[House Hearing, 118 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
OVERSIGHT OF THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF
HOMELAND SECURITY
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
WEDNESDAY, JULY 26, 2023
__________
Serial No. 118-39
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on the Judiciary
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available via: http://judiciary.house.gov
__________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
53-168 WASHINGTON : 2023
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
JIM JORDAN, Ohio, Chair
DARRELL ISSA, California JERROLD NADLER, New York, Ranking
KEN BUCK, Colorado Member
MATT GAETZ, Florida ZOE LOFGREN, California
MIKE JOHNSON, Louisiana SHEILA JACKSON LEE, Texas
ANDY BIGGS, Arizona STEVE COHEN, Tennessee
TOM McCLINTOCK, California HENRY C. ``HANK'' JOHNSON, Jr.,
TOM TIFFANY, Wisconsin Georgia
THOMAS MASSIE, Kentucky ADAM SCHIFF, California
CHIP ROY, Texas ERIC SWALWELL, California
DAN BISHOP, North Carolina TED LIEU, California
VICTORIA SPARTZ, Indiana PRAMILA JAYAPAL, Washington
SCOTT FITZGERALD, Wisconsin J. LUIS CORREA, California
CLIFF BENTZ, Oregon MARY GAY SCANLON, Pennsylvania
BEN CLINE, Virginia JOE NEGUSE, Colorado
LANCE GOODEN, Texas LUCY McBATH, Georgia
JEFF VAN DREW, New Jersey MADELEINE DEAN, Pennsylvania
TROY NEHLS, Texas VERONICA ESCOBAR, Texas
BARRY MOORE, Alabama DEBORAH ROSS, North Carolina
KEVIN KILEY, California CORI BUSH, Missouri
HARRIET HAGEMAN, Wyoming GLENN IVEY, Maryland
NATHANIEL MORAN, Texas BECCA BALINT, Vermont
LAUREL LEE, Florida
WESLEY HUNT, Texas
RUSSELL FRY, South Carolina
CHRISTOPHER HIXON, Majority Staff Director
AMY RUTKIN, Minority Staff Director & Chief of Staff
------
C O N T E N T S
----------
Wednesday, July 26, 2023
Page
OPENING STATEMENTS
The Honorable Jim Jordan, Chair of the Committee on the Judiciary
from the State of Ohio......................................... 1
The Honorable Jerrold Nadler, Ranking Member of the Committee on
the Judiciary from the State of New York....................... 3
WITNESS
The Hon. Alejandro Mayorkas, Secretary, U.S. Department of
Homeland Security
Oral Testimony................................................. 5
Prepared Testimony............................................. 8
LETTERS, STATEMENTS, ETC. SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING
All materials submitted for the record by the Committee on the
Judiciary are listed below..................................... 112
Materials submitted by the Honorable Sheila Jackson Lee, a Member
of the Committee on the Judiciary from the State of Texas, for
the record
An article entitled, ``Texas trooper alleges inhumane
treatment of migrants by state officials along the
southern border,'' Jul. 18, 2023, CBS News
An article entitled, ``Southern border `eerily quiet' after
policy shift on asylum seekers,'' Jul. 12, 2023, The
Washington Post
An article entitled, ``Exclusive: Texas troopers told to push
children into Rio Grande, deny water to migrants, records
say,'' Jul. 17, 2023, Houston Chronicle
A document from the Hon. Alejandro Mayorkas, Secretary, U.S.
Department of Homeland Security, Mar. 29, 2022, submitted by
the Honorable Darrell Issa, a Member of the Committee on the
Judiciary from the State of California, for the record
Not provided at time of publication
A fact sheet entitled, ``Quick Facts: Fentanyl Trafficking
Offenses,'' United States Sentencing Commission, FY 2018-FY
2022, submitted by the Honorable Henry C. ``Hank'' Johnson,
Jr., a Member of the Committee on the Judiciary from the State
of Georgia, for the record
Materials submitted by the Honorable Mike Johnson, a Member of
the Committee on the Judiciary from the State of Louisiana, for
the record
An article entitled, ``Mayorkas testifies DHS is creating
`Disinformation Governance Board,' '' Apr. 27, 2022, Fox
News
A colaborative statement entitled, ``Public Statement on the
Hunter Biden Emails,'' Oct. 19, 2020
Materials submitted by the Honorable Pramila Jayapal, a Member of
the Committee on the Judiciary from the State of Washington,
for the record
An article entitled, ``The migrant crisis that still hasn't
arrived,'' May 23, 2023, Politico
An article entitled, ``Burning Cell Towers, Out of Baseless
Fear They Spread the Virus.'' Apr. 10, 2020, The New York
Times
Materials submitted by the Honorable Matt Gaetz, a Member of the
Committee on the Judiciary from the State of Florida, for the
record
An article entitled, ``U.S. suspends asylum appointments in
Texas border city after extortion reports,'' Jun. 12,
2023, Reuters
An article entitled, ``US halts online asylum appointments at
Texas crossing after extortion warnings,'' Jun. 12, 2023,
AP News
An article entitled, ``US halts appointments using migrant
phone app at Texas border crossing,'' Jun. 13, 2023, The
Guardian
An article entitled, ``Lawyers Say Helping Asylum Seekers in
Border Custody Is Nearly Impossible,'' Jul. 22, 2023, The New
York Times, submitted by the Honorable Mary Gay Scanlon, a
Member of the Committee on the Judiciary from the State of
Pennsylvania, for the record
Materials submitted by the Honorable Cori Bush, a Member of the
Committee on the Judiciary from the State of Missouri, for the
record
A document entitled, ``(U//FOUO) 0900 CETC SITREP: Violence
Across Multiple U.S. Cities,'' Jun. 2, 2020, U.S.
