On August 5, 2026, Governor Healey signed the Massachusetts PROTECT Act. As described in the Act, the legislation is intended to promote “rule of law, oversight, and equal constitutional treatment” and to protect access to courts and public institutions by limiting certain federal immigration enforcement activity and state and local cooperation with that activity. All employers in Massachusetts will be required to comply, and should be aware as to how it affects them. Employers outside of Massachusetts are not subject to the Act, but should be aware as to whether their state has enacted similar legislation.

The Act has particular significance for Massachusetts public institutions and for Massachusetts institutions that employ sworn campus law enforcement officers, including public and private institutions of higher education in Massachusetts. It also creates an employer notification obligation that applies broadly, including to colleges and universities.

The Act does not eliminate federal immigration enforcement authority or change institutions’ obligations under federal law, including the obligation to honor judicially authorized warrants and federal employment verification requirements applicable to Form I-9 records. The Act does provide a directive to public institutions, and guidance to private institutions, to limit cooperation with immigration authorities in the absence of judicial authorization or other legal requirements, and imposes notification requirements related to I-9 inspections that could pose workforce management challenges.

Legal Background

The PROTECT Act generally restricts federal immigration enforcement activity in nonpublic areas of Massachusetts state entities, courtrooms, childcare facilities, and school grounds unless federal authorities have obtained a judicial warrant. It also limits the ability of Massachusetts state and local law enforcement entities to inquire into immigration status and to disclose certain nonpublic immigration-related information to federal immigration authorities, even if the immigration authorities present administrative warrants or other forms of service that are not judicially authorized. In addition, the Act establishes immigration-related notice obligations for Massachusetts employers that receive a notice of inspection for I-9 forms or other employment records.

The Act follows Governor Healey’s January 29, 2026, Executive Order directing Massachusetts schools, including colleges and universities, to require a judicial warrant for entry into nonpublic areas. In so doing, the Act recognizes that while judicially-authorized warrants do mandate compliance with enforcement activity, other forms of process that immigration authorities may present, including administrative warrants, do not require either the state or private entities to comply or cooperate.

The Act’s protections, however, do not bar federal immigration officials from entering areas open to the public, regardless of judicial authority. Institutions of higher education therefore should distinguish carefully between restrictions on access to nonpublic campus areas and the continued possibility of federal enforcement activity in publicly accessible locations.

Campus Access and Public vs. Nonpublic Areas

For colleges and universities in Massachusetts, one of the most important operational questions is which campus spaces are open to the public and which are nonpublic. The Act generally limits federal immigration enforcement activity in covered nonpublic areas absent a judicial warrant, but it does not impose a comparable restriction on access to spaces that are open to the public. This distinction may be especially consequential for institutions with campuses that include a mix of publicly accessible buildings, facilities with restricted entry, residence halls, research spaces, and event venues.

Massachusetts public colleges and universities should evaluate how the Act applies to their facilities in light of their status as state entities. Private colleges and universities should not assume that the Act’s restrictions on access to covered nonpublic areas necessarily apply in the same manner to their campuses. Nevertheless, private colleges and universities may wish to review their own access control practices and law enforcement response protocols, particularly where campus spaces are publicly accessible or where the institution hosts public events.

Institutions should also avoid treating the Act as a categorical prohibition on federal immigration enforcement. The Act may affect where and how enforcement activity occurs, but it does not prevent immigration authorities from being present at or detaining individuals in areas that are open to the public. Institutions should be aware of the limits of federal authority, and be prepared to analyze the types of legal process that authorities may present including judicial warrants, administrative warrants, and/or subpoenas and determine their obligations to comply, cooperate, or deny access.

Sworn Campus Police and Law Enforcement

Many Massachusetts colleges and universities employ sworn campus police or other law enforcement personnel. The Act generally prohibits covered state and local law enforcement entities from inquiring into or recording immigration status and from providing federal immigration authorities with certain nonpublic information, including information about custody status, court appearance dates, and anticipated release dates. The Act also generally prohibits state and local law enforcement from participating in or assisting federal immigration enforcement actions, except when required by law or court order.

Massachusetts institutions with sworn campus law enforcement personnel should assess whether and how these provisions apply to their personnel and operations. In particular, campus police departments may need to review dispatch, incident reporting, detention, records access, and communication practices. The analysis may differ for institutions that use municipal police services rather than maintaining their own sworn force, and institutions should coordinate with applicable law enforcement partners as appropriate.

I-9 and Employment Record Inspection Notices

The Act also affects Massachusetts institutions of higher education in their capacity as employers, and presents potential challenges for managing communications with personnel. When an employer receives a notice of inspection for I-9 forms or other employment records, the Act requires written notice to affected employees within 48 hours. Federal immigration authorities generally provide three business days’ in which an employer must provide I-9s and related documents for inspection. There is no federal requirement to notify employees of the inspection. Under federal law, if the government reviews the provided documentation and determines that the I-9s are in order, there is no need to notify employees; however, if the government identifies I-9s that need to be brought into compliance, the employer may be required to notify only those employees of any irregularities that need to be corrected. The PROTECT Act, however, requires that Massachusetts employers notify all employees of the investigation within 48 hours of receipt of the notice of inspection, well before the government has reviewed the documentation to determine whether there are any compliance issues. 

Because the PROTECT Act’s notification requirement may cause concern among employees whose I-9 paperwork is subject to inspection, Human Resources personnel should work with legal counsel to consider how to meet the Act’s requirements in a manner that will cause the least amount of disruption among the work force. Massachusetts employers, including colleges and universities, may consider conducting an internal audit of I-9 paperwork, so that if a DHS notice of inspection comes, they can assure employees that they have already conducted a review that did not identify issues.

Practical Next Steps

Public and private colleges and universities in Massachusetts should consider the following practical next steps to ensure ongoing compliance with the PROTECT Act:

• Identifying and clearly communicating which campus areas are open to the public and which are nonpublic, including in residence halls, administrative offices, research facilities, and access-controlled spaces.
• Reviewing protocols for responding to federal law enforcement requests for campus access, including procedures for escalating judicial warrants, administrative warrants, subpoenas, notices of inspection, and other legal process to appropriate institutional personnel.
• Assessing whether sworn campus law enforcement personnel are subject to the Act and, where appropriate, updating policies, training, reporting practices, and records disclosure procedures.
• Establishing an expedited process for Human Resources and counsel to provide written employee notice within 48 hours of receiving an I-9 or employment-record inspection notice, and considering communication templates and modalities designed to support employees and minimize disruption.
• Considering an internal audit of I-9 work authorization documents.
• Coordinating among campus police or public safety, Human Resources, Student Affairs, Facilities, International Student Services, Communications, and the Office of General Counsel so that each office understands its role in responding to federal immigration enforcement activity.
• Monitoring implementing guidance, future enforcement activity, and other developments that may clarify the Act’s application to higher education institutions.

The Massachusetts PROTECT Act introduces new compliance considerations for institutions of higher education, while leaving in place important federal obligations and enforcement authorities. A measured review of campus access protocols, law enforcement practices, and employment record inspection procedures may help institutions respond consistently and appropriately as the legal landscape continues to develop.

How Hunton’s Higher Education Team Can Help

Hunton’s Higher Education Team regularly advises colleges and universities on compliance with federal and state education laws, safety and security, and best practices for anticipating and responding to federal law enforcement activity on campus. If you have questions regarding these issues, the PROTECT ACT, or its implications for your institution, please contact your regular Hunton Higher Education attorney.