Staff Reports
Fifteen elected New York sheriffs just took Governor Kathy Hochul to federal court. They filed Bourgault et al. v. Hochul et al. (No. 1:26-cv-01637) and an emergency motion asking a judge to stop the state from voiding their 287(g) immigration agreements and from cancelling federal detention contracts. This is not a policy debate in a press office — it’s a courtroom fight over who gets to run law enforcement in New York.
What the sheriffs are suing over
The complaint and emergency motion ask for a temporary restraining order and a preliminary injunction to block the state law that bans formal local agreements with ICE and creates the Office of Immigrant Trust. The sheriffs say the law impairs contracts they entered under federal law, violates the Supremacy Clause, and intrudes on the independence of elected sheriffs and local home rule. In plain terms: they want the court to keep their 287(g) partnerships and detention contracts intact while the legal battle plays out.
Why sheriffs say public safety is at stake
These sheriffs — from counties across upstate and central New York — argue they use 287(g) tools to identify criminal aliens who have other crimes on their records. They say the state’s order to unwind agreements and stop housing federal civil immigration detainees will make communities less safe, not safer. If you believe local cops should have the tools to check suspects against federal databases, this lawsuit reads like a necessary defense of common-sense policing.
Hochul, the Attorney General, and the larger legal backdrop
Governor Hochul framed the new law as a “stand against ICE overreach” and her Attorney General set up the Office of Immigrant Trust to enforce it, sending compliance letters to counties with active 287(g) deals. The U.S. Department of Justice already challenged parts of the same statute in a separate case; a federal judge issued a mixed ruling, blocking some state rules but allowing the 287(g) ban to stand for now. That means the sheriffs’ filing is a fresh, narrow attack aimed directly at the immediate harm they say the state is causing.
What to watch next
The near-term drama will be whether the court issues the requested temporary restraining order or preliminary injunction. If the judge pauses the state’s enforcement, the sheriffs keep using their federal partnerships while the case proceeds. If not, counties could be forced to tear up contracts and stop holding federal immigration detainees. For voters and law-abiding citizens who want local police focused on local crimes, this suit is a fight worth watching — and if Governor Hochul is looking for a courtroom showdown, the sheriffs have already RSVP’d.