Department of Homeland Security
An article entitled, ``Homeland Security Admits It Tends to
Manufacture Fake Terrorism for Trump,'' Nov. 5, 2022,
Gizmodo
A bulletin entitled, ``Summary of Terrorism--Related Threat
to the United States,'' May 24, 2023, National Terrorism
Advisory System, U.S. Department of Homeland Security
A document entitled, ``DHS Intelligence Report Cribs Andy Ngo
Article,'' Weekly Dometic OSINT Report, 10DEC2022 to
16DEC2022, Tripwire
An article entitled, ``DHS's Newest Target: Atlanta `Cop
City' Activists,'' Jun. 13, 2023, Just Security
A State Warrant and Mittimus, Affidavit, Dec. 15, 2022, Clerk
of Superior Court DeKalb County
An article entitled, ``Tracking Movement of Illegal Aliens from
NGO's to Interior of the USA,'' Dec. 5, 2022, Heritage
Foundation, submitted by the Honorable Troy Nehls, a Member of
the Committee on the Judiciary from the State of Texas, for the
record
Remarks by President Biden and Vice President Harris in a Meeting
on Immigration, Mar. 24, 2021, The White House, submitted by
the Honorable Wesley Hunt, a Member of the Committee on the
Judiciary from the State of Texas, for the record
APPENDIX
DHS data on U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, submitted
by the Honorable Becca Balint, a Member of the Committee on the
Judiciary from the State of Vermont, for the record
A graph entitled, ``Border Apprehensions, October 2015 through
June 2023,'' American Immigration Council, submitted by the
Honorable Veronica Escobar, a Member of the Committee on the
Judiciary from the State of Texas, for the record
Statement submitted by the Honorable Sheila Jackson Lee, a Member
of the Committee on the Judiciary from the State of Texas, for
the record
QUESTIONS AND RESPONSES FOR THE RECORD
Questions to the Hon. Alejandro Mayorkas, Secretary, U.S.
Department of Homeland Security, submitted by the Honorable
Lance Gooden, a Member of the Committee on the Judiciary from
the State of Texas, the Honorable Kevin Kiley, a Member of the
Committee on the Judiciary from the State of California,
Harriet Hageman, a Member of the Committee on the Judiciary
from the State of Wyoming, and the Honorable Cori Bush, a
Member of the Committee on the Judiciary from the State of
Missouri, for the record
No response at time of publication
OVERSIGHT OF THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
----------
Wednesday, July 26, 2023
House of Representatives
Committee on the Judiciary
Washington, DC
The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:01 a.m., in
Room 2141, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Jim Jordan
[Chair of the Committee] presiding.
Members present: Representatives Jordan, Issa, Buck, Gaetz,
Johnson of Louisiana, Biggs, McClintock, Tiffany, Massie, Roy,
Bishop, Spartz, Fitzgerald, Bentz, Cline, Gooden, Van Drew,
Nehls, Moore, Kiley, Hageman, Moran, Lee, Hunt, Fry, Nadler,
Lofgren, Jackson Lee, Cohen, Johnson of Georgia, Schiff,
Swalwell, Lieu, Jayapal, Correa, Scanlon, Neguse, McBath, Dean,
Escobar, Ross, Bush, Ivey, and Balint.
Chair Jordan. The Committee will come to order.
Without objection, the Chair is authorized to declare a
recess at any time.
We welcome everyone to today's hearing on Oversight of the
Department of Homeland Security. We welcome the Secretary here.
The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Texas to lead
us in the pledge.
All. I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States
of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one
Nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for
all.
Chair Jordan. The Chair is now recognized for an opening
statement.
After 2\1/2\ years of the Biden border crisis, here is what
administration officials have to told us:
The Biden Administration's policies have led to more national security
threats.
The Biden Administration's policies make it less likely--less likely--
that enforcement actions will be taken against criminal aliens.
ICE officers have been reassigned from their duties locating and
arresting aliens to simply processing illegal border crossers, if
they report to ICE, as they were ordered to when they were released
at the border.
ICE officers are attempting to arrest fewer aliens because of the Biden
Administration's enforcement priorities memo.
According to the IG, we know that even aliens who illegally
cross the border who are on the Terrorist Watchlist can be
released into the United States, free to board an airplane, and
head to the U.S. city of their choice.
We know that record numbers of illegal aliens, terrorists,
and fentanyl have crossed our Southwest border during the 2\1/
2\ years of this administration.
We know that not only are communities on the Southwest
border overwhelmed, so are cities 2,000-plus miles away from
the border.
With the current rate of removals and the current number of
nondetained aliens who have been ordered removed from the
United States at over 1.2 million, it would take 20 years for
removal of those individuals.
Criminal aliens who could have been removed under previous
administrations are likely not subject to removal today under
the Biden Administration.
We know that Border Patrol does not specifically check the
home country criminal history of aliens it encounters at the
border.
We know that the Biden Administration's open border
policies have led directly to the deaths of Noel Rodriguez and
Kayla Hamilton, the violent assault of a teenaged girl in
Alabama, and the victimization of countless other American
citizens.
We know that this administration repeatedly violates the
law under the guise of instituting safe, orderly, and humane
policies, but nothing about the Biden Administration's policy
is safe, orderly, or humane.
In fact, there have been more than 5.6 million illegal
alien encounters across the Southwest border since the start of
the Biden Administration, and that doesn't include the over 1.5
million gotaways.
Millions of foreign nationals have indebted themselves to
the smuggling cartels to get to this country. Millions of
foreign nationals have subjected themselves to assault,
robbery, or worse, on the way to the border, because they know
that, more likely than not, they will be allowed to stay in the
United States once they get here.
I know that today Secretary Mayorkas is going to try to
paint a rosy picture of this disastrous mismanagement of our
border, but the numbers don't lie. As of June, border
encounters were down from record highs of 252,000-145,000. Only
this administration and my Democrat colleagues would call it a
success when monthly encounter numbers are near 150,000.
In fact, from Fiscal Year 2014 to the beginning of the
Biden Administration, there were only four months with an
apprehension number higher than 100,000. Under the Biden
Administration, there have now been 29 straight months--29
months in a row--with more than 100,000 border encounters,
illegal encounters on our borders.
