Supporters tell Mass. committee to bar local police from assisting ICE; opponents warn of public-safety trade-offs

Supporters of the Safe Communities Act urged the Joint Committee on Public Safety and Homeland Security to advance House Bill H2580 and Senate Bill S1681, saying the measures would stop local law enforcement from assisting federal immigration arrests and reduce fear that keeps immigrant residents from seeking help.

"I live on Wampanoag land, which is now called Boston," said Christina Acevedo, who testified that raids and deportations have grown worse and that people are now afraid to leave home or take their children to school. "We cannot allow ICE to do whatever they want."

The lead witnesses framed the bills as a public-safety and public-health intervention. Jonathan Goldman, executive director of the Student Clinic for Immigrant Justice, recounted a coworker’s detention and said the bill would prevent local police from being turned into ICE agents, block deputization arrangements and expand funding for legal assistance. "We cannot continue being complicit in fueling an immigration system that is driven by hate and fear," Goldman said.

Researchers and health advocates told the committee that fear of immigration enforcement is already depressing use of health and tax services. "Families may disenroll from safety-net programs, stop attending children's activities, going to the grocery store, sending their children to childcare, or attending church," said Stephanie Edinger de Cuba, executive director of Children's Health Watch, citing a rise in measured moderate or severe stress from 8% to 21% in recent comparable six-month periods.

Advocates emphasized three policy components they want the legislature to adopt: prohibit local police from helping ICE make civil immigration arrests; ban any future 287(g) deputization agreements that would deputize local officers to act for ICE; and provide state funding for legal help to fight deportation.

"When people believe any interaction with police could lead to deportation, they stop reporting crimes," Stella Coe of La Colaborativa testified. Multiple witnesses gave local examples—including accounts of unmarked vehicles, masked agents and parents too afraid to go to work—arguing that the loss of trust harms public safety for everyone.

Several organizations representing domestic-violence survivors, immigrant legal services and community groups said they have seen clients avoid police and court systems out of fear. Don Salma of the Asian Task Force Against Domestic Violence said victims sometimes forego restraining orders or medical care because they fear deportation, and that the bill would help rebuild the trust necessary for survivors to seek protection.

A number of students and community organizers also spoke: Sam Levine, a student at Emerson College, urged the committee to act on behalf of the state's international students, saying enrollment has fallen and students feel targeted; and 12-year-old Maria Eduardo said she is "scared that my parents might go to work and not return home."

Not all testimony favored the bills. Henry Barbaro, representing the Massachusetts Coalition for Immigration Reform, said H2580 and S1681 would obstruct cooperation with federal authorities and risk public safety. "The act would prohibit local law enforcement from cooperating with the federal Department of Homeland Security and specifically US Immigration and Customs Enforcement," Barbaro said, arguing that cooperation is necessary to remove criminal migrants.

Advocates and the committee discussed technical distinctions raised repeatedly during the hearing: deputization under 287(g) (which assigns federal immigration authority to local officers), contractual arrangements to rent detention bed space, and informal cooperation such as courtesy calls between local jails and ICE. Witnesses repeatedly distinguished 287(g) deputization from detention contracts and asked the committee to ban any future 287(g)-type agreements even where none currently exist at municipal police departments in the Commonwealth.

The hearing included questions from members about whether a ban could have unintended consequences, such as prompting a federal response; advocates said the prohibition would be a preventive measure to signal a firewall and protect trust in local institutions. Witnesses also said that detention near a community is associated with increased arrests and quick transfers out of state, limiting family access to detainees.

The committee did not take a vote in the transcripted portion of this hearing. Committee members thanked witnesses and urged continued partnership between advocates and law enforcement as the legislature considers policy language and next steps.