New York Assembly Bill A03987

New York 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/30/25
• Refer: 1/30/25
• Report Pass: 5/20/25
• Refer: 5/20/25
• Report Pass: 6/6/25
• Engrossed: 6/6/25
• Refer: 6/6/25
• Engrossed: 2/5/26
• Refer: 2/5/26

Caption

Designates security officers for the village court of the village of Pleasantville as peace officers.

Summary

This bill amends the New York Criminal Procedure Law to add employees of the village court of the Village of Pleasantville who serve as security officers to the list of peace officers. The designation is limited: these officers would only have the powers granted under specified paragraphs of the peace officer statute, rather than the full range of police powers. The bill also makes clear that the new peace officer status does not itself authorize the carrying, possession, repair, or disposal of a firearm unless the person has the proper license under the Penal Law. If the employee is not already a police officer or peace officer, the bill requires completion of the training mandated by law for peace officers. The act would take effect immediately upon enactment.

Impact

The bill would amend section 2.10 of the Criminal Procedure Law by creating a new category of peace officers for a specific local court security workforce in Pleasantville. Its practical effect is to expand the legal authority of those court security employees for limited law-enforcement-related functions, while preserving existing firearm licensing requirements and training standards. The measure affects the Village of Pleasantville, its village court, and the state statutes governing peace officer status, authority, and training.

Sentiment

The available voting history suggests broad support for the bill. It advanced unanimously out of the Assembly Codes Committee and the Assembly Rules Committee, and it passed the Assembly floor with a strong majority, 134-9. No committee transcript is available, but the recorded votes indicate the proposal was generally viewed favorably and as a narrow, local administrative change rather than a controversial policy shift.

Contention

The main substantive issue is the scope of authority granted to the designated court security officers. The bill limits their powers to specific peace officer functions and expressly excludes any automatic firearm authority, which likely addresses public safety and oversight concerns. Any opposition appears to have been limited, given the small number of negative floor votes, and may have centered on whether local court security personnel should receive peace officer status at all or on the breadth of powers and training implications.