ReportWire

Tag: society of the united states

  • Democrats seek probe of ICE tactics

    [ad_1]

    BOSTON — Members of the state’s congressional delegation are demanding a probe of recent federal immigration raids in the state, accusing the Trump administration of using “excessive force” and “aggressive tactics” to apprehend people suspected of being in the U.S. illegally.

    In a letter Thursday to the Department of Homeland Security’s Office of Inspector General, Sens. Elizabeth Warren and Ed Markey lead calls for an investigation into claims of “increasingly aggressive and intimidating tactics” by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents during recent enforcement actions.


    This page requires Javascript.

    Javascript is required for you to be able to read premium content. Please enable it in your browser settings.

    kAm%96 =2H>2<6CD 2==686 xrt 286?ED 2C6 FD:?8 “ADJ49@=@8:42= 2?5 A9JD:42= 4@6C4:@?” 2?5 “9:5:?8 286?ED’ :56?E:E:6D 2?5 C67FD:?8 E@ AC@G:56 :56?E:7:42E:@?]” %96J’C6 2=D@ E2C86E:?8 D6?D:E:G6 =@42E:@?D =:<6 D49@@=D 2?5 49FC496D[ “2CC6DE:?8 A6@A=6 H9@ 2C6 ?@E E96 E2C86ED @7 C2:5D[ :?4=F5:?8 &]$] 4:E:K6?D[” E96J HC@E6]k^Am

    kAm“xrt’D 4@?5F4E 92D 8@?6 36J@?5 D:>A=J 6?7@C4:?8 E96 =2H 282:?DE A6@A=6 4@?G:4E65 @7 G:@=6?E 4C:>6D 2?5 92D DF3;64E65 4@>>F?:EJ >6>36CD H9@ A@D6 ?@ E9C62E[ :?4=F5:?8 A2C6?ED 2?5 49:=5C6?[ E@ D66>:?8=J ?665=6DD 92C>[” E96 =2H>2<6CD HC@E6]k^Am

    kAm%96 56>2?5D 4@>6 😕 C6DA@?D6 E@ C646?E xrt C2:5D 😕 |2DD249FD6EED @G6C E96 A2DE >@?E9 E92E D2H ?62C=J `[d__ F?5@4F>6?E65 :>>:8C2?ED 2CC6DE65 😕 q@DE@?[ {2HC6?46[ (@C46DE6C[ }2?EF4<6E 2?5 |2CE92’D ‘:?6J2C5]k^Am

    kAmu656C2= 2FE9@C:E:6D D2:5 2 >2;@C:EJ @7 E9@D6 2AAC696?565 😕 E96 C2:5D 925 @FEDE2?5:?8 H2CC2?ED 7@C 4C:>6D :?4=F5:?8 9@>:4:56[ 5CF8 EC277:4<:?8[ D6IF2= 2DD2F=E[ 2?5 @E96C G:@=6?E @776?D6D] ~E96CD H6C6 7@C6:8? ?2E:@?2=D H9@ 925 C66?E6C65 E96 &]$] :==682==J[ @7E6? >F=E:A=6 E:>6D 27E6C 36:?8 56A@CE65]k^Am

    kAmqFE E96 =2H>2<6CD 4C:E:4:K65 E96 6?7@C46>6?E 24E:@?D 2D “5C28?6E” C2:5D “E2C86E:?8 4@>>F?:EJ >6>36CD H9@ A@D6 ?@ E9C62E” E@ E96 DE2E6[ 2?5 4=2:>65 E96 E24E:4D FD65 3J 7656C2= @77:4:2=D “>2J G:@=2E6 4@?DE:EFE:@?2= AC@E64E:@?D 2?5 286?4J A@=:4J]”k^Am

    kAm%96 =2H>2<6CD 4:E65 ?6HD C6A@CED @7 2? xrt 2CC6DE H96C6 2? 286?E C6A@CE65=J FD65 2 D=658692>>6C E@ 3C62< E96 H:?5@H @7 2 42C 😕 }6H q657@C5 E@ 2AAC696?5 2 DFDA64E] p?@E96C :?4:56?E 4:E65 3J E96 =2H>2<6CD :?G@=G65 xrt 286?ED DE@AA:?8 2 72>:=J =62G:?8 2 49FC49[ 56E2:?:?8 E96 72E96C]k^Am

