Massachusetts Senate Approves New Protections for Immigrants Amid Federal Enforcement

BY KATIE CASTELLANI & COLIN A. YOUNG

Amid widespread fear across the country over federal immigration law enforcement activities, legislation aimed at providing new protections for immigrants in Massachusetts got one step closer to Gov. Maura Healey’s desk on Thursday.

The Senate voted 37-3 to pass a Ways and Means redraft (S 3072) of legislation (H 5316) the House approved 134-21 in March. Senators filed 76 amendments, most of which were withdrawn or rejected over eight hours. 

“Massachusetts is stronger because of the immigrants who call our great state home, people who work hard, raise families and contribute to our communities every single day,” Senate President Karen Spilka said during a press conference. “People deserve to live with dignity, safety and peace of mind to do their everyday life.” 

Immigrant advocates, who have been pushing the bill, could be heard singing throughout the State House while senators debated. Several erupted in cheers from the Senate gallery when the vote on the bill was announced. Republicans raised concerns about the bill’s constitutionality.

When the bill surfaced, Minority Leader Bruce Tarr offered an order that the to seek a Supreme Judicial Court opinion on the constitutionality of three provisions in the bill. Tarr earned support to get a vote on suspending rules to allow the Senate to take up his order. It failed on a 5-35 vote and the order was sidelined. Tarr voted in favor of the bill later in the day and a staff member said he had no comment. 

President Donald Trump’s administration has ramped up immigration enforcement actions. In doing so, Trump is pursuing campaign promises he made to increase deportations as part of an effort to reduce crime and crack down on illegal immigration. Protests have unfolded across the country in response to the increasingly violent actions by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents and their targeting of some residents.

“It’s a pretty broad question, first of all,” Spilka said in response to a reporter’s question on whether all ICE arrests are unjustified in Massachusetts. “And again, Trump came in saying he was only going to arrest those with proven criminal records. Clearly, that’s not what has happened.”

More than 75% of immigrants detained in Massachusetts have no criminal record, said Maroni Minter, political director at the Massachusetts Immigrant & Refugee Advocacy Coalition. 

When Healey unveiled her proposal in January, Spilka pledged swift action on “measures that we feel are necessary to defend the safety, dignity, and rights of our residents.” She declared in January that “the Senate will do everything in its power to return these proposals to your desk for your signature – soon.”

But the House and Senate have a lot of differences to hash out before a final version reaches Healey’s desk.

The most glaring distinction that House and Senate negotiators will have to resolve is where warrant requirements for civil arrests will apply. The House bill would specifically protect courthouses only. It also includes language granting the governor authority to ban or limit civil immigration enforcement in nonpublic areas of “any state entity.” The Senate adopted language to create four additional categories of protected spaces, with detailed policy, notice, and parent-notification requirements for schools and child care programs.

The Senate bill creates a right of action letting individuals sue under state law for constitutional deprivations; the House did not. The House bill spelled out obligations for jails and prisons around legal access, interpreter services, transfer notification, and a public locator line; the Senate did not. The House also included a requirement that courts consider a defendant’s “likelihood of imminent deportation” when setting bail; the Senate did not.

The Senate-approved bill includes tighter restrictions around providing non-public personal information and other information to federal immigration authorities. 

It also does not preserve the narrow pathway for criminal-purpose 287(g) agreements that the House bill left open. Representatives passed a bill that includes a way for law enforcement agencies to petition the state for authorization to enter into a time-limited cooperation agreement with ICE that could not be automatically renewed. The Senate prohibits all new, expanded or renewed 287(g) agreements but, like the House, allows the state Department of Correction to maintain its existing agreement.

Senators added several new policies the House did not. These include banning out-of-state military personnel from entering the state without the governor’s approval as well as establishing a state-level civil violation to break certain federal laws surrounding polling place protections. 

Under new rules adopted this session, the House and Senate will have until the first week of January to pass a compromise. Old rules would have pressured negotiators to get something to the governor’s desk by July 31.