This article reflects Massachusetts law and enforcement conditions as of June 2026. The current operative state-level protection is Executive Order 650, signed by Gov. Maura Healey on January 29, 2026. EO 650 prohibits the state from entering into new 287(g) agreements except for documented public safety needs, bans ICE civil arrests in non-public areas of state facilities, and prohibits the use of state property as ICE enforcement staging areas. The PROTECT Act (HD.5608 / S.3072, formally An Act Promoting Rule of Law, Oversight, Trust and Equal Constitutional Treatment) passed the Massachusetts House 134-21 on March 25, 2026, and passed the Massachusetts Senate 37-3 on May 7, 2026. The two versions differ and as of June 2026, the bill was in a conference committee to reconcile the differences before going to Gov. Healey for signature. Gov. Healey has expressed support for the legislation. The PROTECT Act is not yet law. Verify its current status before relying on its provisions, using the MIRA Coalition at miracoalition.org or the ACLU of Massachusetts at aclum.org. Massachusetts also has a longstanding policy under the 2017 Lunn v. Commonwealth decision restricting civil immigration detainer holds without judicial authorization. The Work and Family Mobility Act (effective July 1, 2023) allows all Massachusetts residents to obtain a standard driver's license regardless of immigration status; the RMV does not share information with immigration authorities.
Where Massachusetts Stands
Massachusetts sits firmly in the protective tier of this 50-state series, and it has been moving deeper into that position throughout 2025 and 2026. The Commonwealth entered the Trump era with an existing judicial precedent limiting civil immigration detainer holds, a governor who wasted no time issuing a protective executive order, a legislature that passed a sweeping protective bill through both chambers by overwhelming margins, and a long history of local non-cooperation policies in Boston, Cambridge, Somerville, and other municipalities.
The editorial distinctiveness of Massachusetts in this series is the PROTECT Act itself: the most comprehensive state-level legislative response to federal immigration enforcement of any state in the country as of mid-2026, described by Gov. Healey as such when she filed related legislation in January 2026. The PROTECT Act would ban new 287(g) agreements statewide, bar law enforcement from inquiring about immigration status, prohibit ICE civil arrests at sensitive locations including courthouses, schools, hospitals, places of worship, and childcare facilities, make ICE agents civilly liable for civil rights violations, block unauthorized deployment of out-of-state National Guard into Massachusetts, and allow parents facing deportation to pre-arrange guardianship for their children. As of June 2026, the bill was in conference committee between the House and Senate versions.
Massachusetts is also distinctive for the density of its immigrant communities and the economic stakes of enforcement. Greater Boston, the North Shore (Lawrence, Haverhill, Salem), the South Shore, the Cape and Islands, and the Pioneer Valley all have significant immigrant populations woven into the healthcare, construction, hospitality, and domestic services sectors. ICE conducted enforcement operations in Massachusetts throughout 2025 and 2026, including workplace raids (the New Bedford Market Basket suspension of 47 employees after an ICE inspection in July 2025 being a notable example) and street enforcement in multiple cities.
Part 1: What Federal Immigration Law Actually Says
Immigration enforcement is exclusively a federal function under the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). The federal government controls who may enter, remain in, and be removed from the United States. State and local governments cannot create their own immigration enforcement schemes that conflict with the INA.
The Tenth Amendment anti-commandeering doctrine, established in Printz v. United States (1997), means the federal government cannot compel state and local agencies to enforce federal immigration law. Massachusetts's protective approach, from the executive order to the pending PROTECT Act, rests on this foundation: the state is declining to have its own law enforcement participate in civil immigration enforcement activities, which is a constitutionally protected choice.
Section 287(g) of the INA allows local agencies to voluntarily enter into agreements with ICE to take on immigration enforcement functions. EO 650 restricts the state from entering new 287(g) agreements except for public safety needs. The PROTECT Act, if enacted, would codify a broader ban on new 287(g) agreements into statute, making it harder to reverse through future executive action.
ICE detainers, Form I-247, are administrative requests, not court orders. They ask local jails to hold someone beyond their release date so ICE can take custody. In 2017, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court in Lunn v. Commonwealth held that Massachusetts law does not authorize holding a person on a civil immigration detainer alone, absent independent legal authority. This was one of the most significant state court decisions on detainers in the country, and it predates the current federal enforcement surge. Massachusetts jails generally do not honor civil immigration detainers without judicial authorization under this precedent.
