A federal judge has temporarily blocked key parts of a New York law that sought to limit how federal Immigration agents conduct enforcement operations, ruling the state likely exceeded its authority by attempting to regulate federal officers.
According to Fox News, on Monday, U.S. District Judge Mae D'Agostino of the Northern District of New York issued a preliminary injunction preventing enforcement of provisions that would have barred federal Immigration agents from wearing masks and required them to display visible identification while performing their duties.
The ruling allows the challenged provisions to remain on hold while the lawsuit over the law continues through the courts.
In her decision, D'Agostino concluded the restrictions are likely unconstitutional because they interfere with federal law enforcement agencies, including Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), the FBI, the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP).
The judge wrote that the federal government alone has the authority to determine policies governing federal law enforcement officers and that states cannot impose their own requirements on those agencies.
"New York cannot impose its own uniform requirements on federal agents simply because it disagrees with how the Federal Government is exercising its authority," the ruling stated.
New York Gov. Kathy Hochul and Attorney General Letitia James criticized the decision and said they are evaluating their next legal steps.
"While the court enjoined enforcement of New York's mask ban, we stand firm in our belief that masked agents do not make New York safer and our offices are reviewing all legal options at this time," the two said in a joint statement.
The court did, however, allow another portion of the law to remain in effect. D'Agostino declined to block a provision prohibiting New York's local law enforcement agencies from participating in certain federal Immigration enforcement efforts through 287(g) agreements.
The judge noted that federal law makes participation in those agreements voluntary, meaning states may choose not to cooperate without violating federal law.
"The State's refusal to cooperate in the Immigration context—a possibility contemplated by the relevant federal statutes—does not constitute discrimination against the federal government," the ruling stated.
Hochul and James welcomed that part of the decision, arguing local police should focus on state and local responsibilities rather than assisting federal Immigration enforcement.
"As we have said from the start, New York's ban on 287(g) agreements is legal and will keep our communities safe," they said. "Local law enforcement should be focused on local matters, and New York taxpayers should not have to foot the bill for any collaboration with ICE."
The case will continue as the court considers the broader constitutional challenge to the New York law.