Attorneys say they still can’t contact a man who, in December, was illegally transferred directly from the city’s Department of Correction to federal immigration authorities.
Days before the man was set to be released from Rikers Island, the DOC handed him directly to Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents — without the legally required judicial warrant to do so under the part of New York’s sanctuary city protections called the detainer law, said Natalie Fiorenzo, a senior corrections specialist at New York County Defender Services. Her firm was representing the man in an unrelated criminal defense case.
“The DOC has violated city law and our client’s rights,” Fiorenzo said during testimony to the New York City Board Correction at its Jan. 13 hearing. “As a result of this unlawful transfer, our client is now detained out of state, separated from counsel and family, and effectively beyond the reach of meaningful legal advocacy…This is precisely the harm that [the law] was designed to prevent: the extrajudicial transfer of people in city custody into federal immigration detention without judicial oversight and due process.”
A DOC release form obtained by amNewYork Law shows that the man, whose name attorneys are keeping confidential out of safety concerns, was transferred directly to ICE on Dec. 1, 2025.
For the DOC to transfer a person directly to ICE custody, the department must have a judicial warrant to do so and the person must be convicted of one of approximately 200 “violent or serious” crimes, according to the DOC’s own policies and the city’s detainer law, which has been in place since 2014. While the man was convicted of one of those crimes, DOC did not have the proper warrant to transfer him, Fiorenzo said.
Fiorenzo called it “legally erroneous” that the DOC and Mayor’s Office of Immigrant Affairs told her team that DOC didn’t have and didn’t need a judicial warrant to transfer a person to ICE’s custody, and that they didn’t see the act as a violation of the city’s detainer law.
“In open defiance of City law, both agencies claimed that no judicial warrant was required and then declined to examine their own illegal actions once those claims were challenged,” she testified. “Both agency responses show that DOC is willfully violating City law without any consequences.”
ICE did not respond to a request for comment on the incident or on what its policies are for requesting the transfer of people from DOC custody to its custody.
When asked about the matter, a DOC spokesperson told amNewYork Law that, “any cooperation with federal authorities is done in compliance with local law.”
Peter Markowitz, one of the architects of the detainer law, told amNewYork Law he found the department’s comments and interpretation of the law shockingly incorrect.
“I think it’s incredibly troubling that the Department of Correction would say that because the law very, very clearly talks about the necessity of a judicial warrant to honor a transfer request,” said Markowitz, a co-director of Cardozo Law’s Immigration Justice Clinic. “Their tortured interpretation of the law, that no judicial warrant is required, is just not reconcilable with the plain language of the city law.”
It’s even more troubling to Markowitz that the DOC allegedly told New York County Defender Services one of their reasons for directly transferring the man to ICE custody was because “it was safer for ICE to take custody of [the man] rather than ICE making an arrest in the street,” because it shows that the department is parroting ICE talking points and undermining the authority of the New York City Council.
“This…attack on the sanctuary laws that New York City pioneered…saying that, ‘You should just hand over anybody and everybody we want, or else we’re going to go out and make things really dangerous for you on the streets,’ and the idea that we are making our city less safe by honoring immigration detainers is at direct odds with all of the data showing that sanctuary cities that restrict federal Immigration authorities are safer because of those restrictions,” Markowitz said.
While the DOC has violated other sanctuary city laws in the past, like sharing information with federal authorities that it isn’t legally allowed to, Markowitz said he’s never seen the department violate the law in this way. New York County Defender Services also said they’d never experienced something like this happening to one of their clients before.
It’s especially concerning, Markowitz said, because city laws like this one are important for building trust with the city’s immigrant community, which keeps everyone safer and ensures city resources aren’t used for federal policies it believes are misguided.
“Immigrant communities trust cities that don’t do ICE’s bidding, and that trust is critical to public safety and to law enforcement operations in the city,” he said. “Entanglement with federal immigration enforcement creates a divide between immigrant communities and local police, and when any member of the city is afraid to come forward to the police as witnesses and victims of crime, everyone is less safe.”
“Sanctuary laws are a statement to all New Yorkers that you are safe accessing city services, and that makes us a safer, healthier city,” he continued. “What our sanctuary laws do is say that New York City is not going to let our resources be misused to tear apart New York families and to endanger communities, and that is the right that our city has under the United States Constitution.”
Even though this alleged violation of the sanctuary city law occurred under former Mayor Eric Adams’ administration, Markowitz said he was still concerned about it happening in the future. He advised attorneys to remain vigilant and remind DOC’s officers and legal team about the city’s sanctuary and detainer laws when they represent incarcerated immigrant clients.
Now, it’s up to Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s administration to provide clear instructions to the DOC and ensure staff fully understand their obligations under the law to prevent a similar situation from happening in the future, Markowitz said.
“This situation signals that the new administration needs to take a hard look at the way these laws are being implemented at the Department of Corrections to ensure that the lapses that became too common under the Adams administration are not repeated under this administration,” Markowitz said. “The problem here is an implementation issue. The requirements are clear. It’s about making sure that the people at the agency know what they are and feel accountable to adhere to them.”
Mamdani’s team did not respond to a request for comment on the situation and questions on whether the administration plans to provide the DOC with additional instruction on the city’s sanctuary city laws.
