Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Safe Communities Act topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Supporters urge Massachusetts to bar local cooperation with ICE and fund immigrant legal defense
Summary
At a Joint Committee hearing on the Safe Communities Act (H.2580/S.1681), medical professionals, unions, legal aid groups and business leaders testified largely in favor of banning local collaboration with ICE, outlawing 287(g) deputizations and establishing state-funded deportation legal defense; opponents urged prioritizing deportation of serious criminals.
Lawmakers heard hours of testimony in favor of the Safe Communities Act — House Bill H.2580 and Senate Bill S.1681 — as advocates, health-care professionals, unions and small-business leaders argued that local collaboration with federal immigration enforcement is undermining public safety and public health across the Commonwealth.
Sunny Robinson, who opened the panel, told the joint committee on public safety and homeland security that the bills would "prohibit local police from doing ICE's work" and help ensure residents can "seek police and court protection without fear of immigration consequences." She added that police should be "free to do community policing, not act as ICE agents."
Medical witnesses said fear of immigration enforcement is already affecting health care access. Dr. Marybeth Miyoto of the Massachusetts Medical Society told the committee that "when fear drives immigrant patients into hiding, the consequences ripple far beyond one family," citing missed vaccines and appointments. Julia Koehler, a pediatric infectious-disease specialist, testified that ICE actions have caused "permanent and irreparable harm" to children whose parents were detained or deported.
Legal-services and advocacy groups gave concrete examples they said justify a statutory ban on local cooperation. Laura Rotolo of the ACLU and Julia Schlossman of the Jewish Alliance for Law and Social Action described instances where local agencies or court staff allegedly tipped off ICE and warned that the federal 287(g) program deputizes local personnel to carry out civil immigration arrests.
Unions and business groups also testified in support of the bill. Dave Foley of SEIU Local 509 and speakers representing 1199 SEIU and the Massachusetts AFL-CIO said immigrant workers are essential to the state economy and argued that fear of enforcement is causing workers to miss shifts and customers to avoid public spaces. Elizabeth Cruz, president of the Latin American Business Organization (LABO), described restaurants and small businesses losing staff and revenue because community members are too afraid to commute or be visible in public.
At least one witness opposed broad limits on cooperation with federal agents. John Thompson of the Massachusetts Coalition for Immigration Reform said the state should not impede efforts to deport noncitizens who commit serious crimes, arguing that the public expects enforcement of criminal law.
The committees heard repeated asks from testifiers for three core elements: (1) prohibit local police and court actors from assisting ICE in civil immigration arrests, (2) ban 287(g)-style deputization agreements, and (3) create or fund state support for legal representation in immigration proceedings. No formal committee vote on the bills is recorded in the transcript; a motion to adjourn is called near the end of the record.
What happens next: the transcript ends after a motion to adjourn. The committee did not record a final vote on H.2580 or S.1681 in the provided segment of the hearing.
