Staff writer: Gwen Pichette
Email: gpichette@umassd.edu
(Image via msn.com)
When Massachusetts Governor Maura Healey was asked in a news segment if she would assist in President-elect Donald Trump’s mass deportation plan, she simply replied, “No, absolutely not.”
The clip has since gone viral on social media, with intense backlash from Republicans, along with immense support from Democrats.
This controversial answer comes following President-elect Donald Trump’s promises to implement the largest mass deportation of undocumented immigrants in U.S. history.
The U.S. has never deported more than half of a million immigrants a year, yet Trump is staunch in his vow to deport 13 million.
This effort will be headed by Trump’s newly appointed “border czar,” Thomas Homon, a former director of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement who infamously oversaw the zero-tolerance immigration enforcement policy.
A policy that detained adults who crossed the U.S. border illegally and separated them from their children. The number of children separated from their parents under this policy is estimated to be nearly 4,000.
Reunifications of families with their children were also reportedly extremely difficult and, in some cases, impossible, generating immense backlash and accusations of this policy being inhumane.
When asked in a 60 Minutes interview back in October if there was any way to carry out mass deportation without separating families, Homon responded, “Of course there is. Families can be deported together.”
Safe to say, Homon does not appear to be fond of push-back from states on the issue of immigration.
Hormon even alluded to Healey’s controversial comment in a Fox News interview, promising federal reinforcements if necessary: “If you don’t want to work with us, then get the hell out all the way, we’re going to do it,” Homan said. “What it means is, rather than send 100 people to Boston, we’re going to send 200 agents to Boston. We’re going to get the job done.”
Days after her initial comment, Healey later expanded: “It is up to the new Trump administration and federal authorities to figure out how they’re going to implement and what they’re going to implement when it comes to immigration enforcement. We’ve got to see what President-elect Trump actually does,” the governor added, “because it’s one thing to make a bunch of promises and statements during … a campaign, it’s another thing to actually operationalize and implement.”
Healey claims that she will support other ways of resistance against such policies, including her own executive powers and state legislation, “to hold the line on democracy and the rule of the law.”
This issue has only further highlighted the ever-growing tensions between the state and federal governments regarding the law.
For instance, another hotly contested issue that deals with state versus federal divisions, right up there with immigration, is the issue of abortion.
Take the state of Idaho, for example.
Idaho had maintained that it allowed for termination of pregnancy in the case of a life-threatening emergency that was medically necessary. Yet after the monumental 2022 overturning of Roe V. Wade, this changed.
The state of Idaho then enacted a law that made it a felony for doctors to terminate a pregnancy to save the life of the mother.
Lawyer Lindsey Harrison further elaborated on this state/federal conflict in an interview: “For physicians at St. Luke’s hospitals … there’s a conflict between what federal law says they should do, which would allow them to save the patient’s organs … and what Idaho allows them to do, which is nothing, until the patient’s life is at risk,” Harrison says.
When the federal government and the state government are in contention, this leaves people in a sense of uncertainty about how to proceed–which is very similar to the spot where it leaves governments with conflicting beliefs on immigration policies.
Yet, there is some clarity regarding what state troopers are authorized to do regarding federal immigration.
A Massachusetts State Police policy, last updated in December 2023, stated that the agency was not responsible for investigating violations of federal immigration laws and that questioning individuals about their immigration status with the intention of aiding in their deportation was not appropriate.
Despite policies of what is or isn’t permitted, the country remains divided.
Some celebrate, like Karoline Leavitt, a Trump campaign spokesperson, who vows that President-elect Trump will restore effective immigration policies and “…marshal every federal and state power necessary to institute the largest deportation operation of illegal criminals, drug dealers, and human traffickers in human history.”
Others remain increasingly worried, considering the bill is estimated to cost a whopping $315 billion.
Maura Healey expresses her concern for the undocumented immigrants and the economic stress this could cause the country:
“We have students here, we have families here, some who have been here for decades who may not be here lawfully; they’re working. I mean, I don’t know what the president is going to do or the impact of that on the economy.”
I’m from Mass. the majority of people I’ve talked to all want these illegal immigrants deported. It’s causing a huge financial strain. Mayor Wu is trying to raise property taxes to pay for the illegals.. Many people in the city also want these illegals deported. It seems our elected officials are doing want they want and not what the people want.
The Trump administration has said time and time again. They are coming to extract the migrants with violent and criminal backgrounds first and foremost. If these elected officials like Healy and Wo insist on protecting these types of dangers to our communities. Then they should no longer hold these leadership positions.
Remember, Healy and Wu are not our LEADERS, as they keep reminding us. They are fortunate to hold these positions due to the election process.
They were elected to speak FOR the people of MA & Boston. It appears that they have their own agenda and are ignoring the majority opinion. We get to vote them out in the next election and put folks in their seats who will speak for the majority.