Order relative to requesting the opinions of the Honorable Justices of the Supreme Judicial Court on important questions of law relative to promoting rule of law, oversight, trust and equal constitutional treatment
Generates a plain-language summary of the bill text and history.
| Date | Branch | Action |
|---|---|---|
| 5/7/2026 | Senate | Referred to the committee on Senate Rules |
| 5/7/2026 | Senate | Motion (Tarr) to suspend the rules does not prevail -- see Roll Call #153 (Yeas 5 to Nays 35) |
| Bill | Title | Status |
|---|---|---|
| S3015 | Order relative to requesting the opinions of the Honorable the Justices of the Supreme Judicial Court on important questions of law relative to the public records law | Active |
| S3016 | Order relative to requesting the opinions of the Honorable the Justices of the Supreme Judicial Court on important questions of law relative to legislative stipends | Active |
Ordered, Whereas, House 5316, entitled “An Act promoting rule of law, oversight, trust and equal constitutional treatment,” is pending before the Massachusetts State Senate; and Whereas, Section 1 of Senate Amendment No. 3072 to House No. 5316 creates a state law cause of action allowing individuals to bring suit in state court against federal officers acting under color of federal law for alleged violations of rights secured by the Constitution of the United States; and Whereas, Congress has enacted statues governing liability for such violations by federal officers; and Whereas, Section 1 therefore raises substantial questions under the Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution, including whether Congress has occupied the field of federal officer liability through the Federal Tort Claims Act, the Federal Employees Liability Reform and Tort Compensation Act of 1988 (Westfall Act), and related federal remedies, and whether a state law cause of action against federal officers is barred by the doctrine of intergovernmental immunity or constitutes an obstacle to federal objectives; and Whereas, Senate Amendment No. 3072 to House No. 5316 also imposes restrictions on civil immigration enforcement, including restrictions on civil arrests in childcare facilities, schools, health care facilities, and courts, and Whereas, these restrictions raise questions under the Supremacy Clause as to whether they are preempted by federal immigration law under the doctrines of field preemption or obstacle preemption as articulated in Arizona v. United States, 567 U.S. 387 (2012), and related cases; and Whereas, the Senate is of the opinion that such grave doubts create important questions of law and constitutional interpretation that should be resolved before final legislative action is taken; now therefore be it ORDERED, That the opinions of the Honorable Justices of the Supreme Judicial Court be required by the Senate on the following important questions of law: 1. Federal Preemption of Section 1 (State Cause of Action Against Federal Officers) Does Section 1 of Senate Amendment No. 3072—which creates a state law cause of action allowing individuals to sue federal officers in state court for alleged violations of rights secured by the Constitution of the United States—violate the Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution, where Congress has enacted a comprehensive federal framework governing liability for federal officers, including the Federal Tort Claims Act, the Federal Employees Liability Reform and Tort Compensation Act of 1988 ( Westfall Act), and the limited federal constitutional remedies recognized under Webster Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388,(1971), such that Section 1 may be preempted under the doctrines of field preemption, obstacle preemption, or intergovernmental immunity? 2. Federal Preemption of the Bill’s Restrictions on Civil Immigration Enforcement Do the restrictions imposed by Senate Amendment No. 3072 on civil arrests—including restrictions on civil immigration arrests in childcare facilities, schools, health care facilities, and courts—violate the Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution under the doctrines of field preemption or obstacle preemption? 3. Obstacle Preemption Under Arizona v. United States Does Senate Amendment No. 3072, or any of its restrictions, conflict with federal immigration law or federal objectives in a manner that would render the bill, or any part of it, invalid under the doctrine of obstacle preemption as articulated in Arizona v. United States, 567 U.S. 387 (2012)?
Ordered, Whereas, House 5316, entitled “An Act promoting rule of law, oversight, trust and equal constitutional treatment,” is pending before the Massachusetts State Senate; and Whereas, Section 1 of Senate Amendment No. 3072 to House No. 5316 creates a state law cause of action allowing individuals to bring suit in state court against federal officers acting under color of federal law for alleged violations of rights secured by the Constitution of the United States; and Whereas, Congress has enacted statues governing liability for such violations by federal officers; and Whereas, Section 1 therefore raises substantial questions under the Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution, including whether Congress has occupied the field of federal officer liability through the Federal Tort Claims Act, the Federal Employees Liability Reform and Tort Compensation Act of 1988 (Westfall Act), and related federal remedies, and whether a state law cause of action against federal officers is barred by the doctrine of intergovernmental immunity or constitutes an obstacle to federal objectives; and Whereas, Senate Amendment No. 3072 to House No. 5316 also imposes restrictions on civil immigration enforcement, including restrictions on civil arrests in childcare facilities, schools, health care facilities, and courts, and Whereas, these restrictions raise questions under the Supremacy Clause as to whether they are preempted by federal immigration law under the doctrines of field preemption or obstacle preemption as articulated in Arizona v. United States, 567 U.S. 387 (2012), and related cases; and Whereas, the Senate is of the opinion that such grave doubts create important questions of law and constitutional interpretation that should be resolved before final legislative action is taken; now therefore be it ORDERED, That the opinions of the Honorable Justices of the Supreme Judicial Court be required by the Senate on the following important questions of law: 1. Federal Preemption of Section 1 (State Cause of Action Against Federal Officers) Does Section 1 of Senate Amendment No. 3072—which creates a state law cause of action allowing individuals to sue federal officers in state court for alleged violations of rights secured by the Constitution of the United States—violate the Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution, where Congress has enacted a comprehensive federal framework governing liability for federal officers, including the Federal Tort Claims Act, the Federal Employees Liability Reform and Tort Compensation Act of 1988 ( Westfall Act), and the limited federal constitutional remedies recognized under Webster Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388,(1971), such that Section 1 may be preempted under the doctrines of field preemption, obstacle preemption, or intergovernmental immunity? 2. Federal Preemption of the Bill’s Restrictions on Civil Immigration Enforcement Do the restrictions imposed by Senate Amendment No. 3072 on civil arrests—including restrictions on civil immigration arrests in childcare facilities, schools, health care facilities, and courts—violate the Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution under the doctrines of field preemption or obstacle preemption? 3. Obstacle Preemption Under Arizona v. United States Does Senate Amendment No. 3072, or any of its restrictions, conflict with federal immigration law or federal objectives in a manner that would render the bill, or any part of it, invalid under the doctrine of obstacle preemption as articulated in Arizona v. United States, 567 U.S. 387 (2012)?