Massachusetts Leaders Clash Over ICE Mask Policy and Accountability

Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Campbell has engaged in a heated exchange with U.S. Attorney Leah Foley regarding the policy of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents wearing masks while on duty. The discourse escalated following Campbell’s assertion that banning masks for federal agents should be a priority at the federal level. In response, Governor Maura Healey stated that the rationale behind the use of masks by ICE agents is unclear and expressed her support for enforcing accountability among federal officials.

During an appearance on GBH’s Boston Public Radio, Healey articulated her belief that if the deportation agenda advocated by former President Donald Trump focused on apprehending dangerous individuals, she would fully endorse it. “But that’s not what is going on,” Healey remarked on Wednesday. She urged the public to document ICE activities, indicating a broader frustration with perceived abuses within the agency.

This exchange took place shortly after Foley issued a statement defending the use of masks by ICE agents, emphasizing the substantial threats they face, which have reportedly increased by approximately 830%. Foley criticized Campbell’s approach, stating, “It is disappointing to hear her say that our country’s Constitution is not on her ‘side.’” She highlighted the constitutional protections that prevent state officials from arresting federal officers while performing their duties.

In her prior comments, Campbell argued that a proposed state law banning ICE agents from wearing masks would be more effective if implemented at the federal level. “To implement that against ICE officials is nearly impossible,” she asserted. Campbell also indicated her office is monitoring ICE activities for signs of possible racial profiling, aiming to hold the agency accountable for any misconduct.

The contentious dialogue reflects ongoing tensions between state and federal law enforcement, particularly as the FBI has recently advised partner agencies to clearly identify themselves amidst incidents of impersonation by individuals posing as ICE officers. This backdrop has led to legislative actions in other states, such as California, which enacted a ban on most law enforcement officers, including federal immigration agents, from masking their faces during official duties. This law was introduced in response to controversial immigration raids in Los Angeles, where masked federal agents executed mass arrests.

Senate President Karen Spilka has also shown support for the proposed ban on mask-wearing by federal agents in Massachusetts, likening the practice to tactics used in oppressive regimes. Governor Healey expressed a desire for transparency and uniform standards across law enforcement agencies, stating that local and state police are identifiable through badges and names, contrasting this with the practices at the federal level.

Foley responded to Campbell’s comments regarding a separate incident involving airport workers and a government shutdown, asserting that Campbell’s version of events was inaccurate. “The attorney general is welcome to share her opinions… but her overtly political and inaccurate statements only fuel misinformation,” Foley countered.

As this conflict unfolds, it underscores the complex relationship between state and federal authorities regarding immigration enforcement and public safety. The discussion continues to resonate within Massachusetts and may influence legislative actions and public perception of ICE and its operations moving forward.