A State Supreme Court judge has indefinitely barred Mayor Eric Adams from allowing Immigration and Customs Enforcement from reopening an office on Rikers Island. 

In a scathing decision published Adams’s federal corruption case — and thus likely violated the city’s conflict of interest law.

Rosado first issued a temporary restraining order in April, and her ruling Friday issues a preliminary injunction that will extend indefinitely as the case continues.

The City Council “has shown likelihood of success in demonstrating, at a minimum, the appearance of a quid pro quo whereby Mayor Adams publicly agreed to bring Immigration and Customs Enforcement back to Rikers Island in exchange for dismissal of his criminal charges,” Rosado wrote. 

“Although the defendants-respondants deny any quid pro quo in conclusory fashion, this is insufficient, and almost expected,” the 18-page decision continued.

Rosado’s order is the latest blow for Adams as he faces a bruising path to reelection this November, with voting beginning tomorrow for the Democratic Party nomination he gave up on in the wake of public furor over the Trump Justice Department’s actions to drop his case after meeting with Adams’ legal team. 

In a statement, Mastro said he disagreed with Rosado’s decision, adding he felt confident the mayor’s office would ultimately prevail in the case. He argues the original 2014 law allows the mayor to establish an ICE office on Rikers Island with an executive order.

“Let’s be crystal clear: This executive order is about the criminal prosecution of violent transnational gangs committing crimes in our city. Our istration has never, and will never, do anything to jeopardize the safety of law-abiding immigrants, and this executive order ensures their safety as well. We will also not assist in civil enforcement, in accordance with local law. It is high time to put politics aside and allow the executive branch to do its job of protecting public safety.”

Council Speaker Adrienne Adams — another mayoral hopeful — called Rosado’s injunction “another victory to protect public safety in New York City and New Yorkers’ Constitutional rights from Trump’s extreme overreach.”

“Our courts have recognized the dire threat it poses, and today’s decision marks the third time the court has ruled against Mayor Adams’ illegal executive order to conspire with Trump,” she said. “The Council will continue to use our power and resources to protect New Yorkers from the Trump istration’s harmful agenda.”

‘Real, Ongoing and Imminent’ Harm

The City Council first sued Adams two months ago, arguing that allowing ICE to reopen an office at the Rikers Island jail complex would funnel thousands of undocumented immigrants into deportation proceedings often before they had been convicted of any crime, while immigrants with legal status could be set on a path of deportation for even minor offenses. 

ICE was booted from the island jail after a 2014 law shut their office there down. The Department of Correction still has the power to transfer detainees to ICE custody if the person has been convicted of certain “violent or serious” offenses within a five-year span. 

In her decision Friday, Rosado also agreed with the Council’s argument that while Mayor Adams said he had delegated the decision to Mastro, that was likely insufficient to fend off concerns about a conflict of interest. 

“First Deputy Mayor Mastro reports directly to Mayor Adams, is appointed by Mayor Adams, and can be fired by Mayor Adams,” she wrote. “He is Mayor Adams’ agent.”

The ruling was hailed by the Legal Aid Society, the city’s largest public defender organization. 

“This preliminary injunction is a critical victory for all New Yorkers amidst an unprecedented, nationwide assault on immigrant families and their communities, and it is a strong rebuke of the Adams istration’s unlawful and dangerous Executive Order 50,” said Meghna Philip, director of the LAS’ criminal defense practice’s special litigation unit.

During a hearing on the preliminary injunction on June 3, James Catterson, a private attorney representing Eric Adams and the City of New York, repeatedly denied any deal with the Trump istration existed and dismissed the Council’s argument as a political ploy by Speaker Adams.  

“What this amounts to is a policy dispute between the City Council and the executive branch,” Catterson argued.

He also argued that the Council couldn’t prove anyone would be harmed by the executive order because it had yet to go into effect. 

But in her Friday opinion, Rosado rebuffed that contention, citing evidence that the Trump istration has ignored court orders nationwide regarding immigration enforcement and made mistaken deportations.

“It is akin to the police telling a 9-1-1 caller that they will not assist a victim who calls while a burglar attempts to enter her house,” she wrote. “The harms to individuals, government institutions and New York City imposed by the issuance of Executive Order No. 50 and the alleged quid pro quo are real, ongoing and imminent.”

Additional reporting by Reuven Blau