Blue Mass Group

Reality-based commentary on politics.

Comments

  1. Here’s the decision. This is not legalese, it’s not hard to understand at all. My emphasis:

    The United States Supreme Court has explained that, “[a]s a
    general rule, it is not a crime for a removable alien to remain present in the United States,” Arizona v. United States, 567 U.S. 387, 407 (2012), and that the Federal administrative process for removing someone from the country “is a civil, not criminal, matter.” Id. at 396. Immigration detainers like the one used in this case, for the purpose of that process, are therefore strictly civil in nature. The removal process is not a criminal prosecution. The detainers are not criminal detainers or criminal arrest warrants. They do not charge anyone with a crime, indicate that anyone has been charged with a crime, or ask that anyone be detained in order that he or she can be prosecuted for a crime. Detainers like this are used to detain individuals because the Federal authorities believe that they are civilly removable from the country.

    It is undisputed in this case that holding someone in circumstances like this, against his or her will, constitutes an arrest under Massachusetts law. The question before us, therefore, is whether Massachusetts court officers have the authority to arrest someone at the request of Federal immigration authorities, pursuant to a civil immigration detainer, solely because the Federal authorities believe the person is subject to civil removal. There is no Federal statute that confers on State officers the power to make this kind of an arrest. The question we must answer is whether the State law of Massachusetts authorizes such an arrest. To answer the question, we must look to the long-standing common law of the Commonwealth and to the statutes enacted by our Legislature. Having done so, we conclude that nothing in the statutes or common law of Massachusetts authorizes court officers to make a civil arrest in these circumstances.

  2. Statement (and more info) from Carol Rose, executive direction of ACLU of MA.

    This court decision sets an important precedent that we are a country that upholds the constitution and the rule of law. This victory is the first of its kind in the nation. At a time when the Trump administration is pushing aggressive and discriminatory immigration enforcement policies, Massachusetts is leading nationwide efforts by limiting how state and local law enforcement assist with federal immigration enforcement. Now more than ever, we need to send a clear message that Massachusetts stands with our immigrant neighbors, and we call on the Massachusetts Legislature to protect all of Massachusetts’ communities by passing the Safe Communities Act.

Archives