Arizona v. United States (2012) remains the controlling federal preemption precedent. The Court held that states cannot create their own immigration enforcement systems that conflict with federal law. Massachusetts's framework, restricting state cooperation rather than creating parallel state enforcement, is designed within that constraint. Whether the PROTECT Act's specific provisions on ICE accountability, sensitive locations, and information sharing raise preemption questions is a question the courts may eventually address.
Part 2: Massachusetts State Law and Policy
Lunn v. Commonwealth (2017) - The Detainer Foundation
The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court's 2017 ruling in Lunn v. Commonwealth is the legal foundation for Massachusetts's detainer policy. The Court held that neither state statutes nor common law authorized Massachusetts law enforcement to detain someone solely on the basis of a federal civil immigration detainer. A civil detainer is not a criminal warrant; it does not independently authorize an arrest under Massachusetts law. Jails are not required to comply with civil immigration detainer requests, and officers who hold someone based solely on such a request without independent legal authority expose their agency to civil liability.
This decision predates EO 650 and the PROTECT Act by years. It means that Massachusetts families have had meaningful detainer protection since 2017, well before the current legislative response. The PROTECT Act would codify and strengthen the Lunn framework in statute, adding clarity and additional enforcement mechanisms.
Executive Order 650 - January 29, 2026 (In Effect)
Gov. Healey issued Executive Order 650, titled Protecting Access to Essential Services and Keeping Massachusetts Communities Safe, on January 29, 2026, the same day she filed related legislation. EO 650 is fully in effect and is the operative executive protection pending the PROTECT Act's enactment.
EO 650 does three things. First, it prohibits the state from entering into new 287(g) agreements with ICE unless there is a documented public safety need. This is not an absolute ban but a strong presumption against new agreements. Second, it prohibits ICE from making civil arrests in non-public areas of state facilities. This means that state-owned buildings, including state offices, courthouses, and state hospitals, are protected from civil immigration arrests in their non-public areas. Third, it prohibits the use of state property as ICE enforcement staging locations. ICE cannot use state-owned land, parking lots, or facilities as bases of operation for enforcement actions.
Gov. Healey simultaneously filed legislation to codify these protections and go further, including a proposal to restore the sensitive locations protections that the Trump administration had rescinded on January 20, 2025 (the longstanding policy barring enforcement actions at schools, hospitals, houses of worship, and courts). That legislation was incorporated into the PROTECT Act process.
The Work and Family Mobility Act (Effective July 1, 2023)
Massachusetts enacted the Work and Family Mobility Act in 2022, with implementation beginning July 1, 2023. The law allows all Massachusetts residents, regardless of immigration status, to obtain a standard Class D or Class M driver's license from the Registry of Motor Vehicles. The license looks identical to any other Massachusetts license: there is no marking or code identifying the holder's immigration status. The RMV's stated policy is not to share information with immigration authorities.
This is practically significant for immigrant families in Massachusetts. A standard driver's license means that a traffic stop does not immediately reveal immigration status through the type of license the driver carries, unlike states like Louisiana that require restriction codes on noncitizen licenses. It also means lawfully driving to work, school, and medical appointments without risk of license-related enforcement, and that cars can be insured under normal policies.
Boston, Cambridge, and Municipal Non-Cooperation Policies
Massachusetts has some of the oldest and most established local non-cooperation policies in the country. Boston has had a policy limiting police cooperation with ICE civil enforcement for years. Cambridge has longstanding sanctuary policies. Somerville has policies limiting cooperation with federal immigration enforcement. ICE reported in 2025 that Boston Police Department ignored 167 ICE detainer requests in 2025 alone. These local policies operate independently of state law and have been a consistent feature of enforcement in Massachusetts's urban core.
The PROTECT Act, when enacted, would create a statewide statutory baseline that applies uniformly across all cities and towns, replacing the patchwork of local policies with a consistent state standard. Until then, the strength of local protection varies by municipality.
The PROTECT Act - In Conference Committee as of June 2026 (Not Yet Law)
The PROTECT Act is the most watched piece of state immigration legislation in the country as of mid-2026. The House passed its version 134-21 on March 25, 2026. The Senate passed its version 37-3 on May 7, 2026. The two versions differ in scope and specifics, and the bill was sent to a conference committee to reconcile the differences. As of June 2026, the conference committee had not yet reported out a final version for signature. Gov. Healey has expressed support for the legislation.
