Which Way, New York?
Will Feds Tolerate Local Interference or Assert Their Authority?


cis.org/nyc
By W.D. Reasoner
October 2011

Summary: New York City (NYC) provides a window into how a lack of local government cooperation can adversely affect the federal government’s ability to enforce immigration laws. This obstruction affects the safety of New York City residents and the rest of the state, even the entire country. It also influences how other jurisdictions interface with ICE. Rather than use tools available to discourage this obstruction, the federal government passively accepts this interference as a fait accompli — even as it has moved recently to sue other states for trying to help with enforcement.

Key Findings

Three-quarters of all foreign-born arrests in the entire state of New York occur in New York City (NYC). In 2008, the latest year for which data are available, local officers arrested 52,827 immigrants in NYC.

For at least 20 years, NYC has had official policies impeding the enforcement of federal immigration laws. City policies prevent Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents from receiving notification of arrested aliens before their release from police custody.

In September 2009, NYC’s Department of Correction adopted, and has since maintained, particularly obstructive policies and procedures for immigration officers and agents attempting to access criminal alien inmates housed in its detention facilities. Jail staff are required to follow procedures that actively encourage aliens to refuse to speak with ICE agents.

Since the implementation of these procedures, the number of aliens charged with immigration violations at the city’s main detention facility have been cut nearly in half.

Notwithstanding its lack of cooperation, NYC has garnered millions of dollars each year in federal SCAAP (State Criminal Alien Assistance Program) funds since the program’s inception.

Despite all of the above facts, the federal government has never taken action to overcome the obstacles placed in its way by NYC — either through lawsuits, withholding of funding, or executive action — so that it can perform its job of immigration law enforcement in the most effective and efficient way possible.

Background

An interesting development in recent months has been the emergence of a growing “constituencyâ€