect Our Courts Act goes beyond the directive in a few ways, mainly by preventing federal immigration officers from even getting to the point of arresting an immigrant inside a state courthouse. The bill, according to Hoylman, would prevent civil arrests of immigrants on their way to and from court on the sidewalk or in a parking lot, which ICE can currently do, and does.
The legislation would also bar ICE agents from even entering a state courthouse without a judicial warrant for the immigrant's arrest. If those officers are found to have violated any part of the proposed statute, the immigrant would have a civil right of action to sue over their arrest. The state attorney general would also be empowered to enforce the proposed law.
The OCA directive doesn't go that far, particularly because the agency wouldn't have the power to do so. Court officials can't legislate, they can only control the administrative procedures at state courthouses.
Hoylman said last week after the directive was issued that he still intended to push his bill because of the additional protections it would provide undocumented immigrants in and around state courts.
“[OCA] made it clear that our courthouses are sanctuaries and ICE is unwelcome. Still, there's more we need to do to protect our immigrant communities,” Hoylman said. “The Trump administration's vicious hostility to immigrants, enforced by ICE, is forcing victims and witnesses into the shadows, undermining trust in our courts, and making us all less safe.”
Changes could be made to the bill before it starts to move in the state Legislature. Hoylman said in an interview earlier this month before lawmakers departed for a break from Albany that the legislation could be amended in the coming weeks as he continues to seek support among his colleagues.
“We're working on refinements to the legislation,” Hoylman said. “There's a report that's out, and I know the Immigrant Defense Fund is working on advocacy around the legislation and I'm hopeful that we can move the bill with some more education among our colleagues.”
Lawmakers will have eight weeks to move the legislation when they return later this month for session until they're scheduled to leave Albany for the year in June.
READ MORE:
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
© 2024 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 AllRetired Judge Susan Cacace Elected Westchester DA in Win for Democrats
In Eric Adams Case and Other Corruption Matters, Prosecutors Seem Bent on Pushing Boundaries of Their Already Awesome Power
5 minute readEric Adams Trial Set for April as Defense Urges Dismissal of Bribery Count
Trending Stories
- 1Infant Formula Judge Sanctions Kirkland's Jim Hurst: 'Overtly Crossed the Lines'
- 2Trump's Return to the White House: The Legal Industry Reacts
- 3Election 2024: Nationwide Judicial Races and Ballot Measures to Watch
- 4Climate Disputes, International Arbitration, and State Court Limitations for Global Issues
- 5Judicial Face-Off: Navigating the Ethical and Efficient Use of AI in Legal Practice [CLE Pending]
- 6How Much Does the Frequency of Retirement Withdrawals Matter?
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
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