Massachusetts

Massachusetts House Democrats reject GOP-led civil immigration detainer reform

Published

6 months ago

April 29, 2025

Massachusetts House Democrats reject GOP-led civil immigration detainer reform

House Democrats resoundingly rejected a Republican-led effort Wednesday afternoon to reform a 2017 court ruling that bars law enforcement in Massachusetts from detaining people based solely on suspected civil immigration violations.

During the second day of debate on the House’s $61 billion fiscal year 2026 budget, lawmakers engaged in what was likely an early preview of the back-and-forth over proposed reforms to a Supreme Judicial Court ruling that Republicans have set their sights on this session.

Rep. Paul Frost, an Auburn Republican, unsuccessfully pushed legislators to sign off on a proposal that would have allowed local law enforcement to detain someone wanted by federal immigration authorities for up to 12 hours after their court proceedings end.

Frost said the amendment to the state budget plan was modeled after language originally filed by former Gov. Charlie Baker, a Republican, and would provide a mechanism for law enforcement in courts to detain people involved in violent crimes.

“It’s unconscionable that we simply let these violent individuals go once they’re done in court. And if (U.S. Immigrations and Customs Enforcement) does put a detainer for them, we in Massachusetts will not honor it. We will not hold them,” Frost said from the House floor. “We can address that today.”

But Rep. Priscilla Sousa, a Framingham Democrat, said allowing court officials to hold someone based on a civil immigration detainer would have a chilling effect among people who are not in the country legally.

She said her family immigrated from Brazil to the United States when she was seven years old. In their quest to obtain citizenship, Sousa said her family ended up overstaying their visa, which amounted to a civil infraction and made them undocumented.

“Our life in this country was uncertain because we lived in the shadows, and every time something like what is being proposed today was brought up, we would be less trusting of law enforcement and authorities in general. We hid at home more. We stopped interacting and investing in our community, and we stopped planning for our future,” she said.

The amendment backed by Frost, which was shot down on a 25 to 131 vote, tried to target a ruling from the Supreme Judicial Court that critics have argued provides “sanctuary” protections to undocumented immigrants in Massachusetts and impedes the work of federal immigration officers. Supporters say the ruling sets clear boundaries between state and federal officials.

Multiple Republicans have filed bills this legislative term that seek to rework the ruling. Gov. Maura Healey’s secretary of public safety and homeland security said earlier this year that the decision is a “significant issue” that needs to be addressed by lawmakers.

The court decision has become a flashpoint among conservatives after a series of high-profile arrests in state-run shelters and attempts by immigration authorities to take custody of people who entered the United States illegally.

In a 34-page decision issued in 2017, SJC justices wrote that local law enforcement do not have the power to hold someone beyond the time they would otherwise be released from court custody solely on the basis of a civil immigration detainer issued by federal authorities.

That means that local law enforcement and court officers must release people even if ICE officers have lodged a civil immigration detainer as part of deportation proceedings.

Detainers generally ask local authorities to hold someone who would otherwise be entitled to release for up to two days in order for immigration officials to arrive and take the person into their custody for removal proceedings.

Justices ruled that holding someone against their will based on a civil immigration detainer constituted an arrest under Massachusetts law.

The justices did not decide whether the arrests based on civil detainers, if they were authorized under state law, would be permissible under the U.S. Constitution or the Massachusetts Declaration of Rights.

Instead, the justices ruled that local authorities do not have the inherent authority to arrest someone based on a civil immigration detainer issued and largely left it up to lawmakers to decide whether to further clarify state law.

“The prudent course is not for this court to create, and attempt to define, some new authority for court officers to arrest that heretofore has been unrecognized and undefined. The better course is for us to defer to the Legislature to establish and carefully define that authority if the Legislature wishes that to be the law of this commonwealth,” the justices wrote in the decision.

Frost said his amendment attempted to provide that clarification.

“This amendment seeks to provide that statute, provide that mechanism,” he said. “If a violent offender is arrested, is brought to court, and is of interest to ICE, that ICE puts in a detainer for that individual, that the court can hold them up, detain them for up to 12 hours, for ICE to come and get them,” he said.

Rep. Daniel Cahill, who co-chairs the Public Safety and Homeland Security Committee, said there is already cooperation between federal immigration authorities and local law enforcement when a person is the subject of a criminal immigration detainer.

The Lynn Democrat argued that allowing court officials to hold people based on civil immigration detainers would “utilize state resources to assist federal agencies in civil deportations.”

“The law says here in Massachusetts, we are not to detain someone a moment, not 12 hours, not 12 seconds. When your case is concluded, you leave,” he said. “What the federal government wants us to do is expend resources to hold people beyond that time. That’s a constitutional problem.”

Source link

Click to comment

Massachusetts

Ranking the top 25 MIAA high school football teams in Massachusetts ahead of Week 9

Published

14 hours ago

October 30, 2025

Press Room

Ranking the top 25 MIAA high school football teams in Massachusetts ahead of Week 9

Our No. 1 stayed firmly in place. After weeks of coming close, St. John’s Prep grabbed the top spot in our poll from Catholic Memorial with all four first-place votes and a unanimous 100 points last week. The Eagles stayed firmly in place following a convincing 37-15 win at Malden Catholic last Friday night.

This is the final week of the regular season before a much-anticipated MIAA tournament, and teams across the commonwealth are staking their places in league standings and the statewide power rankings.

Kyle Grabowski (MetroWest Daily News), Jason Snow (The Patriot Ledger), Tim Whelan (Gannett New England) and Chris McDaniel (Gannett New England) will collectively rank the top teams in the state every week this season. These are the rankings heading into Week 8.

