Controversial House immigration bill could be dead
House lawmakers have tabled for the “foreseeable future” a controversial immigration bill that would bar state money from funding federal immigration programs after some feared it could be viewed as a “sanctuary state” bill.
Speaker of the House Robert A. DeLeo said the bill will stay on the shelf until lawmakers can address its language, as filed by state Rep. Antonio Cabral.
“That’s nothing I see coming up, at least in the foreseeable future,” DeLeo said of the bill, which faced questions from some Democratic lawmakers last month when it was initially moving toward a vote.
“I think there were some ... (who) felt it could be interpreted as a sanctuary city, town, state bill,” DeLeo said. “I don’t know if those who proposed the bill saw it that way. That’s the sort of language situation that we’re taking a look at.”
The bill specifically prohibits state funds from going toward federal immigration agreements, and would ultimately shut down so-called 287(g) agreements, under which Department of Correction officials notify Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents when convicted criminals slated for deportation are due for release.
The Herald reported yesterday that state prison officials have released 148 immigrants to federal officials since last year, including child rapists, armed robbers and dozens of drug traffickers. Another 172 current inmates who are slated for eventual release also face deportation orders.
Overall, 1,458 immigrants have been released to ICE before they could hit the streets since the agreement started in 2007 under then-Gov. Deval Patrick, according to state data.
Gov. Charlie Baker blasted the legislation, telling the Herald it was a “step backwards in public safety” while defending the program.
Where all the Democrats vying to unseat him stand, however, is unclear.
A spokesman for Newton Mayor Setti Warren did not make him available for comment yesterday. The campaign for Jay Gonzalez released a statement to the Herald repeating his support of another bill, the Safe Communities Act, but his aides did not address his stance on Cabral’s bill directly. Only Bob Massie, an environmental activist who declared his candidacy, addressed it head on, saying he supports it, even though he considers it an “imperfect method” to addressing fears over President Donald Trump’s push for stricter immigration enforcement.
“When ICE was pursuing its responsibilities within the correct and legal guidelines back in 2007, these 287(g) agreements seemed to make more sense,” Massie said. “But when you have the president looking for any loophole to kick out any people he can ... then those same agreements that might have been legitimate 10 years ago are at risk to being abused.”