DHS was created in the wake of September 11, 2001, after
the terrorist attack. It was created to help ensure Americans'
safety. Admittedly, this is an enormous task, and it is one in
which this Secretary has completely failed.
Instead of building off the previous administration's
success, this administration has abandoned any semblance of
border security and immigration enforcement. Americans are
paying the price and they demand accountability.
With that, I yield to the Ranking Member, the gentleman
from New York, for an opening statement.
Mr. Nadler. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Chair, we are, once again, far afield from the work
this Committee should be doing. The Department of Homeland
Security was born in the wake of the September 11th attacks and
exists to protect our Nation from new and emerging threats.
That work is serious business.
In years past, under the leadership of Chair of both
parties, when we welcomed the Secretary of Homeland Security
into this hearing room, we took our responsibilities seriously.
To be sure, some of the questions we posed in those past
hearings were tough. Debate is often heated when we discuss
important topics like immigration and the security of the
Nation. Our work on both sides of the aisle was grounded in a
good-faith effort to advance the mission of the department and
to keep our country safe.
How times have changed. A few weeks ago, desperate for
votes on the debt ceiling deal, Speaker McCarthy promised the
extreme MAGA wing of his party that they could pursue the
impeachment of Secretary Mayorkas.
As Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene put it, if she was
going to vote for the debt ceiling bill, she wanted some,
quote, ``dessert.'' As she so eloquently put it, ``Everyone
loves dessert and that's impeachment. Someone needs to be
impeached.''
Like many of her colleagues, she seemed not to care who was
impeached, so long as they could engage in the political
exercise of impeaching somebody in the Biden Administration.
She singled out Secretary Mayorkas as, quote, ``the lowest
hanging fruit.''
Unfortunately, as we have already heard from the Chair,
today's hearing will not be about legitimate Congressional
oversight or finding out the facts. Instead, the Chair and his
colleagues in the majority will use today's hearing as a
predicate for a completely baseless attempt to impeach
Secretary Mayorkas. They will do so at the behest of the most
extreme MAGA Republicans. It will be one more exercise in
political theater for the right-wing outrage machine before the
August break. Sadly, the outrage will be entirely evidence-
free.
Don't just take my word for it. In October 2022, before the
Republicans took the majority, and before any investigation had
started, Chair Jordan said that Secretary Mayorkas deserves
impeachment.
More recently, he said, quote, ``It is not a matter of if;
it's a matter of when.'' That's right, who needs high crimes
and misdemeanors? Chair Jordan thinks the DHS Secretary should
be impeached because he, quote, ``deserves it.''
To be clear, Republicans have not established any
legitimate grounds to impeach Secretary Mayorkas. They have not
uncovered evidence of wrongdoing or malfeasance of any kind.
They have policy disagreements with the Secretary, and so do
we, but policy disagreements and personal grudges are not a
basis for impeachment.
Throughout this hearing, you will hear more of the same
bogus claims that we have been hearing for the past six
months--some of it dangerous; some of it petty; none of it
true.
First, Republicans will say that, as a result of, quote,
``invasion'' of migrants at our Southern border, we no longer
have a country.
Second, they will say that Secretary Mayorkas opened our
borders deliberately and is willfully violating our immigration
laws.
Third, they will say that all migrants are suspect because
they are smuggling drugs, especially fentanyl, across our
Southern border.
Fourth, they will say, without evidence, that Secretary
Mayorkas lied to Congress.
Not one of these claims is true. Let's address each one in
turn.
The invasion narrative some Members push in this hearing
room is bigoted, fact-free, and dangerous. Next month, we will
commemorate the fourth anniversary of the El Paso shooting. In
2019, a domestic terrorist walked into a Walmart in El Paso,
Texas and murdered 23 people and injured 22 others. He posted a
hateful and racist manifesto online prior to the attack,
espousing White nationalist theories, like the great
replacement theory, and claiming that there was a, quote,
``Hispanic invasion.'' He told investigators that he was
targeting Mexicans.
We can draw a straight line from the hateful rhetoric we
hear from some Congressional Republicans to that horrific
tragedy. Our words matter. I implore my colleagues to be
careful about how we discuss these issues today.
I hope we can stick to the actual facts. Opened our
borders? The reality is that Secretary Mayorkas is aggressively
enforcing our immigration laws. The administration has issued a
new asylum regulation that just yesterday a court determined
was too restrictive. The administration has also opened
additional legal pathways for migrants to come via refugee
processing on a case-by-case parole determination.
No matter what you think of these policies, they appear to
be working. As of now, border numbers are at their lowest point
since February 2021, with border apprehension numbers down 70
percent--down 70 percent--from they were just 10 weeks ago.
Further, the Biden Administration has deported or expelled
over 2.5 million people in the last two years. This is nearly
as many people as President Obama deported in his entire eight
years in office.
These are not the policies of an open border or an
administration not executing our laws. They are the opposite.
As we have discussed, drugs are, in fact, coming into this
country. However, as every expert seems to agree, they are
coming largely through ports of entry. According to CBP's own
data, they are being brought in overwhelmingly by U.S.
citizens.
Last, no, the Secretary did not lie to Congress. Nobody
believes that Secretary Mayorkas knowingly and willfully misled
Congress during last year's testimony, and any assertion to the
Congress is flat-out false.
Thank you for being here today, Secretary Mayorkas. I hope
the good men and women of the department will not be
disheartened by what they hear today. I have confidence that
they will not let these baseless attacks deter them from their
commitment to the work that is so essential to the safety of
our Nation.
With that, I thank the Chair and I yield back.
Chair Jordan. The gentleman yields back.
Without objection, all other opening statements will be
included in the record.
Chair Jordan. We will now introduce today's witness, the
Hon. Alejandro Mayorkas. Mr. Mayorkas is Secretary of the
Department of Homeland Security. He was sworn in on February 2,
2021.
We welcome our witness and thank him for appearing here
today.
We will begin by swearing you in. Will you please rise and
raise your right hand.
Do you swear or affirm under penalty of perjury that the
testimony you're about to give is the truth and correct, to the
best of your knowledge, information, and belief, so help you
God?
