New York Gov. Kathy Hochul is not merely defending a policy that blocks cooperation with federal immigration authorities.

The Democrat is boasting about it, even as her decision leaves law enforcement with fewer tools to remove dangerous criminal aliens from communities across the state.

Hochul appeared on MS Now’s Morning Joe to celebrate her move prohibiting New York law enforcement agencies from participating in partnerships with federal immigration officials.

Apparently, refusing federal help to identify removable criminal aliens now qualifies as enlightened leadership in Albany.

Trump's Sovereign Wealth Fund: What Could It Mean For Your Money?

The governor barred agencies within New York from entering agreements under the federal 287(g) program.

She portrayed that order as an effort to focus state resources on stopping “real crime,” while also complaining about the substantial budget provided to Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

That argument becomes rather shaky once the program itself is examined.

ICE provides participating agencies with immigration law information, specialized training, and guidance on multicultural communications, all while teaching officers how to avoid racial profiling.

FREE Gun Law Map: Laws Don't Pause During Social Unrest

The federal government covers the costs associated with entering a 287(g) partnership.

WATCH:

In other words, Hochul rejected federally funded training and support that could help local authorities identify offenders who may be eligible for removal after entering the criminal justice system.

One option offered through the program is known as the Jail Enforcement Model.

It permits state and local authorities to “identify and process removable aliens currently in your jail or detention facility who have pending or active criminal charges while they’re in your custody.”

That is not a dragnet targeting random residents going about their daily lives.

The model focuses on individuals already held in a jail or detention facility who have criminal charges pending or active, which makes Hochul’s objections look more ideological than practical.

The program gives local authorities a direct channel for working with federal immigration officials while offenders remain in custody.

Without that cooperation, agencies can face additional barriers when determining whether a criminal suspect is removable under federal immigration law.

ICE says the partnerships allow authorities to “work together to deport removable aliens involved in gang activity, violent crimes, human smuggling, organized crime, sex offenses, drug smuggling, money laundering and many other crimes,” which sounds suspiciously like a list of real crimes.

Hochul, however, has decided that preventing New York agencies from joining such agreements is something worth advertising on national television.

Her administration seems more troubled by cooperation with ICE than by the serious offenses the program is designed to address.

The governor’s complaint about ICE funding also misses the point.

A federal agency having a large budget does not magically make local coordination unnecessary, particularly when Washington is offering to pay for the relevant training and provide valuable information.

The scale of participation across the country further weakens Hochul’s attempt to present these agreements as unreasonable.

As of August 28, ICE reported agreements with 2,411 agencies spanning 39 states and two territories.

Thousands of agencies evidently see value in coordinating with immigration authorities when criminal aliens enter local custody.

New York’s governor instead prefers a sweeping prohibition that prevents willing agencies from making their own public safety judgments.

There is also an obvious contradiction in claiming to prioritize serious crime while restricting a program aimed at gang members, violent offenders, smugglers, sex offenders, and money launderers.

Albany can dress that contradiction in progressive talking points, but families living with the consequences deserve better than political theater.

Hochul’s television victory lap reveals the priorities behind the policy.

Rather than giving law enforcement every lawful tool available, New York’s Democrat leadership is choosing resistance to immigration enforcement and expecting residents to applaud as public safety takes another needless hit.

The opinions expressed by contributors and/or content partners are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views of Objectivist. Contact us for guidelines on submitting your own commentary.