Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Immigration Enforcement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Hoboken council adopts ordinance limiting city participation in civil immigration enforcement
Summary
After a lengthy debate, the Hoboken City Council adopted an ordinance codifying limits on city action to assist civil immigration enforcement, aligning local policy with prior executive guidance and solicitor recommendations.
The Hoboken City Council voted to adopt an ordinance that directs city employees and agents not to spend city time, funds or resources facilitating civil immigration enforcement operations except when required by law.
Council members said the measure is intended to codify an executive-order policy and to protect municipal resources. Supporters argued the change formalizes existing practice and provides clearer protection for residents.
Councilman Paul Cohen, a sponsor in debate, said the ordinance makes city limits explicit: “Hoboken and its agents shall not spend any time, fund, or resources on facilitating the civil enforcement of federal immigration law nor participating in civil immigration enforcement operations except as legally required to do so.” He added it would prevent local officials from honoring ICE detainer requests or administrative warrants unless compelled by law.
Opponents objected that the ordinance duplicates state and federal guidance and risks creating unnecessary local bureaucracy. One council member cautioned that much of the ordinance’s language repeats Attorney General guidance and that the city should prioritize infrastructure and basic services.
Councilman Miguel Quintero, who supported the ordinance, argued codification prevents a future mayor or a different attorney general from rescinding protections given by an executive order: “The executive order was 11 pages long. The next mayor can decide to rescind it. If we codify, we put it into our laws; it makes it more difficult for them to do that without counsel and consent.”
After the discussion the council took a roll-call vote. The tally recorded by the clerk showed six votes in favor, one “no” and one abstention; the ordinance passed. The city clerk was instructed to publish the enacted law and make its language available to departments that interact with the public.
The ordinance references the New Jersey Attorney General’s guidance cited during debate and was discussed in public session following notice under the Open Public Meetings Act. Council members said departments should review the new directive and return with implementation questions as needed.