Let the record reflect that the witness has answered in the
affirmative.
Mr. Mayorkas, you know how this goes. You've done this
several times. You get approximately five minutes for an
opening statement. We got your written statement last night. I
read through it. We'll look forward to your remarks, and then,
we'll go right into questioning.
STATEMENT OF THE HON. ALEJANDRO MAYORKAS
Secretary Mayorkas. Thank you very much, Mr. Chair, Ranking
Member Nadler, distinguished Members of this Committee.
I'm immensely proud to be here to discuss the work of the
United States Department of Homeland Security. Every day,
members of our extraordinary workforce--260,000 selfless,
dedicated, and talented public servants across the country and
around the world--make sure that travelers reach their
destination safely; protect our shores and harbors; keep
fentanyl and other deadly drugs from entering our country; help
families rebuild after the devastation of a natural disaster;
protect our ability to safely and securely turn on our
computers, faucets, and lights, and secure our border, despite
the broken and outdated immigration system in which we operate.
These heroic men and women are meeting challenges that have
grown more complex and dynamic throughout the 20 years since
our department was established. As the threats have evolved,
so, too, has our department--innovating and advancing, as we
secure our homeland and keep the American public safe.
We are leading an unprecedented effort to interdict the
flow of fentanyl into our communities, which has escalated for
more than five years. We seized nearly two million pounds of
narcotics last fiscal year. Operations Blue Lotus and Four
Horsemen alone stopped nearly 10,000 pounds of fentanyl from
the U.S.; led to 284 arrests and yielded invaluable insights
into the transnational criminal organizations wreaking this
death and destruction on our communities.
When our department was created after the tragedy of 9/11,
foreign terrorists were our primary terrorism-related focus.
While that concern certainly persists, the most prominent
terrorism-related threat we now confront is from lone offenders
and small groups already present here and radicalized to
violence, based on ideologies of hate, antigovernment
sentiments, false narratives, and personal grievances.
Thanks to support from Congress, we have developed grant
programs and distributed more than $50 million in funds to help
communities prevent acts of targeted violence and terrorism.
Our approach to managing the border securely and humanely,
even within our fundamentally broken immigration system, is
working. Unlawful entries between ports of entry along the
Southwest border have consistently decreased by more than half
compared to the peak before the end of Title 42.
Under President Biden's leadership, we have led the largest
expansion of lawful, safe, and orderly pathways for people to
seek humanitarian relief under our laws, at the same time
imposing tougher consequences on those who, instead, resort to
the ruthless smuggling organizations that prey on the most
vulnerable.
We secured the first increase in Border Patrol Agent hiring
in more than a decade, and our campaign to disrupt and
dismantle human smuggling networks has resulted in the arrest
of nearly 14,000 smugglers.
We have taken bold and decisive action to counter the
cybersecurity threat from Nation-States like the People's
Republic of China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea, and from
cyber criminals around the world who targeted our critical
infrastructure and seek to hold schools, hospitals, police
departments, and other institutions vital to our daily lives
hostage for ransom.
We have seen the recent devastation that increasingly
severe and frequent extreme weather events have brought to
Kentucky, Florida, Vermont, Oklahoma, New York, and many other
States. Our department, through FEMA, is working with partners
across the Federal Government to support communities impacted
by unprecedented natural disasters and help them strengthen
their long-term recovery and resilience through grant funds,
technical assistance, and on-the-ground support. This and so
much more.
The DHS workforce does all of this with honor, integrity,
and the resolve to safeguard our people, our homeland, and our
values. They perform bravely, despite public attacks on their
character and service; despite unfair and inadequate pay, and
despite, as frontline agents repeatedly tell me, threats made
against them and their families.
These public servants deserve better. Supporting the men
and women of DHS has been my top priority since taking office.
We have expanded departmental efforts to solicit and
incorporate feedback from personnel across all components and
all levels; worked to ensure that every employee works in a
high-quality facility; made new resources available across the
department for employee mental health and well-being, and
earlier this week, facilitated long-overdue pay fairness for
TSA personnel.
Our department and this Congress need to work together as
partners to address the threats and challenges America faces.
We must fix our broken immigration system; fund the continuing
protection of local communities; disrupt and dismantle
transnational criminal organizations and implement the latest
technologies to advance our mission.
Americans are safer today on the border, in the air, at
sea, across the country, and around the world because of the
Department of Homeland Security. Serving with the personnel of
DHS is the greatest honor of my life.
I look forward to continuing to work together on their
behalf, and I look forward to your questions.
[The prepared statement of the Hon. Mayorkas follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chair Jordan. Thank you, Mr. Secretary.
The Chair now yields to the gentleman from California, Mr.
McClintock.
Mr. McClintock. Mr. Secretary, what is the maximum number
of illegal migrants you believe we should admit into this
country?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, it is our responsibility
to enforce the laws that Congress has passed, and that is,
indeed, what we are doing. Individuals who do not have--
Mr. McClintock. So, is there a limit? Yes or no?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, individuals who make a
claim for relief under our laws and who do not succeed--
Mr. McClintock. Well, you've already released more than 2.1
million illegal immigrants into this country since you took
office. That's a population the size of the State of Nebraska.
While the Border Patrol has been consumed by taking names and
changing diapers at the border, 1.5 million known gotaways have
illegally entered the country as well. That's an additional
illegal population the size of the State of Hawaii.
So, once again, I would ask you, what is the limit? Or is
there one?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, last year, we expelled or
removed approximately 1.4 million people who did not have a
legal basis to remain in the United States, the largest number
in recent history.
Mr. McClintock. Well, actually, you testified that 72,000
illegal migrants were removed in 2022. In 2019, there were
267,000 removals. So, removals are down under your
administration by more than 75 percent.
Meanwhile, in 2019, there were 458,000 border encounters.
Yet, under your policies, we're now up to 2.3 million
encounters. That's five times as many.
So, while encounters were up five times, removals are down
by 75 percent. How do you account for this?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, a few points.
