By Bob Katzen
Senate 37-3, approved its own version of the PROTECT Act that supporters said would establish statewide standards governing interactions between state and local law enforcement and federal immigration enforcement. The House has already approved its own version of the measure and a House-Senate conference committee will eventually hammer out a compromise version.
Provisions include prohibiting state and local law enforcement from stopping, questioning or targeting individuals based solely on immigration or citizenship status; prohibiting warrantless civil immigration arrests in sensitive locations such as schools, childcare centers, hospitals, houses of worship and state courthouses; strengthening protections for immigrants who are victims or witnesses of crimes, including trafficking victims and expediting visa processes so they can safely assist law enforcement and prosecutors; blocking unauthorized deployment of other states’ National Guards into Massachusetts; and allowing parents facing detention or deportation to pre-arrange guardianship for their children.
“The PROTECT Act is comprehensive legislation that defends the values enshrined in the Massachusetts Constitution, particularly equal protection under the law for all,” said Sen. Cindy Friedman (D-Arlington). “This bill will increase protections for our residents, spells out plainly and clearly that Massachusetts law enforcement officers are not responsible for aiding civil immigration enforcement, and importantly, stands up for our immigrant community in the face of an adversarial federal government.”
“My parents came to Lawrence with very little and gave everything they had to this community,” said Sen. Pavel Payano (D-Lawrence). “That same story is being lived by immigrant families across our Gateway Cities today. They are our neighbors, our teachers, our health care workers, our small business owners. The people who keep Massachusetts moving.”
Payano continued, “The PROTECT Act makes clear that no matter what happens in Washington, Massachusetts will not allow our institutions or our communities to be weaponized against the people who helped build them. Today we made clear whose side we are on. This is an important step forward, but the fight to protect dignity and basic humanity is far from over.”
Sen. Adam Gomez (D-Springfield) said, “When the Federal government fails to protect our communities, and starts attacking our immigrant neighbors, we stand up in Massachusetts for what is just and right. To those immigrant families forced now to live in fear we tell them: We are standing with you. You are not alone. Fear will not win. We will keep leading and protecting our neighbors from any kind of abuse. Hate doesn’t have a place in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.”
Sen. Ryan Fattman (R-Sutton) who voted against the bill, said that while he supports the underlying premise of the legislation, he voted “No” because he vehemently objects to a provision that prohibits local and state law enforcement from working with federal law enforcement to apprehend dangerous felons accused of committing violent crimes.
The only two other senators who voted against the bill, Sens. Peter Durant (R-Spencer) and Kelly Dooner (R-Taunton), did not respond to repeated requests from Beacon Hill Roll Call asking them why they voted against the bill, nor did they speak out against the bill during Senate debate on it.
(A “Yes” vote is for the bill. A “No” vote is against it.)
Sen. Patricia Jehlen Yes