Watch MA high school football on NFHS Network

MA high school football top 25 rankings

1. St. John’s Prep- 100 points (4 first-place votes)

2. Springfield Central – 96 points

3. Xaverian – 92 points

4. Catholic Memorial – 88 points

5. King Philip – 84 points

6. Natick – 79 points

7. Methuen – 73 points

8. Central Catholic – 70 points

9. Bishop Feehan – 63 points

10. Tewksbury – 61 points

11. Barnstable – 60 points

12. Marshfield – 54 points

13. Scituate – 53 points

14. Foxborough – 50 points

15. Mansfield – 49 points

16. Andover – 39 points

17. North Attleborough – 37 points

18. Shawsheen Valley Tech – 31 points

19. Milton – 30 points

20. Winchester – 23 points

21. Bridgewater-Raynham – 14 points

22. Abington – 9 points

23. Canton – 8 points

T-24. Hingham – 7 points

T-24. Hanover – 7 points

Other receiving votes: Leominster (6), Duxbury (6), Archbishop Williams (5), Wachusett (5), Bedford (1)

Who jumped into the top 25?

Hanover (5-2) moved into the poll after a 42-21 victory over Quincy, the Hawks’ fourth straight win.

Other notable activity

The top eight remained the same as last week, but Bishop Feehan moved up three spots to #9 after a 27-21 win over a tough Franklin team. North Attleborough, meanwhile, moved down seven spots from #10 to #17 after a 24-14 defeat to Mansfield. The Hornets moved from #20 to #15 with the Hockomock League Davenport triumph.

Source link

Massachusetts

Employee with Gov. Healey’s office fired following drug arrest

Published

1 day ago

October 29, 2025

Press Room

Employee with Gov. Healey’s office fired following drug arrest

Massachusetts Gov. Maura Healey’s office confirmed Wednesday morning that one of her staffers has been fired following his arrest.

“The Governor’s Office has been made aware of the arrest of an employee, Lamar Cook,” a spokesperson for Healey said in a statement. “The conduct that occurred here is unacceptable and represents a major breach of the public trust. Mr. Cook has been terminated from his position effective immediately. This criminal investigation is ongoing, and our administration will work with law enforcement to assist them in their work.”

The state’s website says Cook served as the governor’s western Massachusetts deputy director in Springfield. He has reportedly served in that role since April of 2023.

According to the Hampden District Attorney’s Office, Cook is charged with cocaine trafficking, unlawful possession of a firearm and unlawful possession of ammunition and is expected to be arraigned in Springfield District Court on Wednesday.

Prosecutors said Cook was arrested Tuesday following an investigation conducted by state police, Homeland Security and other partner agencies. They said investigators have seized multiple parcels containing a total of 21 kilograms of suspected cocaine, including about 8 kilograms that were intercepted on Saturday during a controlled delivery operation in Springfield.

They said the controlled delivery took place at the Springfield State Office Building, where Cook worked. Investigators executed a search warrant of Cook’s former office within the office building on Monday night.

Prosecutors said the investigation that led to Cook’s arrest stemmed from two prior seizures conducted by law enforcement earlier this month. On Oct. 10, they intercepted and searched two suspicious packages at Hotel UMass in Amherst, which were found to contain approximately 13 kilograms of suspected cocaine.

“Evidence collected during that operation was consistent with the narcotics recovered during the most recent controlled delivery in Springfield,” the district attorney’s office said. “The investigation into the UMass seizure remains ongoing and may result in additional charges related to the prior shipments in Hampshire County.”

Source link

Massachusetts

“Missed jury duty” scam involving Bitcoin ATMs targets Massachusetts residents, sheriff warns

Published

2 days ago

October 28, 2025

Press Room

“Missed jury duty” scam involving Bitcoin ATMs targets Massachusetts residents, sheriff warns

Two Massachusetts women recently lost a combined $6,700 to a “missed jury duty” phone scam that utilized Bitcoin ATMs, Norfolk County Sheriff Patrick McDermott said.

According to the sheriff, there’s been an increase in calls from scammers who claim to work for local law enforcement and demand money from residents who have supposedly missed jury duty. They threaten to arrest those who don’t agree to pay.

“The Norfolk County Sheriff’s Office never makes calls like this, and neither do local police departments,” McDermott said in a statement Wednesday. “Just hang up on anyone who is demanding money and acting like they are from our office, or another law enforcement agency, threatening you with arrest or detainment for things like ‘missed jury duty’ or an ‘outstanding warrant.’”

Scammers used Bitcoin ATMs

Both of the victims came to the sheriff’s office after sending money to the scammers. One was a woman from Sharon who paid $5,250 via a Bitcoin kiosk.

“She told our officer she was there to clear up an issue about missing jury duty after transferring the money as demanded,” the sheriff said.

The woman said she saw a sign on the Bitcoin machine warning about scams, but the person on the phone told her should would be detained for 10-12 days if she didn’t pay.

Just 90 minutes later, the sheriff said a woman from Dedham came into the office to report that she paid a $1,450 “bond” through a Roslindale Bitcoin kiosk. The scammer reportedly sent her a “fraudulent court document to back up his claims,” the sheriff said, and threatened that she’d be arrested and detained for 72 hours unless she paid immediately.

Scam warnings

The city of Gloucester recently banned Bitcoin ATMs, saying they’re concerned the machines could be used by scammers to prey on elderly victims. And in Waltham this summer, a police officer stopped an elderly man from sending $12,000 to scammers via a Bitcoin machine.

In August, the Federal Trade Commission warned that scammers pretending to be police are calling up Americans and directing them to fake websites to pay a fine for missing jury duty.

“It might ask you to pay up to $10,000 in fines on the site, or send you to a “government kiosk” (no such thing) to pay by cryptocurrency,” the FTC said. “But every bit of this is a scam.”

Source link