THE US DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE sent a clear message pressuring state and local authorities by filing charges against New York officials for allegedly violating federal law by refusing to cooperate with immigration enforcement.
Days earlier, the Justice Department sued Chicago and Illinois over that state’s “sanctuary” law. Now federal officials are going after New York for its “Green Light Law”—which, much like our Commonwealth’s Work and Family Mobility Act, allows undocumented immigrants to obtain driver’s licenses.
The Justice Department announced: “We sued Illinois, and New York didn’t listen, so you’re next,” warning that any other state not complying with federal law should expect to be targeted next.
The goal is clear: to intimidate local officials, manufacture a public spectacle that terrorizes immigrants, and rally political supporters who mistakenly conflate immigration enforcement with public safety.
But the Justice Department’s attacks are misplaced and unwarranted. Federal agencies already have access to criminal records, for example, through the National Crime Information Center (NCIC). Nothing in federal law requires state or local officials to share additional information—let alone actively assist with federal prerogatives like immigration enforcement. In fact, courts have consistently ruled that states and localities don’t have to carry out the federal government’s bidding. Pretending otherwise violates the separation of powers enshrined in the Constitution, especially the Tenth Amendment, which reserves unenumerated powers to the states.
Beyond the constitutional argument, there are also practical and financial reasons for keeping local and state authorities out of immigration enforcement. It would be an unfunded mandate, draining local tax dollars for federal priorities. Immigration enforcement is highly specialized, technical, and complex, increasing the risk of wrongful arrests—entanglement burdens localities and taxpayers with significant responsibility and costly liability.
Immigration enforcement should remain the responsibility of federal agencies, which are already well-trained and well-funded for the task. ICE receives $9 billion annually, while US Customs and Border Protection gets an additional $17 billion. With such massive federal investments in immigration enforcement, scarce local and state resources should remain focused on community needs. Local officials and police should stay in their lane, prioritizing community concerns.
To be sure, Massachusetts is not immune from federal attacks. Following the charges against Chicago and New York, jurisdictions that refuse to fall in line with the mass deportation agenda are being targeted through funding threats and escalating enforcement actions.
We have already seen ICE agents staking out Market Basket in Chelsea. We have watched them bring news crews along to broadcast aggressive arrests in our neighborhoods. This is an alarming and calculated attempt to instill fear and pressure local officials into retreating from lawful and longstanding immigrant-friendly policies that promote public safety.
Sanctuary policies foster trust between immigrant communities and law enforcement, ensuring that victims and witnesses of crime feel safe calling 911 and cooperating with police. Without them, fear drives people deeper into the shadows, making it harder to investigate and solve crimes. For example, if an immigrant is the only witness to a hit-and-run, why would they come forward if local police are enmeshed with ICE? If victims and witnesses are afraid to interact with police, the entire community becomes less safe.
Many cities and towns with immigrant-friendly policies take pride in these protections and actively defend them. Other localities should follow their lead to enhance public safety. Now, more than ever, we must protect and expand sanctuary policies. Cities and towns that value trust between police and communities must stand firm. Those without sanctuary protections should implement them.
We must also counter the rampant misinformation campaign and push back against false and dangerous narratives. No one is hiding immigrants from ICE. No one is protecting criminals. Sanctuary policies do not prevent federal immigration enforcement; they simply keep local law enforcement focused on public safety rather than acting as ICE agents.
Local officials, community leaders, and residents must actively challenge the fearmongering about sanctuary policies. Facts matter: sanctuary policies do not shield serious criminals, nor do they violate federal law. They create stronger and safer communities.
This is not just about New York or Illinois. It is about every community that values safety, trust, and human dignity. The fight is here, and Massachusetts must be ready.
Iván Espinoza-Madrigal is executive director of Lawyers for Civil Rights.
The post We must push back on attack on sanctuary cities appeared first on CommonWealth Beacon.