    kAm%96J 244FD65 E96 286?4J @7 FD:?8 E24E:4D E92E 92G6 2=D@ 42FD65 “ADJ49@=@8:42= E6CC@C” 😕 E96 :>>:8C2?E 4@>>F?:EJ[ H:E9 A=2:?4=@E965 xrt 286?ED 4@G6C:?8 E96:C 7246D H:E9 >2D2C<65 G69:4=6D]k^Am

    kAm“%96 9F>2? E@== @7 E96D6 E24E:4D 😀 :>>6?D6[” E96 =2H>2<6CD HC@E6] “u2>:=:6D 2C6 36:?8 D6A2C2E65[ 2?5 4:E:K6? 2?5 ?@?4:E:K6? 4@>>F?:EJ >6>36CD 2=:<6 2C6 =67E =:G:?8 😕 762C]”k^Am

    kAm!C6D:56?E s@?2=5 %CF>A =2F?4965 2? 288C6DD:G6 :>>:8C2E:@? 6?7@C46>6?E 42>A2:8? ;FDE 52JD 27E6C E2<:?8 @77:46 😕 y2?F2CJ[ G@H:?8 E@ >2<6 8@@5 @? 42>A2:8? A=6586D E@ DFC86 EC@@AD E@ E96 D@FE96C? 3@C56C 2?5 56A@CE >:==:@?D @7 :>>:8C2?ED 😕 E96 &]$] :==682==J]k^Am

    kAms6>@4C2ED 2?5 4:G:= C:89ED 25G@42E6D 92G6 4C:E:4:K65 %CF>A’D E24E:4D[ 4:E:?8 E96 42D6D @7 49:=5C6? H9@ 2C6 &]$] 4:E:K6?D H9@ H6C6 C646?E=J 56A@CE65 H:E9 E96:C A2C6?ED] $4@C6D @7 =2HDF:ED 92G6 366? 7:=65 3J 4C:E:4D @7 E96 AC6D:56?E’D :>>:8C2E:@? A@=:4:6D[ D@>6 @7 H9:49 92G6 366? 3=@4<65 H:E9 E6>A@C2CJ :?;F?4E:@?D]k^Am

    kAmqFE #6AF3=:42?D 92G6 2=D@ 4C:E:4:K65 s6>@4C2ED @G6C E96:C 962E65 C96E@C:4 @? xrt’D :>>:8C2E:@? 6?7@C46>6?E 24E:@?D[ 244FD:?8 E96> @7 4@?EC:3FE:?8 E@ 2? 5C2>2E:4 FAE:4< @7 E9C62ED 2?5 2DD2F=ED 282:?DE 7656C2= :>>:8C2E:@? 286?ED]k^Am

    kAmx? {@D p?86=6D[ H96C6 AC@E6DED 6CFAE65 =2DE H66< @G6C :>>:8C2E:@? C2:5D[ xrt 286?ED 92G6 366? 2DD2F=E65 3J 56>@?DEC2E@CD[ H9:49 AC@>AE65 %CF>A E@ 42== FA E96 DE2E6’D }2E:@?2= vF2C5 — 2?5 2 4@?E:?86?E @7 &]$] |2C:?6D — @G6C r2=:7@C?:2 v@G] v2G:? }6HD@>’D @3;64E:@?D]k^Am

    kAm“%96D6 G:@=6?E C:@E6CD H:== 36 96=5 244@F?E23=6 :7 E96J 92C> 7656C2= @77:46CD[ 2?5 >2<6 ?@ >:DE2<6[ xrt H:== 4@?E:?F6 E@ 6?7@C46 @FC ?2E:@?’D :>>:8C2E:@? =2HD 2?5 2CC6DE 4C:>:?2= :==682= 2=:6?D[” %@55 {J@?D[ 24E:?8 5:C64E@C @7 &]$] x>>:8C2E:@? 2?5 rFDE@>D t?7@C46>6?E[ D2:5 😕 2 DE2E6>6?E] “$2?4EF2CJ A@=:E:4:2?D H@F=5 5@ H6== E@ C6>6>36C E92E :>A65:?8 @FC 677@CED @?=J 6?52?86CD E96:C 4@>>F?:E:6D[ =2H 6?7@C46>6?E @77:46CD[ 2?5 E96 56E2:?66D E96J 4=2:> E@ DFAA@CE]”k^Am

