There is a growing chorus of people who want the Justice Department to go after Massachusetts Governor Maura Healey like she robbed a bank, when what she actually did was spend a bunch of money they did not like. As TrendingViews laid out, the distinction between "she governed badly" and "she committed a federal crime" is doing a lot of heavy lifting here, and the people ignoring that distinction are building a machine that will absolutely run them over the second someone else gets the keys.
Here is what happened. Massachusetts has a right-to-shelter law from 1983 that requires the state to provide emergency housing. A surge of migrant families showed up. The state spent hundreds of millions of dollars housing them in hotels and other facilities. Residents watched this happen in real time, saw the price tag, and got furious. That fury is completely understandable. Nobody enjoys watching their tax dollars get vacuumed into a program they never voted for while their own rent goes up.
But being mad about government spending is not the same thing as having a prosecutable case. Federal law covers fraud, bribery, embezzlement, obstruction. It does not cover "the governor followed a state law I wish did not exist." Administering a shelter program that the legislature put on the books is not a felony. Declining to have state cops do federal immigration enforcement is not a felony either. Sanctuary policies rest on the Tenth Amendment principle that the federal government cannot commandeer state officers for federal work. Conservatives championed that exact principle for decades. It does not suddenly become unconstitutional because a Democrat is benefiting from it.
Now, the strongest version of the other side deserves a fair shake. Governors swear an oath to serve their people. When housing is tight and working families feel squeezed, directing massive resources toward new arrivals looks like a governor who has her priorities upside down. People who notice the bill are not bigots. That is a legitimate political argument.
The answer to a legitimate political argument is a legitimate political response. Campaign against her. Flip the legislature. Repeal the shelter mandate. Elect someone who spends differently. That process is slower and less emotionally satisfying than watching someone do a perp walk on cable news, but it is also the only approach that does not create a precedent that eats you alive later.
Because the tool you build for your enemies does not stay in your hands. Once you establish that a governor can catch criminal charges for policy choices the opposing party finds offensive, you have handed that loaded weapon to every future administration. Today it is Healey, Newsom, Hochul, and Walz. Tomorrow it is a Republican governor getting indicted for cutting Medicaid or defunding a program some future Democratic DOJ considers reckless. A country that jails elected officials over budget disputes is not fighting corruption. It is speed running toward becoming one of those countries where the new president's first act is arresting the old one.
Disagree with Healey all day long. Demand receipts for every dollar. Vote her out if you can. Just do not pretend that hating a policy is the same as proving a crime, because that door swings both ways and it does not come with a lock.
Read more trending political news at: Trending Views
Here is what happened. Massachusetts has a right-to-shelter law from 1983 that requires the state to provide emergency housing. A surge of migrant families showed up. The state spent hundreds of millions of dollars housing them in hotels and other facilities. Residents watched this happen in real time, saw the price tag, and got furious. That fury is completely understandable. Nobody enjoys watching their tax dollars get vacuumed into a program they never voted for while their own rent goes up.
But being mad about government spending is not the same thing as having a prosecutable case. Federal law covers fraud, bribery, embezzlement, obstruction. It does not cover "the governor followed a state law I wish did not exist." Administering a shelter program that the legislature put on the books is not a felony. Declining to have state cops do federal immigration enforcement is not a felony either. Sanctuary policies rest on the Tenth Amendment principle that the federal government cannot commandeer state officers for federal work. Conservatives championed that exact principle for decades. It does not suddenly become unconstitutional because a Democrat is benefiting from it.
Now, the strongest version of the other side deserves a fair shake. Governors swear an oath to serve their people. When housing is tight and working families feel squeezed, directing massive resources toward new arrivals looks like a governor who has her priorities upside down. People who notice the bill are not bigots. That is a legitimate political argument.
The answer to a legitimate political argument is a legitimate political response. Campaign against her. Flip the legislature. Repeal the shelter mandate. Elect someone who spends differently. That process is slower and less emotionally satisfying than watching someone do a perp walk on cable news, but it is also the only approach that does not create a precedent that eats you alive later.
Because the tool you build for your enemies does not stay in your hands. Once you establish that a governor can catch criminal charges for policy choices the opposing party finds offensive, you have handed that loaded weapon to every future administration. Today it is Healey, Newsom, Hochul, and Walz. Tomorrow it is a Republican governor getting indicted for cutting Medicaid or defunding a program some future Democratic DOJ considers reckless. A country that jails elected officials over budget disputes is not fighting corruption. It is speed running toward becoming one of those countries where the new president's first act is arresting the old one.
Disagree with Healey all day long. Demand receipts for every dollar. Vote her out if you can. Just do not pretend that hating a policy is the same as proving a crime, because that door swings both ways and it does not come with a lock.
Read more trending political news at: Trending Views
