What Does the Protect Our Courts Act Do?
Passed initially in 2020 and now expanded, POCA prohibits civil immigration arrests for anyone “attending a court proceeding” or any “family or household member” (a definition, the DOJ argues is so broad it includes former roommates and virtually anyone in an “intimate relationship” with the party) unless there is a judicial warrant. Notably, POCA makes it a crime to arrest someone in violation of this law, exposing ICE agents to prosecution for contempt of court or false imprisonment, with penalties of up to four years in prison.
Willful violations of POCA or related court orders also expose agents—and anyone assisting them—to civil lawsuits for damages and attorneys’ fees, brought by the New York Attorney General or private individuals.
DOJ: New York’s Law Directly Obstructs Federal Immigration Mandates
The federal government’s argument is rooted in the Supremacy Clause, which makes federal law “the supreme Law of the Land.” According to the DOJ, New York’s blanket ban “poses intolerable obstacles to federal immigration enforcement and directly regulate[s] and discriminate[s] against the Federal Government.”
The complaint cites Arizona v. United States, reiterating that only Congress—not states—can set the terms for immigration enforcement:
“The Government of the United States has broad, undoubted power over the subject of immigration and the status of aliens,” (quoting Arizona v. United States, 567 U.S. 387, 394 (2012)).
Crucially, DOJ lawyers argue that POCA’s requirement for a judicial warrant, and its threat of prosecution, “impede those officers’ ability to discharge their official duties.” The complaint also highlights the Laken Riley Act of 2025, which mandates federal detention for certain criminal aliens, further strengthening the federal position.