    kAm&]$] pEE@C?6J 7@C |2DD249FD6EED {629 u@=6J C646?E=J :DDF65 2 DE6C? H2C?:?8 23@FE “:?E6C76C6?46” H:E9 xrt 6?7@C46>6?E 286?ED[ D2J:?8 96C @77:46 “H:== :?G6DE:82E6 2?J G:@=2E:@?D @7 7656C2= =2H 2?5 AFCDF6 492C86D E92E 2C6 H2CC2?E65 3J DF49 24E:G:EJ]”k^Am

    kAmk6>mr9C:DE:2? |] (256 4@G6CD E96 |2DD249FD6EED $E2E69@FD6 7@C }@CE9 @7 q@DE@? |65:2 vC@FAUCDBF@jD ?6HDA2A6CD 2?5 H63D:E6D] t>2:= 9:> 2E k2 9C67lQ>2:=E@i4H256o4?9:?6HD]4@>Qm4H256o4?9:?6HD]4@>k^2m]k^6>mk^Am

    [ad_2]

    By Christian M. Wade | Statehouse Reporter

    Source link

  • Healey moves to implement gun control law

    Healey moves to implement gun control law

    [ad_1]

    BOSTON — Gov. Maura Healey is moving to implement a tough new gun control law in response to a lawsuit challenging its provisions and a effort to repeal the restrictions.

    On Wednesday, Healey signed an executive order attaching an emergency preamble to the bill she signed in July that expanded the state’s bans on “assault” weapons and high-capacity magazines, outlawed so-called “ghost” guns and set new restrictions on open carry of firearms, among other provisions.

    Gun control groups praised the rare maneuver, which they said is aimed at blocking an effort by critics of the new law to block its implementation as they gather signatures to put the issue before voters in two years.

    “After years of advocating for these gun safety measures to become law, we weren’t going to stand by and let the gun lobby get in the way of our progress,” Anne Thalheimer, a survivor fellow with the Everytown Survivor Network, said in a statement. “We’re grateful to Governor Healey for standing with us and taking decisive action to ensure that this lifesaving law is implemented.”

    But the Massachusetts Gun Owners’ Action League, which has filed a federal lawsuit seeking to overturn the law’s training and licensing requirements, said Healey’s “radical move” signing the executive order makes hundreds of thousands of lawful gun owners across the state into “felons in waiting.”

    He accused the governor and Democratic lawmakers of waging a “consistent effort to silence our voices and mislead the general public.”

    “Ever since this tantrum against the Supreme Court decision Bruen started last year, the so-called ‘process’ has become even more putrid,” said Jim Wallace, GOAL’s executive director, in a statement. “At every turn, the Legislature and now the governor, have avoided honest public input, especially from the 2A [Second Amendment] community.”

    Wallace said despite the order the group is still urging the federal judge to issue a temporary injunction to block the law from going into effect as the ballot initiative and legal challenge plays out in court.

    Besides the legal fight, critics of the new law or gathering signatures to put the question before voters in the 2026 election. They argue that the restrictions will hurt businesses, cost jobs and deprive legal gun owners of their constitutional rights.

    The new law, which passed despite objections from the Legislature’s Republican minority, added dozens of long rifles to a list of prohibited guns under the state’s assault weapons ban, and outlawed the open carry of firearms in government buildings, polling places and schools, with exemptions for law enforcement officials.

    It also set strict penalties for possession of modification devices such as so-called “Glock switches” that convert semiautomatic firearms into fully automatic, military-style weapons. The state’s red flag law, which allows a judge to suspend the gun license of someone deemed at risk to themselves or others, was also expanded under the legislation.

    Massachusetts already has some of the toughest gun control laws in the country, including real-time license checks for private gun sales and stiff penalties for gun-based crimes.

    Gun control advocates argue the strict requirements have given the largely urban state one of the lowest gun-death rates in the nation, while not infringing on the right to bear arms.

    Despite those trends, Democrats who pushed the gun control bill through the Legislature argued that gun violence is still impacting communities across the state whether by suicide, domestic violence or drive-by shootings.

    Second Amendment groups have long argued that the tougher gun control laws are unnecessary, and punish law-abiding gun owners while sidestepping the issue of illegal firearms.

    Christian M. Wade covers the Massachusetts Statehouse for North of Boston Media Group’s newspapers and websites. Email him at cwade@cnhinews.com.

