Editorial: Taxpayers shouldn't foot illegal immigrants' defense bill

Boston Herald editorial staff, Boston Herald on Feb 13, 2026

Published in Op Eds

By clicking submit, I authorize Arcamax and its affiliates to: (1) use, sell, and share my information for marketing purposes, including cross-context behavioral advertising, as described in our Privacy Policy , (2) add to information that I provide with other information like interests inferred from web page views, or data lawfully obtained from data brokers, such as past purchase or location data, or publicly available data, (3) contact me or enable others to contact me by email or other means with offers for different types of goods and services, and (4) retain my information while I am engaging with marketing messages that I receive and for a reasonable amount of time thereafter. I understand I can opt out at any time through an email that I receive, or by clicking here

Flammable and inflammable mean the same thing.

Legal and illegal do not. Except in Massachusetts, apparently.

That’s the logical pothole in An Act Ensuring Access to Equitable Representation in Immigration Proceedings, a bill making its way through the Massachusetts Legislature that would establish a publicly funded program to provide legal representation to illegal immigrants facing deportation proceedings.

There is already legislation addressing this, the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952. According to that statute: “In any removal proceedings before an immigration judge and in any appeal proceedings before the Attorney General from any such removal proceedings, the person concerned shall have the privilege of being represented (at no expense to the Government) by such counsel, authorized to practice in such proceedings, as he shall choose.”

Those who decry ICE and deportation in general point to immigration law as being civil, rather than criminal, as if that dilutes the need to follow it. That distinction is a double-edged sword, however. Immigration proceedings are civil, not criminal, therefore there is no constitutional right to a publicly funded attorney in immigration court.

But this is Massachusetts, and legislators are eager to serve illegal immigration proceedings the Blue State Special.

The bill, filed jointly by state Rep. David Rogers and state Sen. Adam Gomez, would create the immigrant legal defense fund through a “specifically dedicated line-item” in the general appropriations act, according to a summary of the legislation.

AKA, the taxpayer’s dime.

The impetus for this is President Donald Trump’s crackdown on illegal immigrants. Bill supporters said as much during testimony last fall during a Joint Judiciary Committee hearing.

“We hear such a common drumbeat of the lack of sufficient quality legal services, particularly for our most vulnerable immigrants, those who are in detention, and those who are facing removal proceedings. Immigration court proceedings are incredibly complex and the stakes are so high,” said Liz Sweet, Executive Director of the Massachusetts Immigrant and Refugee Advocacy Coalition (MIRA).

The aggressive tactics by ICE agents in Minneapolis has given the agency a black eye, but they don’t change the fact that we have immigration laws, and breaking them comes with the consequence of deportation.

None of this is new.

Barack Obama’s administration deported 2.4 million illegal immigrants from FY 2009 to 2014, according to the Department of Homeland Security. He too, faced blowback, with the American Civil Liberties Union writing in 2014 that “the Obama administration has prioritized speed over fairness in the removal system, sacrificing individualized due process in the pursuit of record removal numbers. ”

It’s one thing to slam the deportation of illegal immigrants, it’s another to make taxpayers foot the bill to defend them, especially as legal citizens are stuck in limbo during the public defender shortage in Massachusetts.

Massachusetts citizens are not patsies with wallets. Our legislators should put their constituents first.

_____