Federal Judge Blocks New York Law Banning ICE Agents From Wearing Face Masks

Aug 3, 2026

U.S. District Judge Mae D’Agostino issued a preliminary injunction blocking New York's law that banned federal immigration agents from wearing face masks and required visible identification, ruling it likely violates the Supremacy Clause. However, the judge upheld New York's ban on 287(g) cooperation agreements between local police and ICE. Governor Kathy Hochul and Attorney General Letitia James defended the cooperation ban as legal while reviewing options to appeal the masking decision.

Federal court ICE mask ruling

▪The blocked New York face covering and identification measures were signed into law by Governor Kathy Hochul in May 2026 and took effect in June 2026.
▪U.S. District Judge Mae D’Agostino issued a preliminary injunction on August 3, 2026, blocking New York's law that prohibited federal immigration agents from wearing face masks and required them to display identification.

New York 287(g) cooperation ban

▪New York Attorney General Letitia James sent letters to a dozen localities in New York ordering them to cancel their 287(g) cooperation agreements with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
▪U.S. District Judge Mae D’Agostino's ruling let stand a separate New York state prohibition on 287(g) cooperation agreements between local police departments and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

Constitutional Supremacy Clause arguments

▪Linda Fang of the New York State Attorney General’s office argued that the state's masking law did not contradict federal law and that federal functions can be subject to general state rules when the federal government has not spoken.
▪U.S. District Judge Mae D’Agostino ruled that New York's Face Covering and Identification Acts likely violate the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution by directly regulating federal officers.
▪Department of Justice lawyer Brandon Neuman argued during oral arguments on July 21, 2026, that New York's laws are invalid because states cannot regulate the actions of federal agencies.

State official responses

▪New York State Senator Patricia Fahy stated that the masking restrictions sent an effective message against the actions of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and indicated the ruling could be appealed.
▪Governor Kathy Hochul and Attorney General Letitia James issued a joint statement asserting that New York's ban on 287(g) agreements is legal, while stating they are reviewing all legal options regarding the blocked mask ban.

Federal official responses

▪Assistant Attorney General for the Department of Justice Civil Rights Division Brett Shumate celebrated the injunction, stating that states have no authority to regulate federal officers under the Supremacy Clause.
▪James Percival, a general counsel for the Department of Homeland Security, cheered the ruling, stating that states continue to face legal losses when attempting to pass unconstitutional bans on masking for immigration officers.

ICE transparency debate

▪During oral arguments, U.S. District Judge Mae D’Agostino showed pictures of masked agents and characterized U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement as a double-secret force.
▪U.S. District Judge Mae D’Agostino noted that while New York appeared well-intentioned in pursuing transparent policing, the court's decision must focus strictly on constitutionality rather than policy preferences.