This Massachusetts sheriff says his contract with ICE overrides state law
It’s bad enough that any official in Massachusetts is participating in the carnival of unaccountable cruelty that is this nation’s immigration detention system.
Read more Three share lead as Massachusetts Amateur gets underway at Winchester
It’s even worse that an official is refusing to hand over vital information on how detainees are being treated in our own state.
Plymouth County Sheriff Joseph McDonald operates the only county lock-up where civil immigration detainees are held in Massachusetts. His facility currently houses 507 immigrants.
Attorneys for those detainees have asked the sheriff to provide information on the kind of medical care they are receiving. But even though his Plymouth County Correctional Facility is a state entity, McDonald is refusing to turn over the information. He is essentially arguing that his federal contract puts him above the state’s public records law.
McDonald, who maintains that his detainees enjoy humane conditions far superior to those in federal facilities, rejects that characterization.
“Plymouth County Sheriff’s Office is not beyond the reach of state public records laws, and we are responsive to FOIA and public inquiries,” he said in an emailed statement. “However, we must comply with federal law.”
It’s easy to see why people are concerned about these detainees. Even in the best of times, ICE facilities across the country have been notorious for neglecting the medical needs of the immigrants they are legally required to care for. But wanton cruelty is central to the Trump administration’s greatly expanded immigration enforcement operation. The death rate in detention centers has more than doubled under Trump, according to a Reuters analysis. Since January of last year, at least 50 detainees have died in ICE facilities, many from lack of timely care.
Journalists and elected officials have uncovered widespread medical neglect across detention facilities, where inhumanity is accepted and even encouraged by administration officials.
The Plymouth County jail might not be “Alligator Alcatraz,” but advocates have good reason to worry about detainees there. Advocates have decried McDonald’s failure to provide immigrant detainees . For several years, Senators Elizabeth Warren and Ed Markey have been calling on ICE to improve conditions in Plymouth, citing a DHS investigation in 2022 that reported rotten food, limited access to clean water, and delays in medical attention. , inmates have described a lack of timely access to health care and medications. And it’s getting worse, said Leah Hastings, staff attorney at Prisoners’ Legal Services of Massachusetts.
“The past three months or so have been the highest volume of medical-related issues at Plymouth I’ve seen since I started in 2023,” Hastings said. Detainees have reported long delays after multiple requests for medical care, difficulty getting essential prescription medications, slow or no appointments for specialists and imaging, and weeks of suffering with tooth infections and other dental conditions.
“Some detained people have told me medical staff say there is insufficient funding or supplies to provide them with the care” they need, Hastings said.
Read more Rahm Emanuel will assail Netanyahu in Tel Aviv speech as American politics shift against Israel
In December, McDonald said critics of the conditions in his jail are “lying.” In his statement, he rejected the allegations of mistreatment.
“I am proud of the humane care and custody we provide in the Plymouth County Correctional Facility,” he said. “We are…routinely audited by federal and state agencies, and routinely exceed all applicable standards.”
We shouldn’t have to take his word on that, though. Which is why the ACLU of Massachusetts asked for a bunch of records that would show what kind of medical care detainees are getting in Plymouth, how much it costs, and whether any immigrants have been sick enough to be sent to outside medical facilities.
The sheriff refused to hand over the bulk of them, because some contain detainees’ identifying information – even though the ACLU specifically asked that all records be anonymized. When the ACLU sued for the records in February, the sheriff’s response included an argument that could have enormous implications if it is allowed to stand.
It uses an expansive principle called “field preemption,” which holds that state law simply does not apply in a field such as immigration enforcement, which is wholly governed by federal laws. In other words, because of the sheriff’s contract with a federal agency, the state public records law does not apply.
“The argument seems to be that the state is not allowed to have a public records law that requires any transparency that relates to Plymouth’s immigration detention operation,” said Dan McFadden, managing attorney at the ACLU. “That means it would be entirely shielded from public scrutiny, which would be highly concerning.”
It sure would. It cannot be that signing a contract with a federal agency puts a county official beyond the reach of the state public records law, and effectively beyond review by the voters and taxpayers who put him in office and largely fund his operation.
McDonald argues that federal law, and a couple of decisions by the Commonwealth’s Supervisor of Records in other counties, tie his hands here.
The two sides will argue their positions at Suffolk Superior Court on Tuesday, and the sheriff’s spokesperson said McDonald is looking forward to direction from the judge.
McFadden, of the ACLU, said a ruling in the sheriff’s favor would undermine government transparency in this state “for the purpose of assisting ICE to maintain secrecy in its detention operations.”
None of us should want any part of that appalling project.
Post Comment