The implementation of Mayor Eric Adams’ administration’s executive order allowing federal immigration agents to re-establish offices on Rikers Island would “tear a hole through the fabric of New York City’s sanctuary laws,” a coalition of public defender organizations, immigrant and civil rights advocates argued Monday.
The coalition made its case in a legal brief filed May 12 in support of a lawsuit seeking to stop U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) from returning to the city-run jail.
The filing comes just weeks after a state judge extended a temporary restraining order on the executive directive, siding with the City Council, which sued the Adams administration on April 15 to block Executive Order 50 (EO 50).
The judge’s order prevents ICE from returning to Rikers until at least the next court hearing, scheduled for May 29. City Hall said Monday it remains confident in its position.
The amicus brief filed Monday urges the court to permanently block Executive Order 50, saying the move violates NYC’s sanctuary laws and could lead to widespread constitutional violations and deportations without due process.
“Executive Order 50 is a clear violation of New York City’s sanctuary protections and it invites a new era of racial profiling, wrongful deportations, and constitutional violations on Rikers Island,” said Meghna Philip, Director of the Special Litigation Unit at The Legal Aid Society, who filed the brief in partnership with Public Advocate Jumaane Williams and 12 immigration, civil rights groups.
ICE order for Rikers a ‘pretext for mass deportation’
“The Trump Administration has shown it will use any pretext to carry out mass deportations — even in defiance of our Constitution and federal court rulings — and this executive order gives ICE direct access to New Yorkers in custody, their information, and their families,” Philip continued. “We’re urging the court to block this unlawful and dangerous policy before the harm becomes irreversible.”
The brief argues that EO 50 facilitates backdoor cooperation between the Department of Correction and ICE, using jail data, visitation records, and surveillance tools to identify immigrants for deportation, particularly Latin youth and survivors of trauma who may qualify for legal protections. It warns that the move could cause “immediate and irreparable harm” to incarcerated immigrants and their families.
“The mayor has long looked for every opportunity to expand collaboration with ICE, attempting to make it more acceptable to chip away at protections and deport more immigrants, regardless of criminality or illegality,” said Williams. “Rikers is in a constant state site of crisis and human rights violations, and inviting ICE in only compounds that harm. This mayor has already demonstrated a willingness to ignore laws he doesn’t like, especially on Rikers, and this latest example is nothing more than an attempt to aid the Trump deportation machine.”
The advocates argue that any ICE presence at Rikers would undo more than a decade of progress under the city’s sanctuary laws, which have prohibited ICE from operating in city jails since 2014.
“Both before and since passage of the sanctuary laws, amici have directly observed the egregious and irreparable harms that result from collaboration between our local government and federal immigration authorities,” the brief reads. “This collaboration subjects New Yorkers to violence and constitutional violations, tears families apart, and erodes public trust and faith in the functions of our local government.”
The Council’s lawsuit alleges that the executive order may have been part of a corrupt deal with the Trump Justice Department to drop the mayor’s criminal charges — a claim the Adams administration has denied. The mayor’s legal team says the order is aimed at targeting violent gang activity, not civil immigration enforcement.
Deputy Mayor Randy Mastro, who signed the executive order, previously insisted that the City Council’s lawsuit reads like a “political polemic” and argued that the executive order does not violate the city’s sanctuary laws.
In response to the brief filed Monday, City Hall said it remains confident in its position.
“First Deputy Mayor Mastro has been clear that our executive order to establish federal office space on Rikers Island helps us in our mission to protect New Yorkers from violent transnational gangs because it allows federal and local law enforcement agencies to coordinate on criminal investigations — and only on criminal investigations,” a City Hall spokesperson said.
“As this amicus brief itself admits, no one is disputing that the executive order is consistent with our local laws, and as a result, the brief focuses on assumptions about hypothetical situations that are clearly outside the scope of what this executive order actually does,” they added.
The brief also highlights historical abuses by ICE officers at Rikers, including due process violations, racial profiling, and coercive tactics as a warning of what might occur should the executive order be implemented.
“Ten years ago, we saw the damage ICE caused at Rikers—Bronx residents transferred without warrants, families torn apart, and entire communities criminalized and driven into the shadows,” said Anne Venhuizen, senior staff attorney in the Impact Litigation Practice at The Bronx Defenders. “Executive Order 50 would reopen the door to those abuses, fueling unconstitutional harm and violating our city’s sanctuary laws. This isn’t about public safety—it’s a political move that puts justice, due process, and community trust at risk. We urge the court to block this order before the damage is done.”
Highlighting how the current federal administration has ramped up mass deportation efforts with the usage of the Alien Enemies Act, even under court injunctions, the brief argues that Executive Order 50 would effectively turn Rikers Island into a direct conduit for those deportation efforts.
“The Trump Administration has repeatedly and openly acted with deliberate lawlessness,” the brief states. “Whether ignoring court orders to turn planes full of AEA deportees around or bring back wrongfully-deported people, calling for the impeachment of federal judges who dare to uphold the law, or repealing disfavored regulations by diktat, the administration has repeatedly shown a callous disregard for the rule of law. We can expect the same on Rikers.”
