Gov. Maura Healey is right.

Massachusetts is not a sanctuary state.

It just acts like one. It’s instead a sort of haven, or heaven, for immigrants, illegal or otherwise, who have flocked here seeking refuge and welfare.

Just don’t call it a sanctuary.

“We are not a sanctuary state,” Healey said following raids by President Donald Trump’s “border czar” Tom Homan, and ICE last week in which some 370 wanted “illegal aliens” –including drug dealers, gun runners, murderers and rapists—were rounded up in Boston and across the state.

The newcomers to Massachusetts, with good reason, apparently thought otherwise.

And why not? Under Healey the state is spending billions of taxpayer dollars for the caring of the influx of immigrants from around the world who have sought sanctuary, or refuge, in the state. This includes free housing, food, medical care, cell phones, transportation, schooling and so on.

Only the other day Healey’s Labor and Workforce Development Secretary Lauren Jones told a State House committee hearing that Healey is seeking to spend $30 million to teach adult immigrants English under a program called English for Speakers of Other Languages.

The same committee is considering a companion bill creating a state funded Immigrant Legal Defense Fund that would provide lawyers for immigrants who face deportation, including those held in federal detention centers.

But Healey may have a point, shaky as it is. The state is not Boston, which with its Boston Trust Act which makes it a sanctuary city.

The act prohibits Boston cops from making arrests of illegal immigrants or holding them based on ICE immigration detainers. The cops are also prohibited from even asking people about their immigration status.

Even though the act does not apply to the state, a 2017 decision by the Supreme Judicial Court does apply by making Massachusetts a safe harbor for migrants wanted by ICE— or at least it did before Homan came to town.

The court held that the state court officers are not legally permitted to arrest or hold immigrants wanted by ICE on detainers. The ruling is interpreted to apply to all state and local law enforcement officials as well.

If that does not make Massachusetts a sanctuary state, then perhaps the loose interpretation, or outright ignoring, by the Healey administration of the state’s so-called “Right to Shelter” law, does.

This is the 1983 law (ACT 1983. Chap. 45, Section 1) that was passed to deal with the state’s homeless problem which back then was  small compared to today.

The law, signed by Gov. Michael Dukakis, limited the eligibility for welfare benefits only to “residents” of the state.

It says that “any such person who enters the Commonwealth solely for the purposes of obtaining benefits under this chapter shall not be considered a resident.”

This accounts why progressives like Healey, Boston Mayor Michelle Wu and Attorney General Andrea Campbell call immigrants “residents”’ even if they just crashed into the state and were sleeping at Logan Airport or checking in at one of Healey’s hotels.

Healey, the progressive that she is, had no choice when the alternative was to send many of the illegal immigrants arriving from around the world back to their home countries..

No progressive with a heart would dare suggest a thing, even if it could be done.

So that left President Trump, who the progressives hate, to clean up the mess that Joe Biden left behind when he opened the borders and waved millions of unvetted immigrants into the country, criminals included.

Governors like Healey, instead of attacking Trump, should be thanking him for shutting down the border, ending the immigrant invasion, and deporting the violent immigrant criminals living in the state committing horrendous crimes.

Instead, Healey, Wu and Campbell all planned to thwart the president.

Campbell even said, “Bring it on.” So, Trump did.

As Heavyweight boxer Mike Tyson once said, “Everyone has a plan until they get punched in the face.”

Veteran political reporter Peter Lucas can be reached at: peter.lucas@bostonherald.com

Originally Published: March 31, 2025 at 5:15 AM EDT

And now, even with the stock market rattled by Trump’s tariff policies and recession fears rising, Johnson remains bullish.

“There might be a rocky road a little bit as the economy resets,” said Johnson. “It’s kind of like when a company files for a reorganization after bankruptcy. … It’s tough times going through that reorganization, but they come out of it a lot stronger.”

