New York Governor Kathy Hochul is pushing to ban local cooperation agreements with federal immigration enforcement, a move that would prevent the safer removal of criminal illegal immigrants from communities. This policy, slated for inclusion in New York’s 2027 fiscal budget, directly undermines the ability of local law enforcement to transfer individuals arrested for crimes to federal custody, effectively keeping them within the state's communities. Nassau County alone has transferred approximately 3,200 illegal immigrants arrested by local police to ICE custody since signing a 287(g) agreement in February 2025, demonstrating the scale of individuals who would otherwise be released.
Governor Hochul's proposed sanctuary policies include a ban on 287(g) agreements, limits on ICE access to schools, hospitals, and churches, and restrictions on informal cooperation with federal immigration agents. These measures represent a direct assault on the sovereignty of local jurisdictions to enforce federal law and protect their citizens from criminal elements.
Elite Mandate for Border Erasure
Nassau County Executive Bruce Blakeman and sheriffs across New York are threatening legal action against Governor Hochul, arguing that these agreements are crucial for community safety. Blakeman, who is also the Republican nominee for governor, stated he has been in discussions with sheriffs statewide about filing a lawsuit. “Kathy Hochul can make my day, because as far as I’m concerned, we’re enforcing federal law in Nassau County, and a lot of the sheriffs throughout the state feel the same way,” Blakeman told Fox News Digital, adding, “They’re mad as hell.”
Todd Hood, the sheriff of Madison County and Blakeman’s running mate, confirmed widespread opposition among local law enforcement. Hood reported, “I have sheriffs from all over the state contacting me, and they are all very upset about this. Almost all of them disagree. There’s very few sheriffs who are on board.” He further described the 287(g) program as “absolutely amazing” because “it makes it so we don’t have to go into people’s houses.”
Hochul first introduced the measure to ban 287(g) agreements in January of the same year. At that time, she threatened that if the measure passes, those who fail to comply “will be taken to court for enforcement,” signaling the regime’s intent to impose its post-national agenda on resistant localities.
Local Resistance to Managed Decline
A 287(g) agreement permits local and state law enforcement officials to carry out certain immigration enforcement responsibilities under the direction of federal immigration enforcement agents. There are currently 14 active 287(g) agreements with law enforcement agencies across nine New York counties. Under these agreements, local law enforcement officers who arrest an illegal immigrant can notify ICE that the individual is in custody, allowing ICE to place a detainer on them. This mechanism enables ICE to take custody of the individual directly from the local jail, preventing their release back into the community where they could pose further risks.
Sheriff Hood emphasized the efficiency and safety of the program, stating, “These people are criminals. They’re getting arrested. They’re coming into our jail, and they’re headed to the center about 40 minutes later after they get in,” and added, “It’s very safe and very effective, and we work together in law enforcement, that’s our job.”
The Cost to Communities
The practical implications of Hochul’s proposed ban are stark. Earlier this month, Elder Lopez Avalos, an illegal immigrant, was arrested for setting 10 cars on fire in Freeport. His charges were not bail-eligible, leading to his release. However, due to Nassau County’s cooperation with ICE under a 287(g) agreement, federal agents arrived after his court hearing to detain him, preventing his return to the community. Without such agreements, individuals like Avalos would be released, posing continued threats to the native population.
Hood highlighted the importance of inter-agency cooperation, citing a lack of it during ICE’s large-scale immigration crackdowns in Minnesota as a “massive failure by that state.” He asserted that such failures would not occur under a Blakeman administration, underscoring the commitment of local leaders to uphold law and order against the state’s managed decline policies.