BOSTON — The Massachusetts Republican Party has put out a statement hammering the PROTECT Act as a brazen state challenge to federal authority over immigration, citing the U.S. Supreme Court's 2012 ruling in Arizona v. United States.
There is just one problem. Both Republican legislative leaders on Beacon Hill already voted YES on it.
Senate Minority Leader Bruce Tarr (R-Gloucester) crossed the aisle Thursday and gave the Senate a 37-3 supermajority on its version of the bill. House Minority Leader Brad Jones (R-North Reading) had done the same in March, helping the House pass its version 134-21.
House Minority Leader Brad Jones (R-North Reading), left, and Senate Minority Leader Bruce Tarr (R-Gloucester), right — both voted YES on the PROTECT Act their own party committee now calls unconstitutional.
What the party committee said
In a release attributed to MassGOP National Committeewoman Janet Fogarty, the party committee accused state lawmakers of "directly challenging the federal government's role in immigration enforcement, a principle upheld by the Supreme Court in a case brought by President Obama's own Justice Department."
"By moving forward with the Protect Act, Massachusetts lawmakers are directly challenging the federal government's role in immigration enforcement, a principle upheld by the Supreme Court in a case brought by President Obama's own Justice Department." — Janet Fogarty, MassGOP National Committeewoman
The party pointed to Arizona v. United States — the 2012 case in which the Supreme Court struck down most of Arizona's SB 1070, ruling that states cannot create or enforce local immigration laws that conflict with federal policy. The Obama-era Justice Department brought the suit, arguing Arizona's law violated the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution.
The MassGOP release warned the PROTECT Act could face the same constitutional fate, saying it "raises serious questions about its compatibility with established federal law and precedent, potentially setting the stage for further legal challenges."
Their own leadership voted YES
The press release does not mention what their own Senate and House minority leaders did when the bills came up for a vote.
MASSDAILYNEWS
STAY UPDATED
Get Mass Daily News delivered to your inbox
ADVERTISEMENT · Interested in advertising?
ADVERTISEMENT · Interested in advertising?
In the Senate (Thursday, May 7, 37-3):
- Bruce Tarr (R-Gloucester) — minority leader — YES
- Patrick O'Connor (R-Weymouth) — YES
- Three GOP no votes: Ryan Fattman, Peter Durant, Kelly Dooner
Tarr had asked the Senate earlier in that same session to pause and refer three provisions of the bill to the Supreme Judicial Court for a constitutional review — the same kind of legal review MassGOP is now invoking on the back end. The chamber wouldn't take it up. His motion failed 5-35. Tarr voted YES on final passage anyway. He has had no comment since.
In the House (March 25, 134-21):
- Brad Jones (R-North Reading) — minority leader — YES
- David Vieira (R-Falmouth) — third assistant minority leader — YES
- Marcus Vaughn (R-Wrentham) — YES
- Donald Wong (R-Saugus) — YES
Six Republican legislators in total, including both chamber leaders, crossed the aisle to give Beacon Hill Democrats their margins.
MDN asked the MassGOP press office for comment on the gap between the party committee's statement and the votes their two leaders cast. The party had no comment.
What the bill actually does
ADVERTISEMENT · Interested in advertising?
ADVERTISEMENT · Interested in advertising?
The Senate version of the PROTECT Act, S.3072, lets illegal immigrants sue federal ICE agents personally in state court for excessive force or constitutional violations — a first-in-the-nation provision modeled on 42 U.S.C. § 1983, the Reconstruction-era statute that already lets people sue state and local police.
It also bars Massachusetts jails from honoring ICE detainers, the federal request to hold someone an extra 48 hours after their release date so ICE can pick them up. The practical effect: a convicted illegal immigrant who finishes a state sentence walks out the front door instead of into ICE custody.
The bill blocks new or expanded 287(g) agreements between Massachusetts law enforcement and ICE, bars local police from asking about immigration status, and prohibits ICE from entering courthouses, schools, daycare centers and hospitals without a judicial warrant signed by a judge or magistrate.
The House version, which Jones helped pass in March, did not have the lawsuit provision. Conference negotiators from both chambers will now reconcile the two bills.
Heads to conference
Under new joint rules, conferees have until the first week of January to send Gov. Maura Healey something to sign. Healey is already on board.
If MassGOP is right that the bill defies federal supremacy under Arizona v. United States, the legislators who put it on the conference table include their own Senate Minority Leader and their own House Minority Leader.
Both Tarr and Jones are up for re-election. Massachusetts state senators and representatives serve two-year terms, with all 40 Senate and 160 House seats on the ballot. The state primary is September 1, 2026 and the general election is November 3, 2026.
Loading Comments