    [ad_2]

    By Christian M. Wade | Statehouse Reporter

    Source link

  • Gun control foes push to repeal restrictions

    Gun control foes push to repeal restrictions

    [ad_1]

    BOSTON — Opponents of Massachusetts’ new gun control law are gearing up to repeal the tough restrictions, which they say will hurt businesses, cost jobs and deprive people of their constitutional rights.

    A law signed by Democratic Gov. Maura Healey in July expanded the state’s bans on “assault” weapons and high-capacity magazines, outlawed so-called “ghost” guns and set new restrictions on the open carry of firearms, among other provisions.

    The move was in response to concerns about mass shootings and gun violence.

    But critics of the new restrictions say they are unconstitutional and argue the changes will do little to reduce gun violence. They’ve started gathering signatures on petitions to put a repeal of the law before voters in the 2026 elections.

    The chief organizer of the repeal effort, Cape Cod Gun Works owner Toby Leary, said on Thursday that the petition-gathering effort is well underway and he is seeing strong support for putting the question on the ballot.

    “A lot of businesses and jobs are at stake,” Leary said during a livestreamed briefing sponsored by the state’s Republican Party. “The effects of this law on businesses will be catastrophic. Jobs will be lost. Businesses and livelihoods will be lost.”

    Leary said among the many concerns gun shop owners have about the new restrictions is that the expansion of banned firearms will reduce the kinds of rifles and other weapons that can be sold in the state, which will hurt bottom lines. He estimates about 50% of his business will be “put on hold” if the law isn’t repealed.

    “But this is also about freedom,” Leary said. “This law is so unconstitutional on every level. A lot of ordinary people are going to run afoul of this law.”

    Massachusetts already has some of the toughest gun control laws in the country, including real-time license checks for private gun sales and stiff penalties for gun-based crimes.

    Gun control advocates argue the strict requirements have given the largely urban state one of the lowest gun-death rates in the nation, while not infringing on the right to bear arms.

    Despite those trends, Democrats who pushed the gun control bill thorough the Legislature argued that gun violence is still impacting communities across the state whether by suicide, domestic violence or drive-by shootings.

    Second Amendment groups have long argued that the tougher gun control laws are unnecessary, and punish law-abiding gun owners while sidestepping the issue of illegal firearms.

    The new law, which passed despite objections from the Legislature’s Republican minority, added dozens of long rifles to a list of prohibited guns under the assault weapons ban, and outlawed the open carry of firearms in government buildings, polling places and schools, with exemptions for law enforcement officials.

    It sets strict penalties for possession of modification devices such as Glock switches that convert semi-automatic firearms into fully automatic, military-style weapons. The state’s red flag law, which allows a judge to suspend the gun license of someone deemed at risk to themselves or others, was also expanded under the law.

    The repeal effort is one of several seeking to block the law. The Massachusetts Gun Owners’ Action League, which is affiliated with the National Rifle Association, plans to file a federal lawsuit seeking to overturn the new law’s training and licensing requirements. Other legal challenges are expected.

    Christian M. Wade covers the Massachusetts Statehouse for North of Boston Media Group’s newspapers and websites. Email him at cwade@cnhinews.com.

    [ad_2]

    By Christian M. Wade | Statehouse Reporter

    Source link

  • Gun rights group chips in $100K for court challenge

    Gun rights group chips in $100K for court challenge

    [ad_1]

    BOSTON — A national gun rights group pledges to help fund a legal challenge to overturn the state’s tough new gun control law that critics say will do little to prevent gun violence while depriving people of their constitutional rights.

    The Firearm Industry Trade Association said it has donated $100,000 to the Massachusetts Gun Owners’ Action League to support the group’s legal challenge against new restrictions on firearms licensing signed into law by Gov. Maura Healey.

    “Massachusetts is known as a birthplace of the American Revolution, but these lawmakers have turned their backs to rights that belong to the people and instead are instituting an Orwellian state over the citizens of the Commonwealth,” Lawrence G. Keane, the association’s senior vice president and general counsel, said in a statement.

    “The fight to protect liberty and individual rights begins anew and we are confident that when federal courts apply scrutiny to this law, it will be relegated to the trash bin where it belongs,” Keane said.