(1) Our approach of expanding lawful pathways for people to
reach the border and delivering consequences for those who
arrive at our border irregularly is working. The number has
dropped.
You'll also recall, Congressman, that last year Title 42--
Mr. McClintock. Well, whoa, whoa.
Secretary Mayorkas. --the public health authority was in
place. Under that authority, we could not remove individuals or
expel them.
Mr. McClintock. Well, again, I'm short on time.
You announced the CBP One app this year. It allows migrants
to bypass the Southern border and enter directly into the
United States at ports of entry. This program began with up to
a thousand illegal migrants a day. It's been amped up to as
many as 1,500 a day. That's more than 540,000. That's the
population equivalent of adding a new State of Wyoming every
single year.
That's why the numbers are dropping. Instead of them coming
in through the Southern border, you're bringing them directly
into ports of entry. So, please don't, don't dissemble.
Now, I've got a very important concern for the people of my
region. In January, a family of six people were executed in the
rural town of Goshen. That's not far from my district.
According to the Tulare County Sheriff, it was a cartel hit.
The victims ranged from age 72 down to a 10-month-old who was
shot in his mother's arms.
Two weeks ago, the FBI Director warned us in this Committee
that the open border is a ``huge driver'' of cartel presence in
the United States. Those were his words--``huge driver.''
The Jalisco, a new generation of cartels, now established
hubs in Los Angeles, Denver, Phoenix, and Chicago. Millions
have fled from Mexico to escape these conditions, and the
cartels have followed them into the United States.
So, how long before we can expect the same kind of gun
battles here as have become routine in Mexico?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, we are taking it to the
transnational criminal organizations, the cartels, that peddle
in death and destruction, to an unprecedented degree. We have--
Mr. McClintock. They're following the mass migration into
this country. That's what the FBI Director told us.
Secretary Mayorkas. We have a number of lawful
investigative actions and operations that are disrupting and
dismantling those transnational criminal organizations.
Mr. McClintock. Director Wray also testified that we have
no idea how many terrorists are among the 1.5 million known
gotaways that have entered under your policies, but that
there's been a significant increase in terrorists apprehended
at the border.
When your administration abandoned Afghanistan, it released
5,000 terrorists that were being held at Bagram. Ten days
later, one of them killed 13 U.S. servicemembers at Kabul
Airport. Wray said we don't know where the other 5,000 are.
It's clear to me that we're in growing danger of a coordinated
terrorist attack because of your policies.
Have you given any thought to how you're going to explain
yourself when that happens?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, the safety and security of
the American people is our highest priority. That is what is
the genesis of the creation of the Department of Homeland
Security.
Mr. McClintock. Well, obviously, it is not your highest
priority. The numbers speak for themselves.
Secretary Mayorkas. It most certainly is, Congressman.
Mr. McClintock. I yield back.
Chair Jordan. The gentleman yields back.
The Chair recognizes the Ranking Member, Mr. Nadler.
Mr. Nadler. Mr. Secretary, I want to address some of the
outlandish claims my colleagues have made and put them to rest
at the outset of this hearing.
My Republican colleagues claim that the border is open. Is
the border open, Mr. Secretary?
Secretary Mayorkas. No, it is not.
Mr. Nadler. Thank you, Mr. Secretary.
The border is not open, and to say so is not only false,
but it is really an insult to the brave men and women of the
Border Patrol who work every day to keep us safe.
Next, Mr. Secretary, my colleagues on the other side of the
aisle have been extremely focused on an exchange you had with
Mr. Roy the last time you appeared before this Committee. They
claim that you liked to the Committee about whether we have
operational control of the border. The Homeland Security
Committee even wrote about it in Phase 1 of their investigation
into potentially impeachment.
It is my understanding that DHS and its components use
different definitions the term ``operational control.'' For
example, the U.S. Border Patrol previously defined
``operational control'' as ``the ability to detect and
interdict illegal activity.''
CBP, in their 2020 U.S. Border Patrol Strategy, defined
``operational control'' as, quote,
The ability to perceive and comprehend the operating
environment; mobilize assets, infrastructure, and barriers to
prevent criminal activity, and respond to and resolve any
illicit cross-border incursions.
Furthermore, in May 2023, a transcribed interview, Chief Patrol
Agent Aaron Heitke of the San Diego Sector affirmed that,
quote,
Border Patrol has operated under different definitions of
operational control than what is listed in the Secure Fence
Act.
So, can you describe what happened in that exchange last year?
Secretary Mayorkas. Ranking Member Nadler, the Congressman
did not allow me to complete my answer. The Secure Fence Act,
specifically, the statute, defines ``operational control'' as
``not having one individual cross the border illegally.'' Under
that statutory definition, no administration has achieved
operational control.
Last year, we had approximately 1.7 million different
individuals cross the border, the Southwest border. So, under
that definition, no administration, under the Secure Fence Act,
no administration has achieved operational control. We have
provided data with respect to the number of encounters
experienced at the Southwest border every month to Congress.
Mr. Nadler. Last, my Republican colleagues claim you are
abusing your authority. However, Congress gave the executive
branch wide latitude over immigration laws, including writing a
provision in the Immigration and Nationality Act that allows
for individuals to be paroled into the United States for urgent
humanitarian or public benefit purposes.
For more than 70 years, administrations of both parties
have used parole for categories of people. Some of my
colleagues have criticized these programs, as well as the ones
recently implemented by the Biden Administration for Haitians,
Venezuelans, Cubans, and Nicaraguans, alleging that parole is
not being granted on a case-by-case basis. Is that particular
criticism accurate, Mr. Secretary?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, I very well know in my 22
years of Federal service, including 12 years as a Federal
prosecutor, that we are a Nation of laws, and I take our
obligation to follow the law scrupulously. I adhere to it
strictly.
Our parole authority is being used consistent with the law.
It is a discretionary authority that the statute provides. We
exercise it on a case-by-case basis, and our parole program has
at least three significant benefits.
(1) It has driven down the number of encounters at the
Southwest border.
