Residents Ask Village Board to Stand Up Against ICE

The national conversation about immigration enforcement came home to Scarsdale at the meeting of the Village Board on Tuesday February 10, 2026. Alissa Baum and Myra Saul attended the meeting and asked the Village Board to support proposed legislation to limit ICE actions in New York State.

Here is what they said:

Good evening. We are Alissa Baum, 2 Sylvan Lane and Myra Saul, 5 Lincoln Road. We are speaking in our capacities as individuals and not representing any group.

About two weeks ago, in response to the murders of Renee Goode and Alex Pretti, members of the Westchester community--of all faiths and backgrounds as well as our elected officials-- gathered at Congregation Kol Ami in White Plains to find comfort in our shared humanity. Justin, you as our mayor, spoke eloquently that night, explaining that regardless of what may be our political differences, we all share a belief in our Constitution, the rule of law, and our common humanity. Thank you.

The other day Heather Cox Richardson, a distinguished American historian, wrote in her online column, that there are over 70,000 people, including children, held in ICE detention centers around the country. These centers are operated by private firms, some apparently shoestring operations, which now oversee private jails that each hold thousands of people. There are reports of the lack of medical facilities and the outright denial of medical care at these centers; many substantiated by ICE.

There are now other reports that whole communities are speaking out against ICE, especially with respect to the establishment of detention centers in their communities. For instance, in nearby Chester, NY, the Orange County Legislature, both Republicans and Democrats, unanimously oppose a proposed detention center there.

Scarsdale needs to stand up with the tools that it has to fight against ICE on both political and moral grounds. Politically—because as our Mayor said at our community gathering of two weeks ago—these issues transcend Democratic and Republican party lines and go to the essence of the constitutional rights we all enjoy. Morally---because we need to speak up with a forceful voice for those in our communities who are suffering.

It is with this background that we are asking the Village of Scarsdale, through its trustees, to support some common sense handcuffs on ICE, as proposed by our governor, in the name of upholding our constitutional rights and decency.

These are:

1. The New York State Bivens Act, which would protect the constitutional rights of New Yorkers by establishing a right to sue federal officers and hold them accountable for violations of individuals’ constitutional rights.

2. The Sensitive Location Protection Act, which would amend the NY State Civil Rights Law to protect sensitive locations – schools, daycares, hospitals, houses of worship, and housing accommodations – from civil immigration enforcement, except where a federal agent has a judicial warrant. We do not want to see ICE invading the spaces we cherish as safe and secure.

3. The Local Crimes and Local Cops Act, which would prohibit so-called 287(g) agreements. This bill would bar state and local police from acting as federal agents or using taxpayer-funded resources or personnel to carry out federal civil immigration enforcement.

We note that this legislation is less far reaching than New York for All, a bill currently being considered by the state legislature and cosponsored by both our state senator and state assemblyperson. Considering that, if the governor’s proposals still seem too controversial, which they shouldn’t be, the Village needs to at least take a stand with respect to its own police force. Right now, we only have a policy which states that the Scarsdale Police Department will not engage in immigration enforcement. |

A policy simply does not have the force of law. Given the activities of ICE in our own backyard, it is critical that we make sure that our own local authorities are not permitted to cooperate with ICE absent a judicial warrant or ongoing serious criminal investigation.

Scarsdale should join other communities across the state and the country willing to protect the most vulnerable among us.

Thank you for your consideration.

Nan Berke came to the mic to second the second the recommendations to limit ICE’s grip. She said, “Kathy Hochul supports this act along with the New York Bar Association. I am hopeful that Scarsdale can be one of the first local governments endorsing this act. I run the local tag sale at Scarsdale Congregational Church and people from all walks of life come to enjoy the sale. We implemented measures to protect people during the sale. I want to make the thought of ICE unimaginable again. The President says his guardrails are only limited by his own morality – this is too low a bar.”

On Wednesday February 11, Mayor Justin Arest responded. Here is his letter:

Dear Scarsdale,

At our Village Board meeting on Tuesday night, residents offered thoughtful comments about the role of local law enforcement and proposals in Albany addressing civil immigration enforcement. We have also received other inquiries from residents. I appreciate this engagement. It is part of what makes Scarsdale, Scarsdale.

Keeping Scarsdale Policing Local

Residents spoke about protecting our community from civil immigration enforcement activity. On that point, it is important to be clear about what we do today.

