NYC Mayor Eric Adams Plans To Allow ICE Into Rikers

Immigrant rights groups are raising alarm about New York City Mayor Eric Adams’ plans to formally allow Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) back to Rikers Island, more than a decade after ICE was prohibited from operating at the jail complex. Advocates say the move puts incarcerated immigrants at imminent risk of deportation.

Adams announced on Feb. 13 that he would soon issue an executive order to allow federal immigration authorities into the jail complex, specifically focusing on “violent criminals and gangs.” The announcement followed Adams’ meeting with President Donald Trump’s border czar, Tom Homan. 

Allowing ICE agents on Rikers Island raises significant due process issues. With roughly 90% of the people detained at Rikers awaiting trial, ICE’s presence could lead to the deportation of people who are legally presumed innocent. Immigrant rights groups are concerned, especially given that New York City has historically been a safe haven for immigrants.

“What happens when someone is wrongfully arrested, happens to be undocumented, and then ends up in ICE’s hands, but then was found to be not guilty of the allegation that was presented against them?” said Murad Awawdeh, president and CEO of the New York Immigration Coalition. 

While the dominant political narrative paints immigration from the southern border as a safety issue, one study found that sanctuary cities such as New York have less crime, higher median household incomes, and lower poverty and unemployment rates.

“There’s been an intentional spinning of misinformation and missed data to paint the picture of immigrant communities being violent or not looking to integrate and be part of the communities that they live in, which is all untrue,” Awawdeh said.

Sanctuary laws protect immigrants as they try to access essential resources, such as health care or the ability to call the police if their lives are in imminent danger, without fear of deportation. The 2014 law that ended ICE operations at Rikers and all city facilities is an example of such a law. 

New York City detainer laws further state that “federal immigration authorities shall not be permitted to maintain an office or quarters on land over which the department exercises jurisdiction, for the purpose of investigating possible violations of civil immigration law.”

This dramatically limited the instances in which the New York Police Department and the city’s Department of Correction (DOC) were able to honor a detainer issued by ICE.

While Adams cannot circumvent city law through an executive order, detainer laws also state that “the mayor may, by executive order, authorize federal immigration authorities to maintain an office or quarters on such land for purposes unrelated to the enforcement of civil immigration laws.” 

Despite the law, a freedom of information request submitted by the New York City-based nonprofit Immigrant Defense Project (IDP) in 2023 found that the DOC and ICE continued to correspond in ways the group argued violated detainer laws. Email correspondences between 2015 and 2019 showed that, in many instances, the DOC slowed the release of incarcerated individuals to wait until ICE arrived to make arrests. DOC General Counsel Paul Shechtman testified to the Council soon after the emails were made public that “the emails you read are not our policy and should not have happened.”

Still, Yasmine Farhang, director of advocacy at the IDP, told Prism that the 2014 law, which stemmed from years of advocacy, was groundbreaking, as it stopped ICE from having “unfettered access” to people incarcerated at Rikers and shut down ICE’s office there. 

“What Adams is now trying to do goes above and beyond to roll us back in time a decade,” Farhang said. “We have agencies that need to be held accountable. We need a mechanism to hold them accountable.”

The IDP is fighting for the NYC Trust Act-Intro 214, which would create a “private right of action,” or allow a private person to take legal action if their rights are violated. This would bring consequences for when city agencies violate these laws.

Adams’ announcement of the executive order seems to expand Rikers’ operations when it should be scaling back. In 2019, the City Council voted to permanently close Rikers in 2027, but now it appears that the jail will likely remain open past the deadline. Some of the new jails intended to replace Rikers wouldn’t be complete until 2032.

Conditions at Rikers are abysmal. At least 35 people have died at the collection of jail facilities since Adams became mayor, including two that died last week.

“He has failed to meet every benchmark set forward by the plan. And one of the biggest components is decarceration,” said Melanie Dominguez, the organizing director of the Katal Center for Equity, Health and Justice.

Adams has voiced criticisms of bail reform efforts that would release people from jail sooner, expressing concerns with recidivism rates. However, one study found that bail reform in New York City did not affect recidivism for people charged with violent offenses and reduced recidivism for those with nonviolent charges.

Adams’ intentions for ICE at Rikers come as the mayor is facing charges for bribery, campaign finance and conspiracy offenses. He is accused of using his position of power to obtain illegal campaign contributions and luxury travel from Turkish officials. He is also accused of facilitating the opening of a Turkish consular building without passing inspection.

Around the time of Adams’ Rikers announcement, acting U.S. Deputy Attorney General Emil Bove ordered federal prosecutors to sign a motion to dismiss Adams’ corruption charges. However, instead of dismissing the charges, seven prosecutors resigned, and two of their resignation letters were leaked.

Eventually, the motion was signed, and on Feb. 21, Judge Dale E. Ho indefinitely adjourned the case and appointed an additional independent prosecutor. Briefs must be filed by March 7, and oral arguments will be heard on March 14.

On Feb. 26, Adams’ legal team filed its own motion to dismiss the case, arguing “prosecutorial misconduct” due to the leaked resignation letters.

This means that no concrete executive order has materialized weeks after Adams’ announcement, and the charges against him still stand.

Many, including at least two of the prosecutors who resigned, have expressed concerns that the federal motion to dismiss Adams’ charges is part of a quid pro quo deal, believing that Adams’ upcoming executive order is in response to the efforts by Trump’s Department of Justice.

“The two are not tied together,” Alex Spiro, a member of Adams’ defense team in the case, told Prism in an email. “His position on immigration has not changed” since before the corruption case “was ginned up.” 

The DOC did not respond to Prism’s questions in time for publication.

Activists have called on Gov. Kathy Hochul to remove Adams from office. She decided not to at this time, but has taken steps to limit the mayor’s authority.

In the meantime, activists are watching for when the executive order is finally announced. “We’re going to fight back, either in the streets or through the courts,” said Awawdeh.