(2) It allows us to screen and vet individuals before they
arrive at the Southwest border.
(3) Very importantly, we are cutting out the smuggling
organizations that wreak such tragedy and trauma on the lives
of vulnerable individuals.
Mr. Nadler. It appears to me that the administration is
merely saying certain categories of people are eligible to be
considered for parole. Is that correct?
Secretary Mayorkas. Yes. We evaluate parole on a case-by-
case basis.
Mr. Nadler. Our adjudicators still conduct a case-by-case
determination to see if to grant parole is appropriate. You
just said that. This is very much in line with historical use
of parole by administrations of both parties?
Secretary Mayorkas. To my knowledge, yes, Congressman.
Mr. Nadler. Thank you. I yield back.
Chair Jordan. The gentleman yields back.
The gentleman from California is recognized, Mr. Issa.
Mr. Issa. Mr. Secretary, we've known each other for a long
time, including your time as a U.S. Attorney. I'm going to ask
you some tough questions and they go back all the way to that
time and before.
Was the immigration system--well, you said it in your
opening statement; ``it was broken.'' Was the immigration
system broken when you were a U.S. Attorney?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, it is broken. It has been
broken for as long as I can remember.
Mr. Issa. Does broken include the fact that there's
virtually no penalty for being a coyote or for entering this
country illegally; that, for all practical purposes, it's a
slap on the hand and that U.S. Attorneys, historically, have a
difficult time justifying their time, when, in fact, it's a
revolving door for people who come into this country illegally
and the coyotes who bring them? Isn't that one of the
challenges you face?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, if you are referring to my
time as a Federal prosecutor--
Mr. Issa. No, I'm not referring to you personally. I'm
referring to the broken, the broken immigration law. You said
it was broken; I agree it was broken. I agree that it's broken
today. I just want to make sure that, for the record, we get
into what's broken.
I asked you a specific question. You might remember that
dismissal of Carol Lam, when she said that it just wasn't worth
prosecuting coyotes who weren't carrying weapons because they
were going to be back out in weeks. So, isn't one of the
problems that there is no real penalty for human trafficking,
and there certainly is virtually no penalty for coming here
illegally?
Secretary Mayorkas. There are penalties for immigration
violations. Title 8 of the United States Code, Section 1324,
deals with smuggling of individuals--
Mr. Issa. Right, and isn't it true, isn't it true that,
within a matter--if you come here illegally, you're going to,
essentially, be sent back out of the country in a very short
period of time? If you traffic without weapons or drugs, you're
going to be removed again.
Let me go on to something else. A broken immigration
system. Isn't one of the biggest parts of the broken
immigration system the part that we've all been talking about,
at least on this side of the dais; the fact that, if you
present yourself at the border and make a claim--one, often,
that has been taught to you by your smugglers, taught to you by
NGO's--if you make a claim, more than nine out of ten of those
claims are false? You will get into the country, and you will
be here for an extended period time.
Isn't, in fact, a system that allows the vast majority of
people making a claim to be lying, to be knowingly giving you a
false story, one that, after adjudication, is proven to be
false, isn't letting them in the country inherently part of our
broken system?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, let me--
Mr. Issa. That was a yes or no.
Secretary Mayorkas. No, let me, let me--
Mr. Issa. Give me a yes or no, and then, give me the rest.
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, I respectfully disagree
with your data, the statistic you cited. One of the problems in
our broken immigration system is the length of time it takes
between the time of the encounter--
Mr. Issa. I understand the length of time. Isn't it true
that most countries do not simply admit and release people,
waiting, and tell them to come back when they adjudicate them?
Aren't we an exception, for the most part, around the world?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, we are not alone in some
of the infirmities of the immigration system that we have.
Mr. Issa. So, today, as the Chief Security Officer for the
United States, would you say that it is reasonable to release
people for months or years rather than adjudicating them
immediately at the border? Isn't it true that, if we were doing
our job in Congress, and you were able to do your job, people
would be adjudicated before they came into the United States?
Those found to be credible would be admitted; those not found
to be credible would be discarded back to the countries they
came from, as appropriate?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, in the absence of
Congressional action, we have actually issued a regulation, the
first of its kind, that has reduced the time between encounter
at the border and the final adjudication of an asylum claim.
Mr. Issa. OK. For the record, there has been, in fiscal
year, let's say, 2020, you had three at the Southwest border
encounters with people on the Terrorist Watchlist. So far this
year, it's 140. Can you give us the whereabouts of those 140?
Are they all incarcerated? Have they all been removed? Or is it
a mixture of incarceration, removal, and release?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, let me say this: The
safety and security of the American people is our highest
priority--
Mr. Issa. So, prove it to me. What is the status of those
140?
Secretary Mayorkas. Individuals who present a national
security or public safety threat are detained and are priority
removed--
Mr. Issa. By definition, Mr. Secretary, if you're on the
Terrorist Watchlist, you represent a threat. So, 140 people on
the Terrorist Watchlist so far this year. For the record, would
you please give us the status of each of those individuals, so
we know what you did with people who were on a Terrorist
Watchlist, who were apprehended--many got away--but were
apprehended, where they are today? So that Congress can know.
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, I would be pleased to
provide you with that information with respect to the
individuals encountered at the service women.
Mr. Issa. Thank you.
I yield back.
Chair Jordan. The gentleman yields back, but could the
Secretary answer that question? What is the status of those
140?
Secretary Mayorkas. Mr. Chair, I communicated--
Ms. Jayapal. Mr. Chair, what is the--
Mr. Issa. Point of order.
Ms. Jayapal. By what authority--or point of order.
Chair Jordan. The gentlelady will State her point of order.
Ms. Jayapal. Mr. Chair, under what authority are you
speaking right now? Whose time? Whose time is it? Are you being
recognized for five minutes?
Chair Jordan. I was just asking what I thought would be a
question--
Ms. Jayapal. Mr. Chair, it's not, it's--
Chairman Jordan. --every single Member of Congress would
want to know.
I'll do it on my time or some other time.