The core provisions that both chambers agreed on include: a ban on new 287(g) agreements across all state and local law enforcement (the Senate version is broader, the House version has narrower exceptions); a prohibition on law enforcement asking about immigration status during stops, searches, or arrests; limits on sharing nonpublic information and advance release notifications with ICE; and protections against civil immigration enforcement at sensitive locations including schools, hospitals, courthouses, places of worship, and childcare facilities.
The Senate version, which passed 37-3, goes further in several respects. It adds provisions making ICE agents civilly liable under state law for civil rights violations during enforcement actions in Massachusetts. It includes a provision blocking the unauthorized deployment of out-of-state National Guard units into Massachusetts without the governor's approval. It adds protections allowing parents facing detention or deportation to pre-arrange legal guardianship for their children. It strengthens provisions around information sharing and closes loopholes that would allow indirect cooperation with ICE. The conference committee's job is to produce a final version from these two bills, and the stronger provisions may or may not survive.
Families should verify the PROTECT Act's current status before relying on any of its specific provisions. The most current information is available from the MIRA Coalition at miracoalition.org and the ACLU of Massachusetts at aclum.org.
The New Bedford Market Basket and Workplace Enforcement
In July 2025, ICE initiated an inspection at the Market Basket supermarket in New Bedford, Massachusetts. The employer suspended 47 workers as a result. This enforcement action was notable because it did not involve a traditional workplace raid with dramatic arrests: ICE's I-9 audit and employer inspection process produced the same outcome - dozens of workers losing their jobs - through administrative means rather than visible enforcement operations. Families in Massachusetts should understand that workplace enforcement takes multiple forms, including I-9 audits that do not involve agents arriving at a worksite.
Part 3: How State and Federal Law Interact in Massachusetts
Massachusetts has constructed a layered protective framework built on judicial precedent (Lunn v. Commonwealth), executive authority (EO 650), longstanding municipal policies, and pending legislation (the PROTECT Act). The combination makes Massachusetts one of the least cooperative states in the country for federal civil immigration enforcement.
The Tenth Amendment anti-commandeering doctrine protects Massachusetts's core choices. The state cannot be compelled to honor ICE detainers (Lunn), participate in 287(g) programs (EO 650), or direct its law enforcement to conduct immigration enforcement. These are protections the federal government cannot override by executive order.
What the state cannot do is prevent ICE from operating independently in Massachusetts. Federal agents can conduct enforcement operations, make arrests in public spaces, enter private spaces with judicial warrants, and run I-9 audits of employers, entirely without Massachusetts state law enforcement involvement. The protective framework limits what Massachusetts agencies do, not what federal agencies do.
The Lunn detainer ruling is the most durable of the protections because it is grounded in the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court's interpretation of state law. It does not depend on a governor's executive order or a legislative majority. It will remain in effect regardless of who governs in Beacon Hill, unless the legislature explicitly changes state law to authorize detainer holds.
The PROTECT Act, when enacted, would convert the most important protections from executive policy (which can be changed by a future governor) to statute (which requires a legislative majority to change). That is the central argument advocates have made for why legislation matters beyond what EO 650 already does.
Arizona v. United States (2012) is the outer constitutional framework. Massachusetts's laws restrict state cooperation rather than creating state enforcement schemes. Whether the PROTECT Act's sensitive locations provisions, ICE civil liability provisions, and information sharing restrictions raise preemption or intergovernmental immunity questions is a live legal question the courts have not definitively resolved for Massachusetts-style protective statutes.
Part 4: What This Means for Families on the Ground
For immigrant families in Massachusetts, the current protective posture is meaningful but imperfect. The Lunn ruling means Massachusetts jails generally will not hold you solely on a civil ICE detainer. EO 650 means state facilities cannot be used as ICE staging areas and new 287(g) agreements face a high bar. Boston, Cambridge, Somerville, and many other cities have longstanding non-cooperation policies. And the Work and Family Mobility Act means your driver's license looks like everyone else's.
ICE continues to operate in Massachusetts. Federal agents conduct enforcement in Greater Boston, the Gateway Cities (Lawrence, Lowell, Brockton, New Bedford, Worcester), and the Cape and Islands. The July 2025 Market Basket suspension showed that workplace enforcement does not always look like the dramatic scenes families fear: an I-9 audit can cost 47 people their jobs without a single agent arriving in force. Community members should understand that enforcement takes many forms.
