In a letter to Garg, Fine added that the threat of organized crime and corruption in the port had not gone away, citing the commission for the resources and expertise it brought in the fight against the mob on the waterfront.

New York could yet opt to take New Jersey to court over the state’s walkout, but has yet to do so, nor indicated if such a move might be under consideration.

New York’s Governor’s office did not respond to repeated requests for comment.

The Waterfront Commission was created in 1953, in response to the deep-rooted corruption then prevalent on the docks. It has wide jurisdiction over all the region’s piers and terminals, including the ports in Newark, Elizabeth, Bayonne, Staten Island and Brooklyn. That responsibility includes certifying those hired on the waterfront are not tied to organized crime and are otherwise fit to work in the shipping trade, a power that gives the agency full discretion over who may work on the piers.

But heavy criticism of the agency by the industry and the dockworkers union led to increasing political pressure in Trenton targeting the commission. New Jersey legislators voted in 2018 to withdraw from the commission. Proponents of the measure charged that the agency had over-regulated business at the port in an effort to justify its existence and had hurt the state’s economic interests.

The bill was approved by Gov. Chris Christie in his final week in office, even though he had once vetoed it as unconstitutional.

The commission went to federal court seeking an injunction against the state and Murphy, by then the new governor. The agency argued that New Jersey could not decide for itself that it no longer wanted to honor its obligations under a bilateral compact ratified by Congress.

A federal judge struck down the New Jersey law, ruling that the governor and the state Legislature could not just abandon the agreement. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, however, reversed the ruling, finding that the commission’s lawsuit “impinged on the State of New Jersey’s sovereignty.” In November‚ the U.S. Supreme Court decided it would not intervene in the case, declining to hear the commission’s appeal, after the office of the Solicitor General in its own brief before the court said it was New York’s fight alone to take.

“If New York believes that New Jersey has violated the agreement between the two states, it could seek leave to file an original action against New Jersey in this court,” said the Acting Solicitor General Brian H. Fletcher, who argues the government’s position for the Justice Department in cases before the Supreme Court.

With the clock ticking down to March 28, the New Jersey State Police has already become a presence in the port areas in New Jersey. Murphy in recent weeks has said that New Jersey had no further need for the commission, calling today “a completely different world” from the time when the agency was created.

Garg, in his letter to Arsenault, told the executive director that no matter what his position on New Jersey’s withdrawal, the commission will not be able to continue operating by the end of the month.

“If you continue to act in defiance of the law by not cooperating with New Jersey’s withdrawal, you will do nothing except endanger operations at the port and risk disruptions to the economy, supply chains and commerce in our region,” Garg said.