Governor Healey Demands ICE Halt Flights from Hanscom

On December 12, Governor Maura Healey wrote to the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and ICE leadership denouncing the use of private charter flights at Hanscom Field to remove Massachusetts residents from the state.

The letter came after months of organizing, research, and sustained pressure from Lexington Alarm and other groups north and west of Boston who founded DE-ICE Hanscom, began weekly standouts at the entrance of the airport, and began a letter campaign to Governor Healey and Massport.

In her letter Governor Healey wrote that ICE is using chartered aircraft at Hanscom to “quickly remove residents and sever them from their family, friends, and counsel without due process of law.” She emphasized that many of the people being detained and flown out of Massachusetts have no criminal convictions or charges, and that many are in the middle of lawful immigration processes through Massachusetts courts. She concluded “This is not the justice we believe in or stand for in Massachusetts. This practice must stop.”

For DE-ICE Hanscom the language was strikingly familiar.

For months, Lexington Alarm, Concord Indivisible, and many other groups north and west of Boston have been saying the same thing in letters to Massport, the Massport Board, and the governor herself. In the original “letter to Massport and Gov. Healey,” sent hundreds of times by residents across Massachusetts, Lexington Alarm warned that Massport was facilitating the removal of people entitled to due process under Massachusetts law and the state constitution.

Our letter argued that when asylum seekers, people with valid work permits, or spouses of U.S. citizens are flown out of state without access to counsel or family support, their constitutional rights are violated. We cited Lunn v. Commonwealth and related cases establishing that Massachusetts officials have no authority to assist ICE in civil immigration enforcement. It also made clear that Massport cannot hide behind federal preemption where it has regulatory authority over its own facilities and contractors. The federal government has no authority to commandeer state actors and facilities.

Governor Healey’s letter now echoes those same core points.

Like the DE-ICE Hanscom letter, the governor’s letter centers due process as the central harm. She explicitly acknowledged that people are being removed “often within hours of arrest,” a phrase that mirrors our charge that these removals are designed to cut people off from lawyers, courts, and families before they can assert their rights.

The governor also adopted the same moral framing many of those protesting have used from the beginning. She described the practice as “intentionally cruel” and harmful not just to individuals, but to entire communities. Our letter similarly argued that these removals do not make communities safer, and instead terrorize immigrant families and undermine trust in public institutions.

A key issue is our focus on state responsibility. While the governor addressed her letter to federal officials, our DE-ICE Hanscom original letter focused squarely on Massport’s role as a state authority that controls access to Hanscom Field. That letter laid out specific actions Massport could take such as publishing records of ICE flights, enforcing compliance with Massachusetts law, regulating their contractors, and ensuring that state police activity at Hanscom complies with Lunn and Attorney General guidance.

Governor Healey’s letter stops short of outlining those specific state actions, but its conclusions point in the same direction. By clearly identifying the harm and stating that the practice must stop, the governor has now publicly affirmed the foundation of the DE_ICE argument: that what is happening at Hanscom violates basic constitutional protections in Massachusetts.

This acknowledgment matters. It confirms the charges against ICE raised by residents, families, and advocates are not exaggerated or speculative. They were real, documented, and serious enough to warrant a formal letter demanding ICE halt these actions from the governor of Massachusetts.

At the same time, we all recognize that a letter alone is not enough. ICE won’t change its behavior because of a strongly worded statement. That is why our original letter emphasized our state’s independent authority and responsibility under state law.

We have repeatedly said Massachusetts cannot simply denounce unconstitutional practices while allowing state facilities to be used to carry them out. The governor’s own words now reinforce that position. The next step is ensuring that Massport’s policies and practices align with the values and legal principles the governor has publicly affirmed.

The December 12 letter is not the end of the story. It is a milestone — and a clear signal that sustained local organizing, public pressure, and careful legal argument can take us further toward the day when ICE operations in our state fully respect the due process rights of all people on American soil.