    The new law, signed by Healey last month, adds dozens of long rifles to a list prohibited under the state’s “assault” weapons ban and outlaws the open carry of firearms in government buildings, polling places and schools, with exemptions for law enforcement officials.

    It sets strict penalties for possession of modification devices such as Glock switches that convert semiautomatic firearms into fully automatic, military-style weapons. The measure also expands the state’s red flag law, which allows a judge to suspend the gun license of someone deemed at risk to themselves or others.

    Massachusetts already has some of the toughest gun control laws in the country, including real-time license checks for private gun sales and stiff penalties for gun-based crimes.

    But Second Amendment groups argue tougher gun control laws are unnecessary and punish law-abiding gun owners while sidestepping the issue of illegal firearms.

    GOAL, which is affiliated with the National Rifle Association, has dubbed the restrictions the “The Devil’s Snare” and say it represents the greatest attack on civil rights in modern U.S. history. The group has filed a federal lawsuit seeking to overturn the new law’s training and licensing requirements. Other legal challenges are expected.

    Members of the group have also filed a petition with the Secretary of State’s Office to begin gathering signatures on a petition to put a repeal of the law before voters next year. The group wants to suspend the law ahead of a 2026 statewide referendum.

    Christian M. Wade covers the Massachusetts Statehouse for North of Boston Media Group’s newspapers and websites. Email him at cwade@cnhinews.com.

    [ad_2]

    By Christian M. Wade | Statehouse Reporter

    Source link

  • Food benefit fund runs out of money

    Food benefit fund runs out of money

    [ad_1]

    BOSTON — After state officials quietly restored state-funded food benefits for legally present immigrants last winter, advocates and lawmakers celebrated the decision, but the money set aside for benefits quickly ran out.

    In December, the Legislature and Gov. Maura Healey agreed on a policy tucked into a large spending bill to expand Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, benefits to all legal immigrants who met the program’s income requirements.

    Advocates said the $6 million injection would last seven months — ending right around the start of the new fiscal year when they hoped lawmakers and Healey would make the program permanent by putting it into the annual state budget.

    But the program ran out of money by the end of April, only two months after it got up and running. Now, Rep. Antonio Cabral is looking to revive the benefit.

    “It was like a tease,” said Lina Tabar, director of organizing and policy at La Colaborativa. “To not have the opportunity to provide decent food for your family, then having the opportunity for two months, then guess what? You don’t have it any more. It’s a bit cruel.”

    La Colaborativa runs a twice-weekly food pantry under the Tobin Bridge, which sees about 10,000 people every week who line up for food. Advocates say that number has increased significantly in the past year, as the number of new immigrants in Massachusetts has grown.

    “We have never experienced running out of food so quickly as we do now,” Tabar said.

    Slipping through a patchwork

    The SNAP benefit expansion was intended to capture certain people who slip through the patchwork of immigration laws.

    About 95 percent of the new arrivals coming into Massachusetts are from Haiti, said Massachusetts Law Reform Institute senior policy advocate Pat Baker. Haitians granted humanitarian parole or who have a pending application for asylum are eligible for federal benefits under a longstanding federal law.

    These are also largely the immigrants who are seeking or using the state’s Emergency Assistance family shelter system, which has grown rapidly since 2022, hit a “capacity limit” set by the governor and has a long and growing list of families hoping to get in.

    These families whose immigration status grants them access to federal benefits and the state’s emergency assistance shelters are largely not the same group who the expanded SNAP benefits were intended to target, Baker said.

    Those who received state-funded SNAP do not get money from the federal government to pay for food, and are usually living with host families or doubled up in living spaces. Many of them have work authorizations but due to language barriers they work in extremely low-wage jobs, where their American coworkers are eligible for SNAP.

    “I feel like there’s a misunderstanding between the immigrants who have been here for a long time and never received government support, and the recent migrant crisis. They think they’re helping the same population, but it’s not,” Tabar said. “We’re talking about workers that have been putting long hours in to support our economy and that are filing taxes, and they have a social security number. But they still don’t have access to these benefits.”

    Benefits resurrected

    Massachusetts used to be one of six states that offered state SNAP benefits to all legal immigrants who met the program’s income requirements, before the state halted the program after five years in 2002.

    By signing a supplemental budget in December, Healey resurrected those benefits.

    The program was funded at $6 million on Dec. 4, after which the Department of Transitional Assistance took about two months to make system changes and identify who was legally present but ineligible for federal dollars.

