New York City’s controversial chokehold ban — dubbed the “diaphragm law”— is back on the books in the Big Apple after a new appeals court ruling Thursday.

The law, passed by the City Council in the wake of George Floyd’s murder, took the state’s ban on police chokehold’s a step farther, making it possible for cops to be charged with a misdemeanor crime if they do anything during an arrest that restricts a person’s breathing “in any way.”

The law was struck down by Supreme Court Justice Laurence Love as “unconstitutionally vague” last June on a legal challenge from the police unions.

The state’s Supreme Court Appellate Division fully rejected that argument in a ruling Thursday morning, saying the lower court “should not have found the diaphragm compression ban to be unconstitutionally vague.”

“The diaphragm compression ban is sufficiently definite to give notice of the prohibited conduct and does not lack objective standards or create the potential for arbitrary or discriminatory enforcement,” the court’s First Judicial Department wrote.

“A trained police officer will be able to tell when the pressure he is exerting on a person’s chest or back, in the vicinity of the diaphragm, is making it hard for the person to breathe, just as a driver should be able to tell when the amount of alcohol he consumed is making it unsafe for him or her to drive (a proxy for high blood alcohol content) and a layperson should be able to tell when he or she is being too loud (a proxy for ability to hear the noise from a specified distance).”

The law has been a hot-button issue between city lawmakers and the police unions, which have fought the law in court, claiming — along with police brass — it was vague and could prevent cops from doing their jobs.

The law even prompted other law enforcement agencies who sometimes wade into the Big Apple during a police investigation to not make arrests once they cross into the city.

Mayor Eric Adams was critical of the law on the campaign trail, calling it “not realistic.”

However, once he took office, his Law Department appealed the lower court’s ruling eight months after it came down.

A spokesman for Adams said that the mayor stands by his prior comments.

“The law as currently written will constrain police officers from being able to apprehend dangerous individuals,” Jonah Allon said. 

Police Benevolent Association President Pat Lynch said in response to the ruling his union was “reviewing our legal options.”

“However, our city leaders need to realize that this ruling deals a direct blow to our fight against the violence that is tearing our city apart. This ill-conceived law makes it virtually impossible for police officers to safely and legally take violent criminals into custody — the very job that New Yorkers are urgently asking us to do,” he added.

The ruling was also blasted by Staten Island District Attorney Michel McMahon who tweeted that he was “Angry & disappointed” about the ruling. 

“We expect & need police to respond to life + death situations, & this bill makes their job harder + in turn our city less safe,” he wrote. 

Additional reporting by Bernadette Hogan