New York’s largest public defender organization is urging federal judges not to turn state courthouses into immigration checkpoints. The Legal Aid Society has filed an amicus brief asking an appeals court to keep New York’s Protect Our Courts Act in place, the state law that bars warrantless civil immigration arrests in and around state courthouses. The group argues the law protects people who are required to appear in court and keeps the justice system functioning instead of scaring key witnesses and defendants away.
Legal Aid’s brief leans on immigrant testimony
The brief, filed by The Legal Aid Society together with a coalition of public defenders and immigrant-rights groups, stacks client declarations and on-the-record courtroom accounts to show how courthouse arrests have chilled participation in court. Those firsthand stories, the filing argues, show why POCA is necessary to keep New York courts open and accessible to immigrant communities, according to The Legal Aid Society.
Federal challenge and the district court ruling
The Department of Justice sued New York in June 2025, claiming the state law clashes with federal immigration statutes and enforcement authority. In November 2025, U.S. District Judge Mae D’Agostino tossed the government’s complaint, finding that the statute rests on long-standing common-law protections and the Tenth Amendment’s anti-commandeering principle, as detailed by Justia Dockets & Filings.
Appeal now in the spotlight
The Justice Department has appealed that dismissal, pushing the fight to the appellate level, where judges will again weigh whether New York’s courthouse protections are preempted by federal law. The current status of the suit, including the pending appeal, is tracked by Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse.
Why advocates say keeping ICE out of courts matters
Advocates point to a wave of arrests at New York immigration courts, most visibly at 26 Federal Plaza in Manhattan, that they say has discouraged immigrants from showing up for hearings or reporting crimes. Local reporting and court filings describe both a surge in courthouse arrests and cramped, harsh conditions for those detained, as reported by Documented.
Legal Aid’s blunt message
Legal Aid attorney Evan Henley did not mince words in describing the federal lawsuit. Henley told amNewYork that federal officials are trying to “commandeer New York's state courts in service of the federal government's deportation agenda.” Henley and other defense lawyers say that upholding POCA is fundamentally about preserving ordinary, fear-free access to state courts for immigrant New Yorkers.
Legal questions on the table
On the legal side, the case turns on whether administrative immigration documents like forms I-200 and I-205 can stand in for a judge-signed warrant under New York law, and whether Congress clearly intended to wipe out the state’s common-law courthouse privilege. Judge D’Agostino’s opinion underscored that internal administrative paperwork is not the same as a judicial warrant, a conclusion the court leaned on when it dismissed the government’s suit, according to Justia Dockets & Filings.
The outcome of the appeal will decide whether New York, and potentially other states watching from the sidelines, can keep courthouses off-limits to warrantless civil immigration arrests. That carries real consequences for how judges, lawyers, and advocates protect access to justice. Briefing and scheduling at the appellate court are still very much in motion, according to a federal litigation tracker.
