Recently the New York State Legislature passed and Governor Cuomo signed into law what is being called the Green Light Law which allows undocumented immigrants to obtain driver's licenses. Both Micky Kearns and Stefan Mychajliw have vociferously came out against.

Our County Comptroller came out with a proposal to use the County hotline as a means for County Clerks in New York to report undocumented immigrants applying for licenses to ICE. While I normally support Stefan I believe it is improper for him to use his office in this manner. It is not within the scope of his duties: http://www2.erie.gov/law/index.php?q...roller-charter

And ICE already has a Hotline for anonymous reports: https://www.ice.gov/contact

Mickey Kearns on the other hand has vowed not to obey this law in the Erie County Auto-bureaus and has asked the County Attorney to file a lawsuit challenging the law.

Lynne Dixon has come out against this law and has challenged Mark Poloncarz on not saying that he is either for or against this law.

Recently, it was reported that Mark Poloncarz gave the County Attorney the permission to file a legal challenge against this law as requested by Mickey Kearns.

First, we must acknowledge that Erie County performs these DMV functions on behalf of the State. In exchange the County keeps a percentage of the revenue collected. Recently this has averaged just north of $4 million annually that goes to the County. Not all Counties operate these Auto-Bureaus and in those that do not they are operated by the State Department of Motor vehicles. It would not take much for the State to do so in Erie County and then the County will lose this revenue. The Governor has the power in the State Constitution to remove an elected County Officer after a hearing as provided in Article VIII section 13.

Secondly, Poloncarz is letting them have their way because he knows that their lawsuit will fail and it is better for him to let them learn that from a Court dismissing this frivolous lawsuit then standing in their way and giving them a platform to attack him in an election year. Poloncarz is a lawyer and is familiar with the law. He knows that New York has long followed the Federal rationale for finding that municipalities lack the capacity to bring suit to invalidate State legislation (see, County of Albany v Hooker, 204 N.Y. 1; City of New York v Village of Lawrence, 250 N.Y. 429; Robertson v Zimmermann, 268 N.Y. 52). As stated in Black Riv. Regulating Dist. v Adirondack League Club (307 N.Y. 475, appeal dismissed 351 US 922): "The courts of this State from very early times have consistently applied the Federal rule in holding that political power conferred by the Legislature confers no vested right as against the government itself. * * * The concept of the supreme power of the Legislature over its creatures has been respected and followed in many decisions." (Id., at 488.)

The rationale was succinctly described in Matter of County of Cayuga v McHugh (4 N.Y.2d 609): "Counties, as civil divisions of a State, had their origin in England and were formed to aid in the more convenient administration of government * * *. So it is today that counties are mere political subdivisions of the State, created by the State Legislature and possessing no more power save that deputed to them by that body." (Id., at 614.)

Moreover, the Court of Appeals has extended the doctrine of no capacity to sue by municipal corporate bodies to a wide variety of challenges based as well upon claimed violations of the State Constitution (see, Black Riv. Regulating Dist. v Adirondack League Club, supra; City of New York v Village of Lawrence, supra; County of Albany v Hooker, supra).

Municipal officials and members of municipal administrative or legislative boards suffer the same lack of capacity to sue the State with the municipal corporate bodies they represent (see, Williams v Mayor, 289 US 36, supra). As we held in Black Riv. Regulating Dist. v Adirondack League Club (307 NY, at 489, supra): "As we have pointed out, the district board has no special character different from that of the State. Its only purpose is to construct reservoirs and that, concededly, is a State purpose in the interest of public health, safety and welfare (Conservation Law, § 431). Not only as a board, but also as individuals, the plaintiffs are without power to challenge the validity of the act or the Constitution".

So in the end Mark Poloncarz will win this fight without being in the fight and if the County loses the Auto-bureau and its revenue it will not fall on him.