(NEW YORK) — new york immigration advocates are pressing state lawmakers to pass the new york for all act, seeking to curb police cooperation with ice and ban 287(g) agreements as heightened federal enforcement under the Trump administration fuels renewed organizing.
Supporters say the proposal would set statewide limits on how local and state agencies can assist federal immigration authorities, and they argue recent events have created an opening in Albany even as no statewide law has been enacted as of early 2026.
Gov. Kathy Hochul added momentum on January 8, 2026, when she signaled support for legislation that would let new yorkers sue ICE agents in civil court for alleged constitutional violations tied to enforcement actions.
“‘New Yorkers who have had their constitutional rights violated because of an ICE agent — whether you’re a member of the media who was beaten up or someone whose business has been ransacked because the ICE agents come in and make them lose money or someone whose mother is murdered — they would have recourse against these individuals’”
Hochul said.
The New York for All Act centers on restricting cooperation between local law enforcement and federal immigration authorities, with advocates describing it as a way to lock in protections they say are vulnerable to shifting enforcement priorities.
Under the proposal, 287(g) agreements would be prohibited. Those agreements are contracts that allow ICE to deputize local law enforcement for immigration enforcement.
Backers also want the measure to restrict other cooperation channels beyond 287(g), including how agencies respond to requests tied to immigration enforcement and how they coordinate with federal authorities.
Lt. Gov. Antonio Delgado, who is running for governor, has moved toward public support as the bill’s proponents have tried to build a broader Democratic coalition.
In June 2025, Delgado expressed reservations about a “blanket rule” banning such agreements. He pointed to existing executive orders, which apply only to state agencies and not localities, and to case law limiting detainer honoring.
By August 2025, Delgado attended a rally supporting the Act and a special session, and he clarified he hadn’t opposed it outright. He now backs banning specific contracts some counties have entered.
Advocates say the aim is to replace a patchwork of local practices with a uniform statewide approach that limits when local agencies can use personnel, money, or facilities to aid federal immigration enforcement.
Hochul’s comments on January 8, 2026 came as she condemned the December 2025 Minneapolis shooting of 37-year-old Renee Nicole Good, a white American citizen, by an ICE agent during a protest.
“‘I’m so sickened as a mom that there’s a child that woke up yesterday, a 6-year-old, who had a loving mother and goes to bed an orphan’”
Hochul said.
Supporters have tied the push for tighter limits on cooperation with ICE to community fears they say arise during enforcement surges, and they have pointed to incidents involving families and workplaces as they press lawmakers to act.
Hochul has also backed the Dignity Not Detention Act, which would ban state prisons, county jails, and private companies from ICE contracts.
Even as the statewide debate continues, local governments have taken steps of their own, offering advocates examples they argue can be scaled up across New York.
Binghamton City Council unanimously passed a law on December 28, 2025, prohibiting city funds, resources, or personnel for federal immigration enforcement.
Mayor Jared Kraham let the measure take effect without signature or veto, and the step aligned with his prior stance against local police involvement.
The Binghamton ordinance has become a reference point in the Southern Tier, a region advocates say has drawn attention as enforcement has increased in areas beyond New York City.
Broome County remains central to that debate because the sheriff maintains an ICE detainee-holding agreement despite local restrictions, advocates said.
Supporters of the New York for All Act argue such county-level arrangements underline why a statewide ban on 287(g) agreements and tighter limits on cooperation should be enacted through legislation rather than left to shifting local policy.
Opponents, meanwhile, have cited legal and practical concerns, including arguments that existing executive orders and case law already set constraints in some contexts and that local officials should retain discretion over public safety practices.
The fight has also played out against a national backdrop in which the Minneapolis incident has spurred similar proposals elsewhere, including in New Jersey.
New Jersey State Sen. Britnee Timberlake, who sponsored a measure to codify police non-cooperation, compared the moment to Nazi Germany.
“‘Anyone who is an ancestor of a Holocaust survivor will tell you, this is how it starts. just ask the children of the 37-year-old woman from Minnesota’”
Timberlake said.
The rhetoric drew a sharp rebuke from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.
DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin called such rhetoric “‘gross’,” adding: “‘From comparisons to the modern-day Nazi gestapo to glorifying rioters, the vilification of ICE must stop’.”
Federal officials have also highlighted specific enforcement actions as they defend immigration priorities and respond to criticism of ICE tactics.
DHS Secretary Kristi Noem visited New York City on January 8, 2026, and announced 54 arrests tied to a July 2025 Manhattan shooting of an off-duty CBP officer.
“‘If you lay a finger on one of our officers, we will catch you, we will prosecute you, and you will feel the full extent of the law’”
Noem said.
Advocates and some Democratic officials have used those types of announcements to argue that the federal government is emphasizing aggressive enforcement, increasing the urgency of state-level limits on cooperation.
Others have framed the issue through staffing and capacity, pointing to hiring during Trump‘s first term as a factor in ICE’s reach.
Illinois State Sen. Laura Fine linked the current climate to Trump‘s first-term hiring of over 12,000 sworn ICE agents, calling them complicit in an “‘authoritarian campaign’.”
Supporters of the New York for All Act have leaned on the Minnesota killing as they argue that the stakes extend beyond immigration policy into questions of constitutional rights and accountability.
Hochul, in signaling openness to civil lawsuits against ICE agents, described scenarios including “media assaults” and “business disruptions,” along with more severe harms, as potential grounds for recourse.
The proposal to allow civil suits is separate from the New York for All Act, but advocates have treated it as part of a broader effort to reduce the footprint of federal immigration enforcement in local communities and to create deterrents against alleged abuses.
At the same time, Hochul’s backing of the Dignity Not Detention Act has reinforced the push to limit detention contracting in New York facilities, a parallel debate over whether the state’s prisons and jails should be used for federal immigration detention.
The overlapping proposals reflect a wider strategy by supporters: tighten limits on direct cooperation such as 287(g) agreements, narrow other assistance to ICE, and reduce detention capacity available to the federal government inside New York.
Despite the increased organizing, the legislative effort remained unresolved heading into early 2026, with no statewide measure advancing to passage in the updates referenced by advocates and officials involved in the debate.
Supporters have been watching for openings around the 2026 State of the State and the state budget talks, where they see opportunities to push leadership to commit to action.
The coming weeks will test whether the push translates into concrete movement in Albany, including whether lawmakers rally behind the New York for All Act’s proposed statewide limits on cooperation with ICE and the ban on 287(g) agreements, and whether Hochul’s signals on civil remedies turn into legislative language that can pass.
Advocates in New York are pushing for the New York for All Act to stop local police from assisting ICE. Governor Kathy Hochul supports additional measures, including civil lawsuits against federal agents following a fatal shooting in Minnesota. While Binghamton passed a local non-cooperation law, the state legislature hasn’t yet acted. Federal officials criticize the movement, emphasizing the need for cooperation to maintain public safety.
