The Center for Immigration Studies reports that as of April 19, eight Massachusetts towns—including nearby Concord—are considered “sanctuary” jurisdictions. This term refers to states, cities, or towns that limit their cooperation with the federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agency to protect from deportation immigrants for whom prosecutorial discretion is warranted. A bill first introduced seven years ago by Harvard’s state Sen. Jamie Eldridge, and now on the docket again, would ensure that immigrants are protected from potential miscarriages of justice by federal officials statewide.
The bill, known as the Safe Communities Act (S.1401 and H.3573), bars law enforcement officers from questioning individuals about their immigration status, unless required by law, and requires written consent for an interview. It also prevents police, court officers, and jail personnel from notifying ICE of an individual’s impending release unless the person is completing a criminal sentence. Without this measure, ICE officials have the ability to take individuals into custody before their cases are fully adjudicated in-state, thereby denying due process. Lastly, the act ends 287(g) agreements, which allow state and county law enforcement officials to be trained as ICE agents using taxpayer dollars and subsequently to carry out the duties of federal agents.
Currently, Massachusetts holds four 287(g) agreements: with the State Department of Corrections, Bristol County, Barnstable County, and Plymouth County. They are the only such agreements in place in all of New England. These partnerships have been renewed despite a Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruling in 2017 that deemed it illegal to hold a person in custody based solely on a request from ICE. Because those officials trained under the 287(g) agreements now operate as federal agents, they claim the SJC ruling does not apply to them.
A major consequence of current policy has been fear of police by immigrant communities. Fearing deportation, undocumented residents are far less likely to call the police if they are victims of a crime, as demonstrated in a FiveThirtyEight data analysis of crime reporting in three major U.S. cities. Immigrants are also less likely to report wage theft by their employers, which the UMass Amherst Labor Center has described as an “epidemic” in the construction industry in Massachusetts.
Nearby, anecdotal evidence points to a serious lack of trust between immigrants and law enforcement. In August, Framingham police in search of a suspect began stopping every vehicle passing through the intersection of Routes 9 and 126, prompting immigrants to start “praying, sending messages, [and] emails [to their loved ones],” assuming that the police were working with ICE, reported the Milford Daily News.
In a written statement to the Press, Sen. Eldridge, through his communications director, expressed pride in his lead sponsorship of this “civil rights legislation.” “Under the Trump administration, ICE agents are targeting hardworking immigrants across Massachusetts for deportation,” he said. “The Safe Communities Act would make sure that state and local law enforcement, sheriffs, and taxpayer dollars are not used to collaborate with ICE agents, and trust is restored between police and immigrant communities.” Passage of the bill this session—it is currently in its fourth—is, he said, “critical.”
State Rep. Jen Benson, a cosponsor of the House bill, described the act in a statement from her communications director as “humane, smart legislation” and noted that it is endorsed by both the American Civil Liberties Union and the Massachusetts Chiefs of Police Association. “Immigration is mostly a federal issue, but there are actions we can take at the state level to promote better policies,” she said. The act would, she stated, “safeguard basic due process rights of detained immigrants.” Benson echoed Eldridge’s concern for the erosion of trust between communities and law enforcement, calling the 287(g) partnerships “costly to police departments and damag[ing] [to] community policing efforts.”
In 2018, the State Senate passed a previous version of the act as an amendment to its state budget. However, with a veto promised by Gov. Charlie Baker, the House chose to omit the amendment. Baker and other opponents of the bill say that cities and towns should reserve the right to cooperate with ICE if they so choose. The act was put up for debate at a hearing with the Committee on Public Safety and Homeland Security on Dec. 2. Supporters have until July 31, 2020, to get it to the governor’s desk.