Ms. Jayapal. Thank you. I appreciate that. Thank you.
Mr. Issa. Point, point of, point of--Mr.--
Chair Jordan. He had asked the question and there wasn't an
answer to the status of the 140 people apprehended--
Ms. Jayapal. Mr. Chair, he did--
Chair Jordan. --on the Terrorist Watchlist--
Ms. Jayapal. The witness provided an answer. If you want to
use your five minutes--
Chair Jordan. I don't think he did, but I'll do it on my
time.
Ms. Jayapal. I think that's great. Thank you.
Chair Jordan. That's fine.
We recognize the gentlelady from California.
Ms. Jayapal. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Ms. Lofgren. Thank you, Secretary Mayorkas, for being here
today and for your service to our country, first, as a U.S.
Attorney and now as Secretary of Homeland Security.
We all know that Congress has not acted in many, many years
to update our immigration laws. In fact, it's been, really, if
you want to take a look at it, we're still operating under the
outlines of the 1965 Act, which no wonder it doesn't work that
well for the United States of America in 2023.
So, I'd like to ask, first, do you agree that it would be
better to have a legal framework wherein people could actually
enter the United States with visas, and the like, instead of a
mishmash of asylum claims, and the like, at the border?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congresswoman, I do. I see other
countries with systems that are more advanced than ours that
actually can match the need for labor with the supply for
labor. In fact, Canada is one of those countries immediately to
the North.
Ms. Lofgren. I would just note that the Canadian government
has now opened-up an official government effort to poach the
most educated and the most talented postdocs and doctors in the
technology field in Silicon Valley. Ten thousand of the best
and the brightest applied on the first day. So, that is a loss
to our country.
I'd just like to note that we have a bill, bipartisan bill,
called the Farm Workforce Modernization Act, that would
streamline the
H-2A program and regularize the status as an agricultural
worker visa for farm workers, half of whom are here without
their papers.
Do you think that would help regularize our situation at
the border?
Secretary Mayorkas. I do. I do, Congresswoman. There are
approximately, I believe, 10 million open jobs in need of
workers. I hear from executives across this country about the
need for labor. It is proven that lawful labor pathways cause a
reduction in the number of irregular arrivals at our border.
Ms. Lofgren. I'd like to just touch again--the Ranking
Member has mentioned the use of parole. It's one of the few
tools that you have under the existing Immigration and
Nationality Act. I note that it's been used by Presidents of
both parties over many, many years.
President Eisenhower oversaw parole of over 30,000
Hungarian refugees escaping communism. President Ford and
President Carter oversaw the parole of hundreds of thousands of
Vietnamese fleeing the communists. We have used parole for
people fleeing communism in Cuba, in fleeing communism in
Nicaragua, and now, fleeing communism in Venezuela.
Would you say that the use of parole today by category, but
then, case by case, is any different than what prior
administrations have done?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congresswoman, we have used our parole
authority consistent with the law and consistent with past
practices of different administrations.
Ms. Lofgren. I'd just like to note that the idea that we
should cutoff this way to rescue to people who are trying to
escape from communism today is completely wrong and contrary to
our history as a country. We have always welcomed those who are
fleeing from communist oppression, going back many decades. I
will strongly object if we turn our back on those refugees from
communism today. That would be very wrong.
I just want to talk briefly about the refugee process. As
we know, in the last administration, basically, the refugee
program was destroyed. How are we doing in rebuilding the
refugee processing, as well as the processing centers in the
United States and the nonprofits who are helping refugees come
into the United States? Can you tell us how we're rebuilding
the refugee process?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congresswoman, we, under the
President's leadership, have recommitted ourselves to the
refugee process. It is a process that benefited my family in
fleeing the communist takeover of Cuba, and it's what drove me,
quite frankly, to public service, the opportunities that this
country provided for my parents, my sister, and me.
Ms. Lofgren. I yield back, Mr. Chair. My time is expired.
Chair Jordan. The gentlelady yields back.
The gentleman from Colorado is recognized.
Mr. Buck. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Secretary Mayorkas, last time you were here, I told you
that my constituents consider you a traitor. Today, I'd like to
explain why they believe this and ask you a few questions.
I'd like to introduce, first, my constituent Stephanie
Granados. She lives in Loveland, Colorado with her mother
Monica and younger brother Axel. She is 24 years old, bilingual
in English and Spanish, a Christian woman who works as a
restaurant server, and is a loyal friend to those around her.
Unfortunately, Mr. Secretary, that's only what I wish I
could tell you about Stephanie. Stephanie is dead. A year ago,
this young woman was poisoned. She never made it to age 24. Her
mother's only glimpse of her now is in old photographs, and her
brother misses his older sister.
Stories like that are normal conversations in Colorado.
Stories like this begin with fentanyl. Where does fentanyl
begin? Many times, it starts among chemical manufacturing firms
in China--companies like the recently indicted Hebei Sinaloa
Trading Company from the Hebei Province in China.
It manufactures and advertises the drug's ingredients to
buyers in Mexico, using common mail and import fraud tools,
like forged customs documents and falsely labeled packages.
Firms ship the product, on purchase, to drug dens in cities
like Guadalajara.
After preparation, these facilities finish the product and
smuggle it by truck, by car, and by humans across our Southern
border--chopped into counterfeit pills that are pressed to look
exactly like legitimate pharmaceuticals, are mixed with cocaine
or other substances. Americans buy those drugs, and it's like a
walking mine field. These illegal drugs are, then, used to kill
American citizens.
According to the CDC, over 150 people are dying every day
because of synthetic opioids like fentanyl. The CDC's National
Center for Health Statistics reported 79,770 opioid-involved
overdose fatalities in 2022, and over 80 percent of opioid
deaths are attributed to fentanyl.
In my home State of Colorado, fentanyl deaths remain near
record levels. According to The Denver Post, more Coloradans
have died of ingesting the drug in 2022 than overdosed on all
drugs in 2016.
According to the Department of Justice's latest report on
the subject, 64 percent of Federal arrests involve noncitizens
committing crimes, despite them comprising only seven percent
of the population.
