Suffolk County Executive Ed Romaine, Suffolk County Sheriff Errol Toulon Jr., and Suffolk County Attorney Chris Clayton delivered a press conference at the H. Lee Dennison Building in Hauppauge to address a lawsuit they all agree to be sheer lunacy.
With local legislators alongside them, the trio took turns explaining what intricacies of the case they are permitted to reveal, and to translate all the legal minutiae into laymen’s terms. The United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York, on behalf of 650 plaintiffs listed in the Class Action, has sued Suffolk County for detainments of illegal immigrants they carried in 2016.
Curiously, they granted immunity to the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) for its 48-hour detainment protocols, but no immunity to Suffolk County—whose officers were operating under the “color of federal authority” as they were instructed to; the lawsuit—with legs that stem from a 2016-borne case—seeks damages in the $60 million range, which Romaine and company call an affront to Suffolk County’s taxpayers.
Back in 2016, then-Suffolk County Sheriff Vincent DiMarco announced the Suffolk County Jail would honor ICE detainers accompanied by a Department of Homeland Security warrant. Prisoners subject to the ICE detainers would be “held for up to 48 hours after the time the prisoner would otherwise be released.”
A 2018 court decision promptly discontinued this practice; incoming Sheriff Toulon respected the reversal as his administration took over the department.
Years later, Toulon and Romaine—who did not take over until 2023—are expected to make sense of this to a puzzled public while left utterly dumbfounded themselves.
“The federal government has asserted ‘qualified immunity’ in this case, leaving the county to fend for itself,’ Romaine said, adding that there is much he’s witnessed from his County Executive post that has made him shake their head, but that this instance perhaps trumps all.
“We will fight this,” he declared. “I strongly believe that anyone that is in this country illegally, that has committed a crime, that violated one of our laws, should not be here. We will continue to work with ICE and Homeland Security on this issue… for the courts to hold against the county because we detained these people at the request of the federal government? And now, to hold us liable, because we cooperated with the federal government—is nothing short of ridiculous.”
Toulon agreed being cast as the scapegoat in this case is not a reality any defendant will accept sans contention. “This is about fairness, accountability, and protecting the resources that our residents depend on,” he said. “The Sheriff's office remains committed to following the law, upholding public trust, and sharing fiscal responsibility.”
Chris Clayton of the Suffolk County Attorney’s Office clarified the writ of habeas corpus through which the County is being sued did not take in an unrelated second appellate court-tried case from years prior. It has only gained steam as the bullseye target morphed into a single entity viewed as having the money to spend—and to make things go away.
Upon review of the plaintiffs' cases, Clayton confirms all involve detainers being issued with cause, affidavits and a legal process contending that all (plaintiffs) were in the country illegally at the time of apprehension.
“It’s an eight-year-old case that has a Byzantine thread of litigation associated with it,” said Clayton. “The undisputed facts of this case are that the individuals who were subject to these detainers were in this country unlawfully, and ICE and Homeland Security issued the detainers and warrants because of that illegal status. These individuals were taken into the custody of local law enforcement and our jail because they violated the law.”
While the County weighs all their preliminary options, Romaine confirmed that, should all else fail, they will “absolutely” appeal this case.
If the worst-case scenario for the County occurs in the end, Romaine said they would either bond the $60 million or take it out of their operating budget.
“It’s notable, and I think ultimately ironic that the federal authorities have been dismissed from this case,” Clayton adds. “We think in recognition of the fact that they had statutory, and other immunities. We believed the court erroneously failed to recognize that the INA provides immunity to Suffolk County as well.”
Concludes Toulon: “Together with our County Executive and our law office partners, we will continue to advocate for the residents of Suffolk County and work toward a resolution that prioritizes fairness, safety and accountability.”