Rockland Fights NYC Request To Move Immigrant Shelter Case

ROCKLAND COUNTY, NY — Rockland County officials embroiled in a legal battle with New York City over immigrants are fighting to stop one case from being moved to state Supreme Court in the city from Rockland County.

County Executive Ed Day said Rockland could not expect a state supreme court judge in NYC to be fair.

"What justice can we reasonably expect from New York City? I firmly believe a case that is about Rockland should be adjudicated and decided by judges elected by Rockland," Day said in a news release.

The battle is over the city's"decompression" plan to temporarily house outside the city limits some of the thousands of asylum-seekers who have arrived in NYC in the past six months.

One of the cases is in State Supreme Court, where Rockland has gotten injunctions temporarily prohibiting New York City from transporting anyone in temporary shelter in the city to any location in Rockland to be used as a shelter.

In New York, the Supreme Court generally hears cases outside the authority of the lower courts.

Rockland has said in its briefs that the city's plan essentially expands its "homeless shelters" to the county, which it argues is against New York State Social Services laws.

NYC attorneys recently filed a motion to change the venue to New York City.

This week, Rockland officials said, NYC also asked Supreme Court Judge Thomas Zugibe, who has been presiding over this case, to adjourn a preliminary injunction hearing until after the motion to change the venue of the lawsuit is decided.

Judge Zugibe granted the adjournment, which infuriated county officials.

They said his decision without ruling on the county’s request for a preliminary injunction first allows a judge in New York City to decide if they’d like to preside over the case moving forward — and leaves that request in that judge’s hands.

And he did it "within an hour, and without speaking to the County, which is the plaintiff in the case," they said in a news release.

Rockland officials said they are now urging Judge Zugibe to withdraw the adjournment and continue presiding over a case that will significantly affect Rockland, "the County he swore to serve."

Rockland officials say they are fighting the City of New York attempting to shift its jurisdiction’s "Sanctuary City duty" which they did not define.

According to the Lutheran Immigration and Refugee service, "The phrase sanctuary city is not a legal term, but one developed over time and more recently reflecting a response to ICE (U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement) policies and actions. In general, a sanctuary city is a community with a policy, written or unwritten, that discourages local law enforcement from reporting the immigration status of individuals unless it involves investigation of a serious crime."

New York City became a sanctuary city in the 1980s; upstate Republicans in the past two months have argued that not only does the law-enforcement policy mean the city should have to handle the influx of asylum seekers by itself, but also that people in other countries know about it and that's why they decide to come to the United States.

Rockland officials point out that their county is the smallest in the State of New York in terms of area and argue that means Rockland cannot support rapid population growth — they say the influx of so-called "natural immigration," meaning people who have arrived because they have friends or family connections, has already caused a strain.

For example, they said this week the Rockland County Office of Buildings and Codes and Center for Rockland Codes Investigations came across another unlawfully converted firetrap; a 2-family home in the village of Spring Valley with 25 beds.

"Rockland County is already tackling a severe housing crisis that includes a shortage of safe and affordable units. This has led to overcrowding in 1 and 2 family homes, which are not subject to mandatory code enforcement inspections, as unscrupulous landlords take advantage of both new legal migrants and the undocumented," they said in the news release. They alleged New York's plan would "undoubtedly" both quadruple the county's homeless population and exacerbate its illegal housing crisis.

Rockland already lost a lawsuit in federal court on the issue. That judge, sitting in Federal Court in White Plains, said in his ruling: "Even during oral argument, counsel for the Rockland County Defendant indicated that financial concerns was just one consideration, but concerns regarding 'life, liberty, and property,' was another major concern. When asked what counsel meant by 'life, liberty, and property,' counsel indicated that there would be public safety concerns, and repeated that the having '340 single unemployed men' come in through the program would cause 'mayhem.' No further satisfactory explanation was given by counsel when asked to explain what was meant by 'mayhem' or where the basis for that concern came from. Therefore, based on the record, the Court agrees with Plaintiffs that there is enough on the record and as reflected during the oral argument that invidious, discriminatory concerns was one of the motivating factors for the issuance of the Rockland EO."

There's another case between the two in state Supreme Court — filed by NYC against Rockland's emergency order, saying county officials acted "in excess of their jurisdiction and lawful authority, in violation of lawful procedure, and in a manner affected by an error of law that is arbitrary and capricious and an abuse of discretion." In their filing, attorneys for the city argued that because it is NYC's plan and the consequences of Rockland's decisions affect the city, it should be heard there.

MORE INFORMATION:

• Migrant Emergency Orders Are Unconstitutional: Federal Judge
• Rockland Issues New Emergency Order On Asylum-Seekers