New York's Attorney General Letitia James and Governor Kathy Hochul announced on Friday, November 6, 2026, that the Attorney General's Office of Immigrant Trust (OIT) has sent a letter to county executives and sheriffs across New York state, giving them guidance on their legal obligation to end any agreement to house or detain people for federal civil immigration violations by November 25, 2026. The announcement is the next step after the development Awaaz Punjab reported earlier this week, when a federal judge rejected 15 sheriffs' bid to block the state's ban on 287(g) cooperation agreements — this letter is about the separate, later deadline for jail housing contracts, and it starts a 19-day countdown for every county that still holds one.
Source: New York Attorney General / Governor's announcement via EIN Presswire, Nov. 6, 2026
Under the Local Cops, Local Crimes Act, passed by the New York legislature and signed by Governor Hochul on May 27, 2026, local governments are prohibited from housing civil immigration detainees in local correctional facilities on behalf of federal immigration authorities. Counties have until November 25 to unwind those agreements, the announcement said.
What the law actually bars — and what it does not
The Act bars any local government or law enforcement agency from entering into, modifying, renewing, extending, or remaining in any contract, intergovernmental service agreement, or other formal or informal agreement to house or detain people for federal civil immigration violations. An agency that holds a prohibited agreement must use its termination provision by November 25, 2026 — three months after the law's effective date. After that date, any such agreement is void and unenforceable under state law, according to the announcement.
If one agreement covers both criminal and civil detention, the agency must end only the portion that allows detention for federal civil immigration violations. James and Hochul stressed two limits that counties asked about: the law does not prevent a local agency from contracting for detention space for people facing pending federal criminal charges, as long as the agreement does not include detention solely for a federal civil immigration violation, and it does not stop any agency from complying with a state or federal court order or a judicial warrant.
The OIT letter asks every county executive and sheriff to tell the Office of Immigrant Trust what steps they have taken to comply with the law — or to confirm that they do not hold a prohibited agreement at all.
What the two state leaders said
'Local officials should not be doing the work of federal immigration authorities,' Attorney General James said. 'New York passed the Local Cops, Local Crimes Act because taxpayer resources should be dedicated solely to keeping our communities safe. My office is providing guidance to help local officials understand their obligations under the law and ensure they meet the deadline.'
Governor Hochul said: 'When I signed the Local Cops, Local Crimes Act into law, I made it clear that our local law enforcement should be focused on protecting New Yorkers and keeping dangerous criminals off our streets, not helping ICE carry out their aggressive deportation agenda. Allowing ICE to utilize our local jails for civil immigration detention does not make our communities safer. Today's reminder ensures that counties across the state are prepared to fully wind down any agreement that gives federal agents access to local jails in New York.' Those are the state leaders' stated reasons; sheriffs challenging the law, and the federal Department of Homeland Security, dispute them, as set out below.
The enforcement office behind the letter
The Office of Immigrant Trust is the new enforcement office created inside the Attorney General's office under the same law. The announcement says the OIT is authorised to receive complaints, conduct investigations, issue subpoenas, and bring civil actions to ensure compliance with state law. New Yorkers who believe a state or local agency, employee, contractor, school or other covered entity has violated state laws on civil immigration enforcement can file a complaint online, and people who witness federal enforcement actions anywhere in the state can report them through the Attorney General's federal action portal at ag.ny.gov/federal-actions-form.
Background: the sheriffs' lawsuit and the ruling earlier this week
The detention deadline is the second phase of the same law. Its ban on 287(g) agreements — federal agreements that let trained local officers perform some immigration-enforcement functions under ICE supervision — took effect on August 25, 2026. Fifteen county sheriffs, led by Rensselaer County Sheriff Kyle Bourgault, sued Hochul and James in federal court in the Northern District of New York (Bourgault et al. v. Hochul et al., No. 1:26-cv-01637), arguing the state was tearing up valid contracts and overriding independently elected sheriffs. The sheriffs' legal backers at the Federation for American Immigration Reform noted that Rensselaer County has run a jail enforcement model agreement with ICE since 2018, and that in their account federal housing brought Rensselaer County about $3.89 million in 2025, while Orange County has housed ICE detainees under its own contract since 2008 — figures presented by the sheriffs' side in the dispute.
As Awaaz Punjab reported in its earlier story on the November 4 ruling, U.S. District Judge Mae A. D'Agostino rejected the 15 sheriffs' request for a preliminary injunction, ruling that they had not proven they have legal authority to bring their constitutional claims against the state. 'Although some scholars have called for a reform of the legal landscape to allow local governments to sue their parent state, the current state of the law does not appear to allow for such a suit,' she wrote in the 28-page ruling. James welcomed that ruling — 'Local law enforcement should be focused on keeping New Yorkers safe, not carrying out the administration's cruel mass deportation agenda' — while Bourgault vowed to press on, saying jail screening gives officers 'important information' about people in custody. A Department of Homeland Security spokesperson, in a separate statement reported by Fox News, argued the restriction will force more federal agents into communities. Those competing claims are allegations and arguments in an ongoing legal fight, not settled findings.
Source: The Center Square via Hometown Register, Nov. 5, 2026
Why this matters for immigrant and Punjabi families in New York
New York is home to large Punjabi and wider South Asian communities — in Queens and elsewhere in New York City, on Long Island, and in Hudson Valley and upstate towns — and to Punjabi truckers who pass through and work out of the state's freight corridors every day. For those families, the practical question behind the legal language is simple: whether a person held only on a civil immigration matter — not a criminal charge — can be kept in a county jail on behalf of federal authorities after November 25. Under the state law, the answer will be no. Supporters say that keeps local jail space and local officers focused on local crime and protects trust between immigrant communities and police. Opponents, including the suing sheriffs and DHS, say it removes a screening and housing tool and will push federal enforcement out of jails and into neighbourhoods. Both effects will be tested only after the deadline passes.
What happens next
Counties now have until November 25, 2026, to exercise termination provisions and report their steps to the OIT, or confirm they hold no prohibited agreement. After November 25, any remaining civil-detention agreement is void and unenforceable under state law, and the OIT can investigate and bring civil actions over non-compliance. The wider litigation has not ended: the sheriffs' case continues after the injunction ruling, New York is also being sued by the U.S. Department of Justice over the law, a federal judge in August temporarily blocked a separate provision banning ICE agents from wearing masks, and James has filed a countersuit to uphold the law, The Center Square reported. The next concrete date is November 25 itself — and whether every county can show, in writing, that its jail no longer holds people solely for civil immigration violations.