A federal judge has blocked key portions of a New York law that sought to prohibit federal immigration agents from wearing face coverings and require visible identification while performing duties.
The ruling, issued Monday by U.S. District Judge Mae D’Agostino of the Northern District of New York, prevents the state from enforcing the provisions while a legal challenge proceeds. The judge found the measures likely violate the U.S. Constitution’s supremacy clause, which bars states from regulating federal law enforcement operations.
New York’s law took effect in June as part of a broader slate of policing policies included in the state budget bill signed by Democratic Gov. Kathy Hochul in May. The blocked provisions would have required federal agents—including those from ICE, the FBI, DEA, and CBP—to display visible identification and prohibited them from wearing face coverings while carrying out official duties.
Judge Cites Federal Authority Over State Law
In her preliminary injunction, Judge D’Agostino wrote that New York cannot impose its own requirements on federal agents, stating: “New York cannot dictate how federal agents perform their official duties simply because it disagrees with how the Federal Government is exercising its authority.”
The judge emphasized that the court’s role was to assess constitutionality, not policy preferences. “The issue now before the Court is about constitutionality—not transparency or preferable policy decisions,” she wrote.
The ruling follows a similar decision earlier this year in California, where a federal judge blocked a state law banning most law enforcement officers from wearing facial coverings. That law had been enacted amid concerns over high-profile immigration raids in Los Angeles.
New York Officials Vow to Challenge Ruling
Hochul and New York Attorney General Letitia James issued a joint statement after the decision, asserting that “masked agents do not make New York safer.” They added that their offices are reviewing all legal options to challenge the ruling.
The state’s legal fight centers on its argument that the measures were intended to promote transparency in policing, though the judge did not address those policy goals in her ruling. The blocked provisions were part of a broader package of law enforcement regulations passed as part of the state budget.
Scope of the Ruling and Remaining Provisions
While the judge blocked the mask ban and identification requirements for federal agents, she did not enjoin a separate provision that restricts New York local law enforcement agencies from performing certain federal immigration enforcement functions under 287(g) agreements.
The federal government had argued that the New York law interfered with its authority to regulate federal law enforcement operations. The Department of Justice has previously filed lawsuits against states and localities over similar restrictions, including a case involving Virginia Rep. Abigail Spanberger’s district, where the DOJ sued over laws it claimed “kneecapped” federal agents.
The legal battle reflects ongoing tensions between state and federal authorities over immigration enforcement and policing policies.