    It rolled out in mid-February, delivering SNAP dollars to eligible households retroactive to early December. But by April, Baker said, the state realized it didn’t have enough to continue funding the program and terminated it on April 30.

    Baker shared cases of people who quickly gained and lost the extra money to help supplement their food purchases:

    • A Salvadoran immigrant, legally present with a work authorization and working a low wage job, who has been in the U.S. for over 30 years;

    • A family of four from Venezuela with humanitarian parole, approved for state benefits, who didn’t qualify for federal SNAP;

    • An individual from Uganda with a pending asylum case and in treatment for cancer, which impacted their earnings and they could no longer afford food on top of rent;

    • A parent of two children pending asylum and awaiting work authorization documents, who cannot yet legally work in the U.S. to support their family and qualified for, then lost, about $400 per month in SNAP to pay for the family’s food.

    “These are families who will get back on their feet if given the tools to do so,” Baker said. “For people whose relationship to their own governments, in their own countries, may already be fractured, to then work with a community partner to get what they need to feed their families — to have that suddenly end is really confusing, and it does worsen trust in communities to get what they need.”

    Seeking opportunities

    Cabral and Sen. Sal DiDomenico filed amendments to include those benefits in fiscal year 2025 annual budgets, but neither the House nor the Senate agreed to to revive the program.

    At the time of the House budget debate, tax collections were coming in below expectations and budget writers were hesitant about adding spending to their bottom line, Cabral said.

    The New Bedford Democrat, who championed the original SNAP benefit expansion policy in the 1990s, said he is looking for new opportunities to get the funding.

    He’s eyeing an amendment, he said, that would re-establish the program for children in these immigrant families with the long-term hope of expanding it to adults eventually.

    “The amount of dollars we need, if it was just for kids, I think would be a number that probably could get support. So we’re trying to figure it out,” Cabral said. “I know the speaker and chairman of Ways and Means have been very supportive of this in the past … Sometimes it’s a matter of dollars and cents.”

    Support, opposition voiced

    When the expansion was approved in December, Senate President Karen Spilka voiced her support for the program.

    “Massachusetts is better off when the most vulnerable in our communities are cared for,” Spilka said. “Access to food is a priority, no matter where you come from or what part of the Commonwealth you live in, and I was happy to see aid for that purpose included in the supplemental budget.”

    Paul Craney of the Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance warned that the funding was “unsustainable.”

    “It’s not a long-term solution to have an open southern border, broken immigration system, and very generous welfare SNAP program funded by Massachusetts taxpayers for newly arriving immigrants,” he said. “This latest taxpayer benefit will attract more immigrants, and Massachusetts will continue to be a magnet. It may sound noble to some but it’s unsustainable for the taxpayers.”

    [ad_2]

    By Sam Drysdale | State House News Service

    Source link

  • Healey team to dissuade migrants at border

    Healey team to dissuade migrants at border

    [ad_1]

    BOSTON — Gov. Maura Healey is dispatching members of her administration to the U.S.-Mexico border in an effort to dissuade asylum seekers from coming to the state amid an ongoing surge of immigration.

    The Healey administration announced Tuesday that a state delegation is headed to the southern border to meet with officials from the U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Joint Task Force-North, relocation agencies and families “to educate them about the lack of shelter availability.”

    Retired Gen. Scott Rice, the state’s emergency assistance director, said the purpose of the trip is “to meet with families arriving in the U.S. and the organizations that work with them at the border to make sure they have accurate information about the lack of shelter space in Massachusetts.”

    “It is essential that we get the word out that our shelters are full so that families can plan accordingly to make sure they have a safe place to go,” he said in a statement.

    The delegation, which includes state emergency management officials and representatives from refugee organizations, is expected to visit several Texas communities along the border this week, including San Antonio, Hidalgo, McAllen and Brownsville, according to the Healey administration.

    Those border communities have been identified as the primary waypoints for migrants heading to Massachusetts after entering the country.

    The move comes as the state continues to see an influx of migrants that has pushed its emergency shelter system to the brink of collapse.

    Healey declared a state of emergency last August and deployed the National Guard to help deal with the influx. Her administration also set a 7,500-family cap on the number of people eligible for emergency housing in October. Hundreds of families are currently on a waiting list for housing.

