Committee to vote on Mass. bill that would give illegal aliens publicly funded legal defense

BOSTON — The fate of 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 may be decided by the Joint Judiciary Committee this month.

The joint bill, called An Act Ensuring Access to Equitable Representation in Immigration Proceedings (H. 1954) (S. 1127), 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. It was filed jointly by state Rep. David Rogers and state Sen. Adam Gomez.

“The office of refugees and immigrants (administrator) designs and funds a system delegating the running of it to a nonprofit entity designated by the Administrator (coordinator) to develop and administer a statewide integrated system for immigrant legal representation,” the summary reads.

The legislation, which is being decided on as Massachusetts faces a public defender shortage, states that the administrator of the program would issue requests for proposals from and award grants to qualified attorneys, firms and nonprofit organizations. The state’s public defender program already has a unit specifically devoted to providing illegal immigrants legal services.

Those in support of the bill testified during a Joint Judiciary Committee hearing on Nov. 25, arguing that the surge in arrests and deportations seen amid President Donald Trump’s national immigration crackdown amplifies the need for free legal representation for illegal immigrants.

“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 stakes can potentially include permanent family separation, they can include deportation often to places where people have grave fears of return. As ICE arrests in our communities continue to increase, that need for representation is only growing and truly eclipsing the existing services,” she said.

Immigration policy expert Wendy Wayne said over 55% of illegal immigrants facing legal proceedings are unrepresented, adding that the percentage is even higher for those detained.

“Research has consistently shown that those who are represented by a lawyer are five times more likely to win their immigration case if they have counsel. And for those who are detained, they’re 10 times more likely.” said Wayne, before arguing for what she calls the economic and societal benefits of providing illegal immigrants with legal representation.

“Several studies over the last 10 years have shown the economic benefit to providing legal representation to immigrants in deportation proceedings. Basically, providing representation costs less than the money lost, the revenue lost, when primary wage earners from families are deported because they couldn’t defend themselves,” she said.

But those against the legislation say it’s unfair to taxpayers who may not want to fund legal services for illegal immigrants, as well as to legal citizens relying on public defenders as Massachusetts remains in a shortage.

“Could you imagine losing a family member or loved one to, for example, an illegal immigrant who has been drunk driving and then finding out its your tax dollars going to support that person’s legal defense?” Director of the Massachusetts Coalition for Immigration Reform (MCIR) Henry Barbaro told the Herald.

“This is terrible governance and it simply reflects that state lawmakers don’t think illegal immigration is bad. If they did, they wouldn’t support something like this and wouldn’t do everything else they’re doing to get in the way of ICE. They would support immigration enforcement. And these politicians don’t differentiate between legal and illegal immigrants. If you look at their literature, if you look at their website, it’s all talking about just immigrants. There’s no mention of illegal immigrants. And that’s who this slush fund is designed for: illegal immigrants,” he said.

As the bill makes its way through the legislative process, there is already funding earmarked for the program, if passed and signed into law. In July, the Massachusetts House included $5 million in funding in the FY26 budget for an Immigrant Legal Defense Fund.

The bill requires an eight-person advisory committee to be formed, tasked with making recommendations on services, policies, training, and procedures.

It calls for the administrator to appoint a single representative each from various nonprofit organizations, including MIRA and the American Immigration Lawyers Association, among others. Three committee members from “community-based organizations based in diverse regions of the commonwealth” would also be appointed.

“I think it’s amazingly bad that it’s calling for an advisory committee and the composition of the committee is made up of representatives from these migrant advocacy groups and lawyers. One that really sticks out is MIRA. Their annual budget is like $3.5 million a year or something,” Barbaro said.

Sweet, in her testimony, did not acknowledge that MIRA would be one of the eight members appointed to the committee.

The Judiciary Committee has a deadline of Feb. 23 to vote on whether to advance or kill the legislation.

The Herald has reached out to Rep. Rogers and Sen. Gomez for comment.

-----------