Scarsdale has not entered into a federal 287(g) agreement, and our officers are not empowered to act as immigration agents. Our department’s focus is local public safety. Scarsdale does not hold or detain individuals for civil immigration purposes based on administrative paperwork alone. As a matter of department policy and long-standing practice, detention does not occur absent a judicial warrant or a criminal matter within our jurisdiction. Consistent with legal guidance from the New York Attorney General, these practices ensure that local resources are used for local safety.

What a Village Can and Cannot Do

Residents also urged the Village to adopt or codify proposals currently being debated in Albany, including the New York State Bivens Act proposal and the Sensitive Location Protection Act.

Those are serious policy questions, but they are not questions a Village can settle by local law. A municipality cannot create a new state cause of action allowing residents to sue federal officials. That authority rests with the State Legislature. Likewise, the Village cannot enact a local rule that overrides federal enforcement authority or sets binding statewide standards for federal agencies. If we attempted to do so, it would likely be preempted by state or federal law and could expose taxpayers to unnecessary litigation.

Moving Forward

As your local government, our job is to keep Scarsdale safe, to keep our police focused on local policing, and to follow the law as it exists. We will continue to track the legislation being considered in Albany and speak up when state action affects our community.

We encourage residents to continue sharing their perspectives with elected representatives at every level of government. The Village remains in communication with our partners at the county, state, and federal levels, and we believe constructive public engagement plays an important role in shaping policy.

Scarsdale should remain a place that values public safety, constitutional rights, and basic decency, all at the same time.

Sincerely,
Justin Arest
Mayor

Responding to the Mayor, Baum, Berke and Saul sent the following letter on February 12, 2026:

Mr. Mayor,
Thank you for your response on behalf of the Village. Respectfully, however, your response does not address our requests.

1. As to Scarsdale police, you indicate that "As a matter of department policy (emphasis added) and long-standing practice, detention does not occur absent a judicial warrant or a criminal matter within our jurisdiction. Consistent with legal guidance from the New York Attorney General, these practices ensure that local resources are used for local safety."

This is the nut of one of the issues we raised in our remarks. We are asking that this policy be made into a local law. If passed, Scarsdale would not be the first Westchester jurisdiction to have such a law. The Town of Irvington has a local law which was used as a model for Westchester County's Immigrant Protection Act with respect to the County's police force.

2. You state that we asked the Village to adopt or codify various state proposals.
You have misstated our request. We are requesting that the Village Trustees pass a resolution in support or issue a Memorandum of Support with respect to the governor's proposals. There is no conflict between various layers of government with respect to this action. As we discussed at the Trustee Meeting, Scarsdale needs to use the tools that it possesses--one of which is to express support for constitutional rights and for our neighbors through the voice of our government.

3. Lastly, you state that "As your local government, our job is to keep Scarsdale safe, to keep our police focused on local policing, and to follow the law as it exists. We will continue to track the legislation being considered in Albany and speak up when state action affects our community."

We reject the notion of the parameters of the powers of local government as stated in the first sentence of this statement. It is too limited. In fact, you recognize that later in the same paragraph where you say that Scarsdale government will "speak up when state action affects our community." As a routine matter, our state officials seek input from various stakeholders, including local government officials, when considering legislation. Similarly, local government officials directly advocate for laws on the county, state, or federal level when an issue has the potential of impacting the community. We have no doubt that if the matter were fiscal, Scarsdale officials would be vigorously conveying to higher levels of government the impact those changes would have on our Village. The challenging of the SALT deduction cap and ConEd rate increases are certainly areas where our local government advocated for change with our state representatives. And, we emphasize that current federal immigration enforcement is affecting us now. It was only months ago that the community united in support of one of its residents who was caught in this overreach.

Scarsdale took a stand in favor of constitutional rights years ago; it was a leader in defense of the First Amendment during the McCarthy Era in the so-called "Battle of the Books". Our democracy is in peril now. There is no reason why Scarsdale should not be a leader now. New times call for different tactics, but with the same goal--upholding constitutional rights. Don't let this opportunity slip away. Be a leader and make us and our future residents proud to call Scarsdale home.

Respectfully submitted,
Alissa Baum, Nan Berke, and Myra Saul

In other news from Village Hall, the Board approved a resolution to receive reimbursement from Westchester County for clearning ice and snow from 3.2 miles of county roads within Scarsdale.

-They passed a resolution to allow a real property tax levy increase above the allowable tax cap 3.65%.

-They authorized the use of Westchester County voting machines for the annual village election on March 18, 2026.

-They accepted a give of $5,000 from Fenway Golf Club Charitable Fund for the Scarsdale Police Department.

-They authorized an agreement with executive search firm Robert Half Inc to fill an executive level position for the Village.

-They discussed, but did not vote on new regulations regarding fencing around swimming pools.