    The governor signed a bill limiting migrants to nine months in emergency shelter, with up to two 90-day extensions for veterans, pregnant women and those in work training programs. The first round of eviction notices, covering 150 families, are set to go out in the next week, officials said.

    The bill also pumped an additional $251 million into the shelter system to cover housing, food and other costs. The state expects to spend about $1 billion this year on migrants. Pleas from state leaders for additional federal funds from the Biden administration have gone largely unanswered.

    Republicans and conservative groups have long argued that the state’s right-to-shelter law — which requires it to offer temporary housing regardless of immigration status — is drawing migrants here. They have pressed Healey to suspend the law, set residency requirements or significantly scale back its provisions.

    Amy Carnevale, chairwoman of the state Republican Party, called Healey’s move to dispatch officials to the southern border a “publicity stunt” that won’t reduce the influx of migrants. Carnevale said there’s a “disconnect” between Healey’s words and actions, and because of “political pride and partisanship” she refuses to take the “necessary steps” to solve the roots of the migrant crisis.

    “They can engage in rhetoric and publicity stunts all they want, but without concrete steps to limit access to emergency housing, nothing will change,” Carnevale said in a statement. “To stop incentivizing migrants from coming to the commonwealth, the right to shelter law must be amended to restrict program access based on the duration of residency in the commonwealth.”

    Paul Craney, a spokesman for the conservative Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance, said Healey’s decision to send a delegation of “midlevel bureaucrats on a field trip instead of going herself will not solve the problem.”

    “If the governor wants to send a message, the best way to do that is simply by removing the state’s very generous right to shelter law and welfare benefits to nonresidents,” Craney said.

    The Healey administration contends that workforce development and rehousing programs have resulted in a “steady increase” in families leaving the shelter system. About 3,700 individuals in shelters have qualified for federal work authorization, the administration said, with 1,114 placed in jobs.

    But the decision to dispatch a delegation to the border to dissuade migrants from heading to Massachusetts shows the influx of new arrivals is continuing to stress the state’s emergency shelter system.

    The tactic is similar to one used by New York City Mayor Eric Adams, whose administration distributed flyers at the U.S.-Mexico border last July telling newly arrived migrants to “consider another city” because there is “no guarantee we will be able to provide shelter and services to new arrivals.”

    New York is required to provide shelter for those without homes, regardless of their immigration status, under a decades-old consent decree stemming from a class-action lawsuit. The city has seen an influx of more than 180,000 migrants over the past year, with about 65,000 under its care.

    Christian M. Wade covers the Massachusetts Statehouse for North of Boston Media Group’s newspapers and websites. Email him at cwade@cnhinews.com.

    [ad_2]

    By Christian M. Wade | Statehouse Reporter

    Source link

  • North Shore to host Juneteenth celebrations

    North Shore to host Juneteenth celebrations

    [ad_1]

    North Shore communities will commemorate Juneteenth next week with flag raisings and celebrations.

    Swampscott, Marblehead, Peabody, Beverly, Lynn, Hamilton and Wenham kicked off the holiday this week with flag raisings at their city and town halls.

    Held each June 19, the federal holiday commemorates the official end to slavery in the United States, when on June 19, 1865, Union troops arrived in Galveston, Texas, to inform more than 250,000 enslaved people of their freedom — two years after President Abraham Lincoln signed the Emancipation Proclamation.

    The red, white and blue Juneteenth flag will be raised June 17 in Danvers. Starting at 2 p.m. outside Town Hall, Danvers is scheduled to host its fourth annual Juneteenth celebration featuring singing, poetry and an address by Northshore Juneteenth Association founder Nicole McClain. The event will be followed by a dialogue and viewing of a documentary about Race Amity Day at the Gordon room of the Peabody Institute Library.

    The flag will be raised in Salem’s Riley Plaza at noon June 18 during the city’s Juneteenth Jam that runs from noon-5 p.m. that day.

    Community members can take part in a public reading of Frederick Douglass’s speech, “The Meaning Of The Fourth Of July For The Negro,” led by McClain.

    Games, activities, crafts, face painting, music and food from Ray Adea’s will be available following the flag raising. Salem Historical Tours will give a free Black history walking tour of Salem starting at 2 p.m. from Riley Plaza.

    The tour is expected to last 90 minutes. Participants can sign up on a first-come, first-serve basis the day of the event.

