Attorneys For Blakeman And County Legislators Trade Barbs Over Civilian Deputy Program

MINEOLA, NY. — Nassau County Legislators Debra Mulé and Scott Davis issued a fiery response to a motion to dismiss their lawsuit against Nassau County Executive Bruce Blakeman Tuesday, claiming that “no New York State official has [the] authority” to create a special deputy program like the one Blakeman created in 2024.

In their latest filing, Mulé and Davis — through their attorney, Manhattan-based Joshua Kelner — claim that discovery in the suit revealed that members of the deputy program include a self-identified member of Blakeman’s extended family, multiple people in their 70s, a doctor who served on Blakeman’s transition team and multiple people who have had arrest warrants in the past.

In a statement delivered through a spokesperson, Blakeman said all of the deputies had undergone extensive background checks.

“All special deputies went through an extensive background check and were trained in criminal law and firearms and all had valid New York State carry permits," the county executive said. "These individuals are licensed to carry a firearm, trained in criminal law, and are respected members of the community; many of whom served in the military and professional law enforcement.”

In a motion to dismiss the suit filed Feb. 2, defense attorney Joshua Liebman cited a member of the county sheriff’s department, who said that the deputy program’s personnel included retired NYPD detectives with over 20 years of experience, former FBI supervisors and federal agents, honorably discharged members of the armed forces, and even former members of the Israeli Defense Force.

“The vast majority of them have extensive backgrounds in law enforcement...Additionally, beyond their primary careers in law enforcement or military service, many have specialized training,” the member of the sheriff’s department is quoted as saying in the motion to dismiss. “We have certified firearms instructors, individuals trained in arrest procedures, those with advanced active shooter response training, and Community Emergency Response Team members. Several are auxiliary police officers. I can safely say that these individuals understand and respect the chain of command, proper law enforcement procedures, and the responsible use of authority.”

Background On The Deputy Program

The deputy program was launched in the Spring of 2024, with the goal of training and deputizing 75 civilians for emergency service with the sheriff’s department. The county executive has previously said that these sheriffs’ deputies would only be used in the event of a “very significant emergency,”calling them “a list, a database of people, who would be willing to volunteer in the event that there was an emergency.”

For Democrats in Nassau County, the deputy program has been a lightning rod since its inception. In May of 2024, Democrats stood on the steps of the Nassau County executive building and demanded transparency into the program, with the director of Nassau County’s chapter of the NYCLU questioning what evidence Blakeman had that indicated the program was necessary.

In 2025, those efforts to achieve some transparency came to the courts, with Mulé and Davis filing a complaint last February. The county and its sheriff, Anthony LaRocco, were named as co-defendants.

In their original complaint against Blakeman, the legislators called the provisional special deputies program illegal and a waste of public funds and sought a judgment declaring it as such.

In the same complaint, Mulé and Davis asked the court to permanently enjoin the county executive and sheriff from maintaining the program.

Blakeman’s Latest Filings

In the February motion to dismiss, Liebman called the suit from Mulé and Davis “purely political,” noting that, while the duo brought the suit as a taxpayer claim and identify themselves as Nassau County taxpayers in their complaint, they are “political adversaries” of the county executive.

In the same motion, Liebman argued that Mulé and Davis had failed to prove that the deputy program was illegal, and that they had failed to identify what parts of it were wasteful, an important standard for a taxpayer claim.

“Indeed, far from being ‘entirely illegal,’ the special deputies initiative is actually entirely legal and fully compliant with applicable law,” Liebman wrote in the motion to dismiss.

“Plaintiffs do not contend that there is any fraud, collusion, corruption or bad faith associated with the County’s emergency public safety initiative,” Liebman added.

At most, Liebman argued in the motion, Mule and Davis had alleged noncompliance with county law and other relevant statutes, which Liebman said are insufficient basis for a taxpayer’s suit. Even the allegations of noncompliance, Liebman said, were made, “erroneously.”

“The success of Plaintiffs’ claim depends on their being able to convince this Court that funding an officially organized, trained and commanded unit of such highly-skilled, disciplined and honorable public servants, who have volunteered to assist in preserving lives and property during times of emergency, can plausibly be alleged to be an unlawful ‘waste’ of public assets and a danger to the community,” Liebman wrote in the motion to dismiss. “We submit that Plaintiffs’ contention is contrary to law, decency and common sense, and urge the Court to neither adopt nor endorse it.”

With all of that in mind, Liebman asked the judge to dismiss the suit. It was the second time in this case that Blakeman’s attorneys have moved to have it dismissed, with a previous attempt to have the case thrown out being denied on Oct. 7, 2025.

What Mulé and Davis Are Saying

In an opposing response to Liebman’s latest effort to have the case dismissed, Kelner said that the motion to dismiss is “premised on the notion that County Executive Blakeman has unlimited authority to empower civilians to wield deadly force and make arrests at his direction.”

“No New York State official has that authority,” Kelner said in his response.

Repeatedly referring to the deputies program as a “militia program” in the response, Kelner claimed that it “defies logic” to assert that the deputized civilians could have a material impact on public safety or disaster preparedness, citing the presence of 3,000 police officers already on staff in Nassau County and over 60,000 police officers on staff in New York State. All of those officers, Kelner said, would be available to Nassau County in the event of an emergency.

Finally, Kelner said that information obtained in discovery about the people who had enrolled in the deputy program was, “underscoring the wastefulness of the program," claiming that some of the enrolled deputies had no prior law enforcement experience.

“Contrary to Defendants’ assurances that the program consists entirely of well trained and ‘highly-skilled’ individuals, some of the program participants have no law enforcement experience and their age or professional experience strongly suggests they are ill suited to exercise police powers against civilians in Nassau County,” Kelner wrote. “For example, one individual enrolled in the program, who identifies himself as Defendant Blakeman’s extended family member, works in real estate; he has no law enforcement experience. Another individual enrolled in the program is a doctor who served on Defendant Blakeman’s transition team. Four individuals in the program appear to have either been arrested or have had warrants issued for their arrest. Five individuals appear to have been in their 70s at the time they enrolled in the program, notwithstanding that New York State has a mandatory retirement age of 62 for most police officers. And six participants in the program are already members of the Nassau County Auxiliary Police, underscoring the wastefulness of the program.”

Where The Case Stands Now

Liebman was unable to be reached for comment for this piece, while Kelner said the composition of the deputy program’s personnel revealed during discovery, “confirms the fears that were expressed when it was first formed.

“The composition of the county executive’s militia merely confirms the fears that were expressed when it was first formed, that he is arming people who should not bear force on behalf of the state, and creates a grave risk to public safety,” Kelner said.