Judge blocks New York from unmasking ICE agents

The federal judge did allow the state to enforce a law that bars local law enforcement from collaborating with federal immigration authorities, however. FILE - A U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent takes part in an early morning operation in Park Ridge, Ill., Sept. 19, 2025. (AP Photo/Erin Hooley, File) MANHATTAN (CN) — New York’s efforts to prevent federal immigration agents from wearing face coverings hit a roadblock on Monday after a federal judge temporarily blocked the state’s mask ban from being enforced. In a 51-page ruling , U.S. District Judge Mae D’Agostino granted a preliminary injunction on behalf of the government, finding that the statewide mask ban for federal agents violates the supremacy clause of the U.S. Constitution. “New York cannot impose its own uniform requirements on federal agents simply because it disagrees with how the federal government is exercising its authority,” said D’Agostino, a Barack Obama appointee. It’s a win for the Trump administration, which has repeatedly insisted its increasingly controversial immigration enforcement tactics require a degree of anonymity amid fears of federal agents being doxxed. New York officials had argued that not all agents chose to wear masks, scrutinizing their necessity. D’Agostino said those arguments “miss the mark,” however. “The individual choices of some federal officers do not open the floodgates to direct state regulation of federal law enforcement operations and policy,” the judge ruled. D’Agostino also noted that the requirement doesn’t outright prevent federal law enforcement from doing its job, but because it takes “direct aim at regulating the federal agents in their function of enforcing federal law, the court finds these provisions likely run afoul of the intergovernmental immunity doctrine.” With federal immigration enforcement proving to be perhaps the most controversial aspect of the second Trump administration — particularly after federal agents shot and killed two U.S. citizens in Minnesota this winter — D’Agostino acknowledged that New York “appears to be well-intentioned in its pursuit of transparent policing.” “Defendants’ perspective is grounded in unavoidable observations of recent troubling events which loom darkly over the public perception of the manner in which federal immigration law is enforced,” she wrote. “However, the issue now before the court is about constitutionality — not transparency or preferable policy decisions.” Her ruling only bars New York from enforcing the law on a preliminary basis until the case progresses and a final judgment is rendered. It wasn’t a total loss for the state. While D’Agostino shot down the mask ban in her Monday order, she also upheld a New York law that bans local and state law enforcement from cooperating with Immigration and Customs Enforcement through 287(g) agreements. The Trump administration tried arguing that this law, referred to by D’Agostino in her ruling as the Termination Act, discriminates against the federal government. The judge disagreed. “The United States has also failed to show, at this stage, that the Termination Act likely discriminates against the federal government,” she wrote. “A state law discriminates against the United States when it ‘treats similarly situated state and federal [actors] differently’ in a way that cannot be explained by ‘significant differences’ between the two.” In a joint statement, New York Governor Kathy Hochul and Attorney General Letitia James said the ruling shows the ban on 287(g) agreements “is legal and will keep our 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,” said the Democratic officials. “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 and our offices are reviewing all legal options at this time.” A Department of Justice