Lawrence, Lowell, New Bedford, and other Gateway Cities have high concentrations of immigrant families and have been locations of active federal enforcement in 2025-2026. Boston Police Department's longstanding non-cooperation posture provides meaningful local protection in the city, but ICE can and does operate in Boston without BPD support. Being in Boston does not mean being invisible to federal enforcement.
The PROTECT Act's passage will matter significantly for families in cities and towns that do not currently have strong local non-cooperation policies. Municipalities outside the major urban centers are not necessarily covered by local sanctuary policies, and state law is what would provide a uniform floor of protection in those communities. Until the PROTECT Act is signed and takes effect, families in smaller Massachusetts communities should not assume they have the same protections as those in Boston or Cambridge.
The sensitive locations protections are particularly important for immigrant families with children. Since the Trump administration rescinded the federal sensitive locations policy on January 20, 2025, schools, hospitals, courthouses, and houses of worship are no longer off-limits to ICE under federal policy. EO 650 provides some state-level protection for state-owned facilities. If the PROTECT Act passes as the Senate envisions, schools, hospitals, courthouses, and places of worship statewide would require judicial warrants for ICE to conduct civil enforcement. Until then, those locations are protected in state facilities under EO 650 but not universally under Massachusetts law.
Part 5: What You Can Actually Do
If ICE Comes to Your Home
Do not open the door. ICE cannot legally enter a home without a judicial warrant signed by a judge. An ICE administrative warrant, Form I-200 (Warrant for Arrest of Alien) or Form I-205 (Warrant of Removal/Deportation), is signed by an immigration officer, not a judge, and does not give ICE the right to enter your home. Ask through the closed door whether the warrant is signed by a judge. If it is not, you may say clearly that you do not consent to entry.
You have the right to remain silent. You are not required to answer questions about your birthplace, how you entered the country, or your immigration status. This right applies regardless of immigration status. Say: 'I am exercising my right to remain silent. I want to speak with a lawyer.'
Do not sign anything without speaking with an immigration attorney. Signing voluntary departure forms or other removal documents can permanently waive important legal rights.
If stopped in public, stay calm. Do not run. Do not physically resist. State that you are exercising your right to remain silent and want a lawyer. Ask if you are free to go. If yes, leave calmly.
If a Family Member Is Detained
Use the ICE Online Detainee Locator at locator.ice.gov immediately. You will need the person's country of birth and either their full name and date of birth or their A-Number (Alien Registration Number). People detained in Massachusetts may be transferred to facilities in other states. Locating your family member quickly is critical.
Call the ICE Detention Reporting and Information Line: 1-888-351-4024.
Call the EOIR Immigration Court Information Line: 1-800-898-7180 for hearing dates and case status.
Contact the Massachusetts Immigrant and Refugee Advocacy (MIRA) Coalition: miracoalition.org. MIRA chairs the Protecting Massachusetts Communities coalition that drove the PROTECT Act and has resources and referrals for families.
Contact the Political Asylum/Immigration Representation Project (PAIR): pairproject.org. PAIR provides free immigration legal services and is a primary resource for detained individuals in Massachusetts.
Contact the ACLU of Massachusetts: aclum.org.
Know the Risk Points in Massachusetts
Workplace enforcement takes multiple forms. I-9 audits and employer inspections can result in mass job loss without dramatic enforcement operations, as the New Bedford Market Basket situation showed. Workers in industries with large immigrant workforces, including hospitality, food production, construction, and domestic services, should understand this risk.
The Gateway Cities face elevated enforcement. Lawrence, Lowell, Brockton, New Bedford, Fall River, and Worcester have significant immigrant populations and have been locations of active federal enforcement operations. Local non-cooperation policies vary by city.
ICE operates independently regardless of local policy. Even in Boston, with its strong non-cooperation posture, ICE can conduct operations without local police involvement. State and local law limits what Massachusetts agencies do; it does not prevent federal enforcement.
The PROTECT Act's sensitive locations provisions are not yet law. Schools, hospitals, courthouses, and places of worship outside of state-owned facilities are not covered by binding state law until the PROTECT Act is signed. Families should know the difference between what EO 650 covers (state facilities) and what the PROTECT Act would cover (a much broader set of locations).
Pre-arranging family emergency plans is advisable. The PROTECT Act includes a guardianship provision allowing parents facing deportation to pre-arrange legal guardianship for their children. Consult an immigration attorney about family emergency planning regardless of whether the PROTECT Act has been signed.
