This is so pathetic.
Massachusetts Governor Maura Healey, a Democrat, has made it clear that her state will not cooperate with any efforts by the federal government under a potential Trump administration to deport illegal immigrants. In a recent interview on MSNBC, Healey strongly asserted that the Massachusetts State Police “absolutely will not” assist in any mass deportation actions, even if President Trump follows through on his promise to launch the “largest domestic deportation operation in American history.”
During the 2016 election, then-candidate Donald Trump vowed to take aggressive action against illegal immigration, including removing millions of people living in the U.S. unlawfully. While Trump’s stance on immigration remains unchanged, Governor Healey, a vocal critic of the former president, has made it clear that Massachusetts will resist these efforts. “No, absolutely not,” Healey replied when asked if her state’s police would participate in such an operation. She emphasized that she would use “every tool in the toolbox” to protect the residents of Massachusetts, including legal and regulatory means, to resist any federal efforts to enforce mass deportations.
Healey, who previously served as the state’s Attorney General, has a history of challenging the Trump administration’s policies, often resorting to lawsuits and executive actions to block federal mandates she views as harmful. In the coming years, she suggests, Massachusetts may once again find itself in the courts or engaging in other forms of resistance to federal immigration policies.
This stance comes amid growing concerns over illegal immigration and its impact on Massachusetts. Last year, Healey declared a state of emergency due to the surge of migrants arriving in the state, some of whom are drawn by the state’s more lenient immigration policies. While Healey has framed the situation as a humanitarian issue, Republicans argue that sanctuary policies like hers only encourage more illegal immigration, burden state resources, and undermine the rule of law.
In response to the influx, Healey has called for federal action to ease restrictions on work permits for migrants, improve housing availability, and reform the nation’s immigration laws. While the state’s policies may reflect a commitment to helping those in need, critics contend that they could attract more illegal immigration, further overwhelming local communities.
As the debate over immigration intensifies, the question remains: Should states like Massachusetts continue to defy federal law enforcement in the name of “humanitarian” efforts, or should they join in the push for stronger border security and a more systematic approach to immigration reform? Healey’s refusal to cooperate with federal immigration efforts may set the stage for a major showdown between state and federal authorities in the years to come.