Trump’s sledgehammer approach to the economy may be unnerving to stock investors and economists, and in Massachusetts, his push to slash federal funding to universities and hospitals could jeopardize jobs, research, and health care access. But even amid the uncertainty, not everyone is bracing for bad times. Some local CEOs and business owners believe the president’s efforts to restructure the economy and rein in government spending will pay off in the long run.

“I would say pretty universally the sentiment is that businesses are going to be better under the Trump administration,” said Robert Hale, CEO of Granite Telecommunications in Quincy, a self-described fiscally moderate Democrat who was a big supporter of former governor Charlie Baker.

Hale doesn’t agree with all of what Trump is doing, and while the Biden administration did not hurt his business, it didn’t help either. “The Trump administration’s sentiment is pro business, which, as a business person, the wind at your back instead of in your face, is a lot different,” he said.

Other business owners have felt left behind by some of Biden’s signature initiatives, such as the Inflation Reduction Act, which injected hundreds of billions of dollars into emerging industries like clean energy.

“Universities, institutions, environmental groups were getting large amounts of funding, and that’s really not how an economy grows,” said Bruce J. Mittman, CEO of Needham advertising agency Mittcom who also owns 34 radio stations across the country. “Government is there to support us and help us grow and keep the marketplaces safe and fair, and borrowing accessible to all, but it’s not there to determine winners and losers, and I think the last administration did that, to their detriment.”

During Trump’s first term, many business leaders and groups clearly distanced themselves on issues ranging from his travel ban of Muslim immigrants to his failure to condemn the Jan. 6 attack on the US Capitol. But in his second term, even as Trump has ratcheted up deportation efforts and anti-diversity rhetoric, executives from Silicon Valley to Wall Street have fallen in line, attending his inauguration and rolling back corporate diversity programs.

Still, Trump remains a polarizing figure, especially in Massachusetts where even supportive business owners often stay quiet because they fear blowback, said Paul Craney, executive director of the Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance. He thinks some business owners who backed the Biden-Harris ticket in 2020 switched to Trump in 2024.

“The Biden that was on the campaign stage against Trump four years ago — his first time where he wanted to kind of unify the country — was not the Biden people saw in the White House,” observed Craney. “I know a lot of business owners who just felt they were just basically making it the last four years. It was tough. … They didn’t feel like people in power cared about what they were trying to do.”

But one thing that has been tough to swallow is Trump’s escalating tariff war against Canada, Mexico, China, and other countries. While business owners laud Trump’s goal to bring more manufacturing back to the US, it’s difficult to plan when his strategy keeps evolving.

“If there are tariffs, we will learn to live with them — again, short-term pain through that restructuring, while businesses adapt and people adapt,” said Rod Egger, who lives in Wellesley and serves as CEO of Bariatrix Nutrition, a high-protein food manufacturer with factories in Vermont, Canada, and France. “The worst thing would be to start down a path and then reverse course in six months or 12 months.”

For now, Egger is making minor adjustments but holding off on big moves. He’s bringing about 30 jobs back to the US, shifting from his Montreal factory to Vermont. That’s because much of Bariatrix’s source material is made in the US, and manufacturing in Canada has become more expensive amid the tariff fight.

“If his tariff strategy is well communicated, and well thought out, it could be very effective for reshoring manufacturing to the US,” added Egger.

Then there are business owners like Quincy construction firm owner Jay Cashman, who think it’s way too early to say if Trump’s policies will strengthen the economy.

Cashman, who voted for Trump, said so far he likes the idea of bringing in billionaire businessman Elon Musk to disrupt government and make it more efficient. “I think the world of Elon Musk,” said Cashman. “It’s a different perspective.”

But on other matters, Cashman said he’s taking a “wait and see” approach, though he’s not too worried.

“I’m pragmatic,” he added. “America is resilient. It can take almost anything. … I think this could be OK.”

Shirley Leung is a Business columnist. She can be reached at shirley.leung@globe.com.