    At 8:30 p.m., the Salem Common Neighborhood Association will host a free screening of Disney’s 2018 hit “Black Panther” at the Common.

    Salem received a grant from Mass Humanities to expand its annual Juneteenth flag raising into this year’s event, in collaboration with the North Shore Juneteenth Association, the city said in a statement.

    “Thanks to the work from members of the mayor’s office staff along with the consultation of North Shore Juneteenth, this year’s ceremony will be thoughtful, fun, and allow our community to come together to celebrate,” Salem Mayor Dominick Pangallo said in the prepared statement.

    In Beverly, The Cabot Theatre will host a free screening of Academy Award-nominated filmmaker Ava DuVernay’s new film, “Origin,” at 7 p.m. on June 18. A community conversation about the film will be hosted at The Cabot the next day at 7 p.m.

    The event is sponsored by the First Baptist Church of Beverly. Visit https://tinyurl.com/cabotorigin to register.

    Then, on Friday, June 21, Doreen Wade of Salem United Inc. and McClain will launch their inaugural racial communication forum, “Our Shared Future: Reckoning with Modern Day Feelings of Racism and Inequity.” The public discussion will start at 6:30 p.m. in the auditorium of the National Parks Service, Salem Armory Visitor Center, 2 New Liberty St. in Salem.

    Contact Caroline Enos at CEnos@northofboston.com

    [ad_2]

    By Caroline Enos | Staff Writer

    Source link

  • Healey pushes for federal contraception protections

    Healey pushes for federal contraception protections

    [ad_1]

    BOSTON — Gov. Maura Healey is leading a group of Democratic chief executives in urging Congress to approve a bill that would protect access to contraception.

    The Right to Contraception Act, which is co-sponsored by Sen. Ed Markey, D-Mass., would guarantee the legal right for individuals to get and use contraception and for health care providers to provide contraception, information, referrals and services related to contraception.

    Democrats are leaning into efforts to protect access to birth control as part of their election year push on reproductive rights, warning that Republicans in Congress and former President Donald Trump will seek to set new nationwide restrictions on contraception, if Trump is elected in November.

    On Monday, Healey joined Democratic Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker in calling on lawmakers to approve the plan, and blasting Republicans for opposing the proposed changes.

    “This legislation would safeguard the fundamental right to contraception,” Healey said in remarks during a live streamed briefing on Monday, sponsored by groups pushing for the bill’s passage.

    “It’s so important, especially at this time where reproductive rights as we’ve seen are under assault across this country,” she said.

    Healey cited comments by Trump, the presumptive Republican presidential candidate, suggesting that he is in favor of national restrictions on contraception.

    “I think all we have to do is look at his track record as president to know what he will do if he’s elected again,” Healey said.

    Trump said in a recent TV interview that he would leave contraception policy to the states but supports efforts to limit access. He later quickly backtracked on social media, saying he has “never and never will advocate imposing restrictions on birth control or other contraceptives.”

    But Democrats see the issue of birth control and abortion access as a wedge that could help incumbent President Joe Biden win his reelection bid in November and possibly help them take over control of the U.S. House of Representatives.

    Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer announced over the weekend that the Democratic-controlled chamber will be taking up the bill during Wednesday’s session.

    “There’s no question in the American people’s minds that Republicans have brought our country to this point,” Schumer said in a statement.

    “And as Donald Trump reminded us recently, he is ‘proudly the person responsible’ for the annihilation of Roe v. Wade and the grotesque reversal of women’s personal freedoms,” said Schumer.

    Republicans and even many anti-abortion groups say they are neutral on birth control and argue there’s no access problem. GOP lawmakers have accused Democrats of using the issue for political gain.

    The proposal set to be taken up by the Senate would prohibit the federal government and any state from administering or enforcing any law, rule or regulation to prohibit or restrict the sale or use of contraception.

    It would also allow the U.S. Department of Justice, health care providers and individuals harmed by restrictions on contraception to go to court to enforce those rights.

    While the measure could pass with Democrats holding a slim majority in the Senate, it faces an uncertain path in the GOP controlled House of Representatives.

    Polls have consistently shown that there is broad bipartisan support for birth control. A 2023 Gallup poll looking at the values and beliefs of Americans found that 88% of them believed birth control was morally acceptable.

    [ad_2]

    By Christian M. Wade | Statehouse Reporter

    Source link