'Uncharted waters': Boston finds itself in the Trump administration's crosshairs
ResumeBoston is experiencing what some say is an unprecedented attack from the federal government.
"City government should be spending money on plowing snow and ... making it safe to walk downtown — not playing defense for a whole bunch of hearings in Washington," said former Boston City Councilor Larry DiCara, referring to Mayor Michelle Wu's recent appearance before the House Oversight Committee.
DiCara served on the council in the 1970s and '80s. He says Trump is not the first president to wield federal funds as a weapon.
“President Richard Nixon did not like Massachusetts for a host of reasons,” DiCara said, “one of them being that Jack Kennedy beat him in 1960, the other that in 1972, when he had that enormous landslide, Massachusetts was the only state to vote against him."
Nixon went on to shut down the Charlestown Navy Yard, as well as a 58-acre military facility in South Boston — moves considered by some as retaliation against the city.
But some political observers say that's nothing compared to the pain the current administration could bring over Boston's immigration stance.
“ Who knows what will happen?” DiCara added. “These are uncharted waters.”
So far, Trump officials have promised to bring "hell” to Boston by means of immigration enforcement. They've floated the sale of federal buildings here and briefly fired key JFK Presidential Library employees. GOP members of Congress called the mayors of Boston, Chicago, New York City and Denver to D.C. for a hostile hearing on city policies that limit police cooperation with ICE.
One Republican on the House Oversight Committee, Rep. Anna Paulina Luna of Florida, accused the mayors of being “ideologically misled” and formally recommended criminal investigations of the mayors by the U.S. Department of Justice.
Luna's letter, obtained by WBUR, cites "Wu's enforcement of
sanctuary city policies, specifically the Boston Trust Act, which may constitute violations of federal immigration law." (Luna's office sent similar letters regarding the mayors of Denver and Chicago. New York City Mayor Eric Adams, whose federal corruption charges were dropped by the DOJ last month, was spared.)
The day after the oversight hearing, the Small Business Administration announced it would be moving its offices out of "sanctuary cities" — Boston, New York City, Denver, Chicago, Atlanta and Seattle.
On Thursday, Boston again appeared on the radar of the Trump administration, this time with a communiqué from the newly-assembled Federal Task Force to Combat Antisemitism. The task force announced that officials wanted to "engage" with officials in Boston — as well as New York City, Los Angeles and Chicago — to discuss their responses to antisemitic incidents at schools and on college campuses.
The slings and arrows aimed at Boston sparked some grassroots outrage. Videos on TikTok with the hashtag #bostontok garnered millions of views, punching back at the border czar's "bringing hell" threat.
The attacks on "sanctuary cities" date back to Trump's first presidency, when he targeted cities that limit cooperation with ICE. While campaigning for re-election, Trump doubled down, promising to "immediately ban all sanctuary cities in the United States” once elected.
That message resonated with Louis Murray, of Boston's West Roxbury neighborhood. He’s with a group called Bostonians Against Sanctuary Cities and he said it’s fair game for the president to withhold federal money from cities that don't comply with the administration's immigration requests.
“ I'm all for President Trump using the power of the presidency, the unified power of the presidential branch, to make Boston come to heel,” he said.
Murray said city officials should seek a détente with Trump and reverse the Boston Trust Act, which limits cooperation with ICE to criminal matters.
“ I think the real concern that Mayor Wu and the City Council should have is what would be the impact of the entire conceptual wielding of power by the Trump administration against the city of Boston? What will be the economic impact? The safety impact? The impact on our schools?” Murray said.
Boston's Trust Act took effect in 2014, when President Barack Obama, a Democrat, was notching a record number of deportations. That happened largely with the assistance of local and state police in other parts of the country, which had signed on to assist federal immigration officers.
The Boston City Council decided local resources should not be used for civil immigration enforcement. But when ICE seeks a detainer for someone with a criminal warrant, city officials say police do comply.
And now, some city councilors are considering ways to expand the policy — or at least further clarify it.
This week, the council held a hearing with a panel of four immigrants’ rights activists to discuss how the policy could be improved. Advocates said the policy could narrow the types of crimes that reach the threshold for cooperation with ICE. They also suggested the city could better communicate to residents what the Trust Act entails.
Amy Grunder, with the MIRA Coalition, told the council there are more than 50 municipalities in Massachusetts with rules similar to Boston’s Trust Act.
“Boston is a true leader in its commitment to its hard-working immigrant communities, and an example to our 350 cities and towns in Massachusetts, to our state Legislature and to the nation,” she said.
Despite threats that Wu and other big city mayors could face charges, some legal experts say those claims are baseless.
“ I think these threats of criminal prosecution are empty threats,” said Ahilan Arulanantham, a professor at the UCLA School of Law.
And he said it’s well-established that the feds can’t tell cities how to handle local policing.
The more open question, Arulanantham added, is whether the president has the authority to withhold funds from cities where he disagrees with local policy. Attempts to deprive cities of funding under the first Trump administration were struck down by lower court decisions. But a New York Appeals panel decided in favor of the administration in early 2020.
Unlike more established law that bars the “commandeering” of local police, Arulanantham said, the U.S. Supreme Court has yet to tackle the practice of withholding funds over immigration enforcement.
”On that side of things, there's more play in the joints,” he said.
Thomas Whalen, who teaches American political history at Boston University, said Trump’s retaliation strategy make him unlike any president before him.
“Grover Cleveland, he lost a second term bid right after his first term, but then he gained it back,” Whalen said. “He didn't take the kind of revenge tour that Trump is embarking on right now.”
Whalen said Trump is attacking reforms made under the “progressive era” of American government, which led to benefits people now take for granted, like Social Security and Medicare. And he said cuts in broader funding for things like education and scientific research make the Boston area particularly vulnerable.
“Higher ed, the medical establishment — we have the best in the world,” Whalen said. “We're basically on the edge of tearing that down.”
Whalen says political favoritism is nothing new in American history. But in recent decades, Massachusetts has navigated Republican administrations relatively well, thanks to powerful Democrats like Ted Kennedy, a longtime senator, and Thomas “Tip” O’Neill, former House speaker.
Those were different times. With the Democrats in the minority in Congress and struggling to stop any of Trump's actions, the heat is now coming directly at cities like Boston, pitting mayors against the president of the United States.
This segment aired on March 13, 2025.
Related:
INTERESTING HISTORY WORTH READING!
SANCTUARY CITIES HAVE LOWER CRIME RATES THAN THOSE FILLED WITH AMERICANS...THEY COME HERE TO RAISE THEIR FAMILIES IN PEACE...HOW COME IT'S THE BIGOTS, RACISTS & WHITE SUPREMACISTS RAISING THESE ISSUES?
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.