“We can affirm and pledge to stand with all of our residents,” said LaChapelle, whose city adopted a “welcoming” ordinance in 2021. “But the federal government is the federal government . . . That is a dark specter over people’s lives.”
Leaders of sanctuary cities in Massachusetts and other state officials largely rejected the department’s order, which they say clashes with federal laws and which experts add is unenforceable. But the Trump administration’s decision to identify and target leaders of such cities thrusts many Massachusetts municipalities into the spotlight of the immigration debate.
The directive, which was sent by acting Deputy Attorney General Emil Bove, said that states and municipalities with sanctuary policies in place could “threaten public safety” and are inconsistent with the Trump administration’s immigration initiatives. It also made clear the administration’s focus is to target undocumented immigrants accused of criminal activity.
“Indeed, it is the responsibility of the Justice Department to defend the Constitution,” wrote Bove, who prior to joining the Trump administration was part of the legal team that defended the president against two criminal cases brought by the Justice Department.
The action comes amid a flurry of others taken by the Trump administration in the first few days of the administration, including deploying more active-duty troops to the southern border, pledging to expel migrants who cross the border illegally instead of allowing them to request asylum, and suspending travel for refugees with plans to enter the United States. And on Wednesday, Congress passed a measure to deport immigrants accused of certain crimes — which the administration has underscored in its messaging and a key point Trump made on the campaign trail.
There is no formal legal definition of a sanctuary city, which has become political shorthand for communities that refuse to cooperate with federal authorities and detain someone based solely on their immigration status. In Massachusetts, State Police are barred from assisting in deportation efforts in cases where there is no criminal offense, since undocumented presence alone is not considered a crime at the state level.
Both municipal leaders and lawyers say the Trump administration’s threats at cities and towns could challenge the constitutional separation of powers and other protections, including state sovereignty, freedom of speech, and protections from unreasonable search and seizure.
Hemanth C. Gundavaram, cofounder and director of the Immigrant Justice Clinic at Northeastern University School of Law, said that regardless of the legality, the point of the Trump administration’s order could be to simply instill fear in local leaders.
“Are you doing it because you think you’ll win, or are you doing it because you’ll scare people?” said Gundavaram. “The fear can be as effective as doing something.”
Iván Espinoza-Madrigal, executive director of Boston-based Lawyers for Civil Rights, said one benefit of sanctuary policies is they allow undocumented people who are victims of crime or witnesses to cooperate with law enforcement without risking their own safety, and such policies are “completely legal.”
His group sued the first Trump administration to protect Chelsea and Lawrence, cities with large immigrant populations. The case was “administratively closed” or put on hold in May 2017.
Now, with Trump back in office, Espinoza-Madrigal said his organization is readying to “push back.”
“The federal government cannot defund or penalize immigrant-friendly communities for exercising their authority and discretion,” he said. “And if witnesses and victims of crime do not feel comfortable coming forward to help with police investigations, it makes us all unsafe.”
Even before Trump took office, Massachusetts leaders were bracing for the impact of the Trump administration on its local governments. After Boston Mayor Michelle Wu said local authorities wouldn’t help with Trump’s pledged deportations, his incoming border czar earlier in January said she should get “the hell out of the way.” Separately, billionaire Elon Musk, who helped get Trump elected, claimed that Massachusetts sanctuary cities were “protecting child rapists,” following arrests of three undocumented immigrants in Methuen and Great Barrington who faced separate criminal charges or convictions of sex offenses against children.
In one of his first executive orders on immigration, Trump on Tuesday directed his officials to evaluate whether sanctuary jurisdictions that “seek to interfere with the lawful exercise of Federal law enforcement operations” should lose federal funding.
Massachusetts has also provided emergency housing for thousands of migrant families, and Governor Maura Healey said State Police would “absolutely not” participate in mass deportations. When asked about the issue at an unrelated event Wednesday, Healey said she is “not concerned.”
“Officials here follow the law. We’re not a sanctuary state,” she said.
However, Healey did say she is concerned for communities with immigrant populations that “may be feeling a lot of fear based on some of the rhetoric.”
In Bristol County, where nearly 15 percent of residents were born in another country, Sheriff Paul Heroux said his agency works with federal immigration authorities in the limited capacity allowed by law.
His office alerts immigration authorities if it is holding someone for whom Immigration and Customs Enforcement has issued a request for detention, which allows law enforcement to hold a noncitizen for up to two days after they would otherwise be released. This week, about 10 of 665 inmates were the subject of detainers.
But his office will not hold someone for ICE who is set to be released and is not covered by an ICE detainer, because doing so would put them in conflict with a law set out by a 2017 Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court decision.
“We’re not allowed to enforce federal law,” he said, adding that they wouldn’t have the staffing to do so, anyway.
Somerville City Council President Judy Pineda Neufeld, who coauthored a resolution passed by her colleagues late last year reaffirming the city’s sanctuary status, said the directive wouldn’t change that commitment.
“I’m lucky to sit on a council where we all agree that we want to protect our immigrant families and neighbors from what’s coming,” Neufeld said.
Neufeld said that tension is already ramping up among immigrant families after Trump’s election, and that she has heard from parents of students who worry “about their schools no longer being a safe place for them and their families.”
She said she foresees the City Council, which can’t set immigration policy, will work so that immigrants in the city know what resources are available to them, including legal aid.
“I am committed personally, and I know the council is committed, to doing everything that we can to protect our immigrant families and neighbors,” Neufeld said.
Spencer Buell and Sean Cotter of the Globe staff contributed to this report.
Samantha J. Gross can be reached at samantha.gross@globe.com. Follow her @samanthajgross.
Leave a Reply