Part 6: Legal Resources in Massachusetts
Massachusetts Immigrant and Refugee Advocacy Coalition (MIRA): miracoalition.org. MIRA chairs the Protecting Massachusetts Communities coalition and tracks the PROTECT Act's status in real time. They provide the most current legislative updates and can connect families with legal resources.
Political Asylum/Immigration Representation Project (PAIR): pairproject.org. PAIR provides free immigration legal services and is a primary resource for detained immigrants in Massachusetts.
Irish International Immigrant Center (IIIC): iicenter.org. The IIIC provides legal services to immigrants from a wide range of countries in the Greater Boston area.
ACLU of Massachusetts: aclum.org. The ACLU of Massachusetts has supported the PROTECT Act and monitors enforcement developments statewide.
Brazilian Worker Center: brazilianworkercenter.org. The BWC co-chairs the Protecting Massachusetts Communities coalition and has strong community connections particularly in the Greater Boston and eastern Massachusetts immigrant communities.
Immigration Advocates Network: immigrationadvocates.org. The national legal aid finder allows searching for immigration legal aid organizations by state and county.
National Immigrant Justice Center (Chicago): immigrantjustice.org. NIJC provides direct legal services and habeas corpus experience for people in immigration detention.
EOIR Immigration Court Information Line: 1-800-898-7180.
ICE Detainee Locator: locator.ice.gov.
ICE Detention Reporting and Information Line: 1-888-351-4024.
Summary
Massachusetts is one of the most protective states in this series. The Lunn v. Commonwealth (2017) Supreme Judicial Court ruling prohibits civil immigration detainer holds without independent legal authority under Massachusetts law. Executive Order 650, signed January 29, 2026, prohibits new 287(g) agreements except for documented public safety needs, bars ICE civil arrests in non-public areas of state facilities, and prohibits use of state property as ICE staging areas. The Work and Family Mobility Act (effective July 1, 2023) allows standard driver's licenses regardless of immigration status, with no restriction codes and no sharing with immigration authorities. Boston, Cambridge, Somerville, and many other municipalities have longstanding non-cooperation policies.
The PROTECT Act passed the House 134-21 in March 2026 and the Senate 37-3 in May 2026 and was in conference committee as of June 2026, not yet signed into law. When enacted, it would codify a comprehensive protective framework into statute, ban new 287(g) agreements statewide, bar immigration status inquiries during police stops, protect sensitive locations from civil enforcement, make ICE agents civilly liable for civil rights violations, and allow pre-arranged guardianship for children of detained parents. Verify its current status at miracoalition.org. Federal enforcement continues in Massachusetts regardless of state law. Know your rights at the door, exercise the right to remain silent, locate detained family members immediately through the ICE Detainee Locator, and contact MIRA or PAIR for current legal guidance.
Sources and verification: Executive Order 650, Gov. Healey, January 29, 2026 (mass.gov); Gov. Healey press release, 'Governor Healey Takes Action to Keep ICE out of Schools, Hospitals, Courthouses, and Places of Worship,' January 29, 2026; Massachusetts House passage of PROTECT Act (134-21), March 25, 2026 (malegislature.gov); Massachusetts Senate passage of PROTECT Act (37-3), May 7, 2026 (malegislature.gov); MIRA Coalition, 'Protecting Massachusetts Communities Campaign' (both bills in conference committee as of May 2026, miracoalition.org); ACLU of Massachusetts, 'Immigrants Rights Coalition Applauds Senate Passage of PROTECT Act,' May 21, 2026 (aclum.org); Massachusetts Peace Action, 'Healey Limits ICE; PROTECT Act Makes It Law,' February 11, 2026; New Bedford Light, 'Mass. Senate Passes Immigrant Protections,' May 8, 2026; Work and Family Mobility Act, effective July 1, 2023; Lunn v. Commonwealth, 477 Mass. 517 (2017); Arizona v. United States, 567 U.S. 387 (2012); Printz v. United States, 521 U.S. 898 (1997); Boston Globe opinion, 'The PROTECT Act Won't Protect Massachusetts,' March 31, 2026 (notes 167 detainer requests ignored by BPD in 2025 and New Bedford Market Basket enforcement, July 2025). Volatile items requiring verification: PROTECT Act final status (conference committee as of June 2026; verify at miracoalition.org or aclum.org before relying on any specific provision); effective date of PROTECT Act once signed. Last verified: June 2026.