NEW YORK — US District Judge Mae D’Agostino issued a preliminary ruling blocking enforcement of New York’s law banning ICE agents from wearing face coverings. Judge D’Agostino allowed New York’s ban on 287(g) cooperation agreements between local police and ICE to stand.

The decision creates a split outcome for the state legislation, which Governor Kathy Hochul signed in late May. The face coverings and identification measures took effect in June, but the preliminary injunction now prevents local police officers from arresting ICE agents for covering their faces in public settings. Despite the block on the mask provision, ICE agents are still required to wear agency identification badges and badge numbers.

D’Agostino wrote that the federal government demonstrated a likelihood of success on its claim that New York’s face covering and identification acts violate the supremacy clause of the US Constitution. "The United States has demonstrated a likelihood that it will succeed on its claim that [New York’s] face covering and identification acts directly regulate federal officers in violation of the supremacy clause," she wrote. She further stated that states cannot exclude the federal government from the exercise of authority conferred by the Constitution or obstruct its authorized officers.

In her written opinion, D’Agostino acknowledged that New York officials may be correct that federal immigration officers wearing masks without displaying viable identification creates dangerous situations. She also noted that while New York appears well-intentioned in its pursuit of transparent policing, the decision was made on constitutional arguments. "Whether federal law enforcement agencies have chosen to carry out such operations in a sufficiently transparent manner is an important question. But that question is not for this court to answer at the present time," she wrote.

She added that settled law establishes federal authorities, not state authorities, make the policies that animate the enforcement of federal immigration laws, and that states have no power to impede, burden, or control the operations of constitutional laws enacted by Congress.

Conversely, D’Agostino ruled that New York’s ban on 287(g) cooperation agreements is an appropriate means of furthering the state’s legitimate interests in protecting public welfare. This portion of the law remains in effect, with the ban on 287(g) cooperation agreements coming into force in August. Under the statute, any contract ICE has with local agencies must be terminated by August 25, and no new contracts will be permitted after that date.

Brandon Neuman, a US Justice Department lawyer, argued in July that both the mask and cooperation bans in New York are invalid because states cannot regulate the actions of federal agencies. "The key harm here is to the sovereign function of the United States," Neuman said. James Percival, general counsel for the Department of Homeland Security, stated on X that Democratic-led states continue to stack losses as they try to pass unconstitutional bans on ICE officers wearing masks.

Governor Kathy Hochul and Attorney General Letitia James issued a joint statement saying the ruling allowing the 287(g) ban to remain shows the law is legal and will keep communities safe. "Local law enforcement should be focused on local matters, and New York taxpayers should not have to foot the bill for any collaboration with ICE," Hochul and James stated. They also addressed the partial injunction against the mask provision.

"While the court enjoined enforcement of New York’s mask ban, we stand firm in our belief that masked agents do not make New York safer," they stated. Hochul and James stated that their offices are reviewing all legal options.

The visibility of masked federal agents has been a point of contention in New York City. A masked federal agent waited outside an immigration courtroom on 8 July 2025 in New York. Another masked federal agent was seen standing outside immigration courts on 16 July 2025 at the Jacob K. Javits Federal Building in New York City. More recently, masked federal agents patrolled the halls of immigration court at the Ted Weiss federal building on 12 May 2026 in New York City.

This ruling fits a broader pattern of legal challenges to state-level restrictions on federal immigration enforcement. Federal judges have previously blocked similar laws in California, Virginia, and Pennsylvania. Earlier coverage on 2026-05-08 reported that New York state was set to ban law enforcement, including ICE, from wearing masks. Additionally, earlier coverage on 2026-07-24 reported that the New York attorney general was cracking down on local police and ICE partnerships.

The issue has political implications as ICE cooperation has become a campaign issue in Governor Kathy Hochul’s bid for re-election in November. Hochul is facing Bruce Blakeman, the Nassau County executive, who supports ICE tactics and opposes the prohibition of cooperation with the agency. The legal battle continues as the August 25 deadline for terminating 287(g) contracts approaches.

Why It Matters

The ruling reinforces the constitutional principle that states cannot regulate federal officers or impede immigration enforcement policies set by Congress. While the decision prevents New York from arresting masked agents, it simultaneously upholds the state's authority to terminate local police cooperation agreements under Section 287(g). This split outcome establishes a precedent where state interests in public welfare can limit administrative partnerships but not the direct conduct of federal personnel.