Judge D'Agostino's ruling should also make clear to everyone that state laws *can* limit how ICE conducts itself and takes advantage of state resources.

Put another way, states are not powerless when ICE brings chaos to their doorstep.

The ruling is first and foremost an important one for people who need to access courts but would understandably be reluctant to do so with federal agents stalking the hallways

www.immigrantdefenseproject.org/wp-content/u...

D'Agostino also wrote that striking POCA would "deprive New York of its essential ability to protect its sovereign interests in the face of undue federal interference"

We filed a brief w/ former NY judges on how ICE arrests undermine NY's interest in ensuring courts remain safe and open to all.

In her decision, Judge D'Agostino rejected both arguments - writing that there is a long standing right against civil arrests when you show up to court and Congress hasn't eliminated that right.

The judge also wrote that states are clearly able to regulate conduct in their own facilities.

This summer, the DOJ sued New York State, arguing that the law violates the Supremacy Clause of the US Constitution because Congress has already spoken on the issue and states can't regulate federal officers

POCA prohibited any civil immigration arrests of people attending or on their way to court. It also allows the state AG and individuals to sue for damages when their rights under this law are violated. 3/

www.brennancenter.org/our-work/ana...

First, POCA passed in 2020 in response to chaotic and fear-inducing courthouse scenes that played out under Trump I when ICE started showing up at courts to make arrests.

There was lots of evidence that ICE's presence was making people less likely to access courts, even when they needed them. 2/

I expect an appeal, but for now this is an important victory for people who need to access courts to keep themselves safe but have been scared off by federal agents roaming courthouse hallways

And "would improperly elevate the concerns of the federal sovereign over that of a State and deprive New York of its essential ability to protect its sovereign interests in the face of undue federal interference."

"Invalidating New York's protections against civil immigration arrests of residents participating in state court proceedings and accessing state facilities for state services would mean that state participation in immigration enforcement efforts would no longer be voluntary."

Judge D'Agostino: "As the complaint makes abundantly clear, commandeering is the entire purpose of this
lawsuit..."

Anyone who comes close to the justice system knows these laws are necessary to ensure the public can safely access courts and to ensure courts can do their jobs.

We helped New York judges file an amicus brief supporting NY's law banning courthouse arrests:
www.brennancenter.org/our-work/res...

Along those lines, if you want to read more about the actual decisions coming out of state high courts across the country, check us out at @statecourtreport.org 8/

statecourtreport.org/our-work/ana...

State supreme courts are important in our democracy. The public *should* know about these elections. But at a time when that public needs to be confident that judges are capable of holding their allies accountable to the law, it is not great that dark money ads are a primary source of info. 7/