NYC Law Dept. Won't Defend Mayor Adams In Lawsuit Over ICE On Rikers

NEW YORK CITY — The New York City Law Department will not defend Mayor Eric Adams in a City Council lawsuit that aims to block the return of ICE agents to Rikers Island, according to reports.

“The New York City Law Department has advised that they will not be representing any party in this litigation. Respondents are accordingly in the process of identifying outside counsel to represent them in this matter," Allison Stoddart, the mayor’s chief counsel, wrote in the letter to the Manhattan Supreme Court that was filed on Wednesday.

The city's law department decision was first reported by the New York Daily News. The law department typically represents the mayor in litigation.

Muriel Goode-Trufant, who heads the law department as the city's corporation counsel, said in a statement to Gothamist, that the department would not get involved in the matter because it had previously advised both sides on the scope of the city’s sanctuary city laws.

The lawsuit filed in Manhattan Supreme Court argues First Deputy Mayor Randy Mastro "made no meaningful independent analysis of the situation" and that Adams directed him to sign the executive order as part of an alleged deal with the Trump administration, according to a New York Post report.

According to the executive order, federal agencies will support local law enforcement in its efforts against international gangs and criminal enterprises such as MS-13 and Tren de Aragua that have been designated by as foreign terrorist organizations, Patch previously reported.

“Mayor Eric Adams, as part of a corrupt quid pro quo bargain to end the federal criminal case against him, promised to let United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) return to Rikers Island and set up an office,” the suit reads. “The Trump Administration has repeatedly confirmed that they will use that office and ICE’s presence on Rikers to supercharge their mass deportation efforts.”

The suit also argues that the executive order is "null and void" because Adams never formally gave Mastro the power to issue such an order. In addition, the order violates city conflict of interest laws.

This is a developing story. This post may be updated.