On Saturday, without adequate public notice or legitimate justification, Mayor Eric Adams declared a “state of emergency” in a last-minute effort to continue solitary confinement in New York City by blocking a law passed to prevent it. The mayor used the ‘state of emergency’ on Rikers as a justification to preserve the status quo of that emergency, rather than allowing a law approved twice by the City Council to take effect. In response, Public Advocate Jumaane D. Williams, prime sponsor of the legislation, urged the mayor to read the law and carry out its provisions.
“I invite the mayor, yet again, to read the legislation he is refusing to implement,” said Public Advocate Jumaane D. Williams. “The mayor continues to believe that his job is to continually ignore and defy the rest of city government and the laws they enact. But the administration’s failure to meaningfully improve the crisis on Rikers is not a valid argument to ignore a law aimed at actually making city jails safer for people on both sides of the bars – addressing the very emergency that the mayor ignored until it was politically necessary. We attempted to work with the administration in good faith throughout the years of deliberations involved in passing this law and were rebuffed – now, we will not allow people to continue to suffer in prolonged isolation as the mayor misleads the city rather than even attempt to carry out the law the Council enacted.”
In attempting to justify yet another move to ignore city laws he opposes, the mayor has argued that the 30-day state of emergency will allow time to review Local Law 42, which was formally introduced two years ago, passed in 2023, and was enacted in a veto override vote six months ago. Despite this ample time to ‘review’ the law, the administration continues to repeat falsehoods about its mandates and process.
In particular, the administration has argued that Local Law 42 entirely prohibits restraining incarcerated individuals, which is belied by the text of the law. The law reads:
- “Use of restraints. 1. The department shall not place an incarcerated person in restraints unless an individualized determination is made that restraints are necessary to prevent an imminent risk of self-injury or injury to other persons. In such instances, only the least restrictive form of restraints may be used and may be used no longer than is necessary to abate such imminent harm. Restraints shall not be used on an incarcerated person under the age of 22 except in the following circumstances: (i) during transportation in and out of a facility, provided that during transportation no person shall be secured to an immovable object; and (ii) during escorted movement within a facility to and from out-of-cell activities where an individualized determination is made that restraints are necessary to prevent an immediate risk of self-injury or injury to other persons."
In addition, the mayor has argued that the legislation as written does not allow for separation or alternative housing for incarcerated people in the event of violence. On the contrary, provisions for de-escalation confinement are defined extensively in the law itself – which can be read in full here.
After the Mayor’s declaration was made public through press reports, the Public Advocate issued a statement saying in part “This is a shameful tactic, another desperate abuse of power by this administration to try and ignore laws it opposes. Misusing a ‘state of emergency’ is dangerous, especially from a mayor who claims to care about public safety.”
Back to press reports