Secretary Mayorkas, I'm going to ask a couple of questions
and answer them for you before I give you a chance to respond.
Is China responsible--oh, I'm sorry. Recently, you spoke at
the Aspen Security Forum and stated that China bears
responsibility for this.
Is China responsible for keeping the Southern border open
to smugglers? No.
Is China responsible for the Mexican cartels' emboldened
attitude in the American drug trade? No.
Is China responsible for the impunity of more and more
illegal aliens committing crimes in America? No.
Is China responsible for the record high 98 aliens on the
Terrorist Watchlist crossing the Southwest border in 2022? No.
Is China responsible for the 856 illegal aliens who died
while crossing the Southwest border last year? No. That's more
than 300 deaths, by the way, in 2021, and more than three times
as many in 2020.
Is China responsible for the 9,200 aliens with criminal
convictions crossing the border illegally just this year to
date? No.
Is China responsible for the estimated 1.5 million illegal
alien gotaways that crossed the border undetected under your
watch? No.
Is China responsible for the 1.2 million removable aliens
who have been told by a judge that they must leave the U.S.,
but insist on staying?
Secretary Mayorkas, it is your responsibility to secure our
border against fentanyl trafficking. The fentanyl killing
thousands of Americans every year is a direct result of your
dereliction. When people die of fentanyl poisoning, it is your
fault.
What would you say to Stephanie Granados' family if they
were here right now?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, we grieve the loss of any
life as a result of the toxicity, the devastation of fentanyl.
The challenge of fentanyl is not new. It has been escalating
for more than five years. I believe there were more than 50,000
overdose deaths from fentanyl in 2020.
This is a scourge that all of us have to work together to
combat. We in the Department of Homeland Security, with our
Federal partners, are taking it to the traffickers to an
unprecedented degree through innovative operations targeting
criminals.
I stand by my statement at Aspen that China does bear
responsibility, because many of the precursor chemicals and the
pill press equipment that are used to manufacture fentanyl does
originate from there.
This is a complex problem. We are taking it to the
criminals, and I look forward to working with you, Congressman,
to address this challenge, which has been only building over
many years in this country.
Mr. Buck. I yield back, Mr. Chair.
Chair Jordan. The gentleman yields back.
The gentlelady from Texas is recognized.
Ms. Jackson Lee. Good morning, Mr. Secretary.
You have repeatedly been before us and indicated your
humble beginnings and the passion and commitment in which you
serve America and take very seriously your job here as
Secretary of Homeland Security.
On that basis, I have a number of quick questions, and I'm
going to ask for a sense of urgency in wrapping this, so that I
can assure that all have been answered.
First, I want to make clear that this is an oversight
hearing, not an impeachment hearing. This is a hearing to
address the questions of the work that has been done.
So, to that end, just as a factual basis, there's been a
lot of hollering about the entry on the border, operational
control. I'm asking for--a brief question: We know that the
Federal Government ended Title 42. Have crossings gone down?
Secretary Mayorkas. Yes, they have. The approach that we
have taken, Congresswoman, of expanding lawful pathways, safe,
orderly, and lawful pathways for individuals, and at the same
time delivering consequences to those who do not take advantage
of those lawful pathways has been working.
Ms. Jackson Lee. Part of that--
Secretary Mayorkas. The challenge, of course, remains.
Ms. Jackson Lee. My numbers suggest 70 percent that they've
gone down. It also suggests that the Biden Administration has
put in stricter requirements for asylum, is that correct?
Secretary Mayorkas. We did. We are delivering consequences
for those who do not take advantage of the lawful pathways.
Ms. Jackson Lee. You still believe in the humane
infrastructure of America that started with the Statue of
Liberty, and realizing people flee persecution, political
dynasties, if you will, that cause violence and the forcing of
leaving. Is that, is that part of our thinking here in the
country?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congresswoman, our laws, our refugee
laws, our asylum laws, are one of our proudest traditions as a
country of refuge.
Ms. Jackson Lee. So, would you say, having been asked this
over and over again, that the United States, the President of
the United States, the Secretary of Homeland Security, and all
the hardworking men and women at the border have operational
control or have a form of presence that they are aware of
what's going on at the border, and that they're working to
secure the border every single day?
Secretary Mayorkas. As we define that term, Congresswoman,
we do.
Ms. Jackson Lee. CISA has been called all things, maybe
even not American. Is it an important element of securing
elections, as it did in the 2020 election and 2022?
Secretary Mayorkas. The security of elections, our election
system is a component of our country's critical infrastructure.
To protect the safety, security, and integrity of the election
process is a significant priority of this government. The
Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency works very
closely with election officials in State and local
jurisdictions to ensure the safety and security of the election
system.
Ms. Jackson Lee. I have two more questions, and I must
quickly move forward.
The ADL has indicated that there have been 3,697
antisemitic incidents, a 36 percent increase, from 2021. What
is your Department doing to protect the Jewish community, and
within the New U.S. National Strategy to Counter Antisemitism,
what kind of commitments have you made?
I have another question, but I think this is extremely
important.
Secretary Mayorkas. Congresswoman, there has been a rise in
antisemitism in this country, the rise in other ideologies of
hate. Our responsibility, as the Department of Homeland
Security, is when there is a connectivity between an ideology,
whatever that ideology might be, and violence. It is the
prevention of violence that really prompts our engagement with
local communities around the country.
Ms. Jackson Lee. Thank you. I want to keep in touch on
those issues. We all face communities who are, certainly,
targets of that kind of violence.
I want to suggest that immigration is a national and
Federal authorized responsibility. We see States like Texas and
Florida that have spent billions in Texas; that have bused
individuals to the Vice President's home and to other places.
Can you tell me how detrimental and questioning States
getting involved in immigration issues, and how confident you
feel that you are protecting the American people?
Incidents like that, including incidents at the border--
which I'll put in the record, ``Texas Trooper Alleges Inhumane
Treatment of Migrants by State Officials along the Southern
Border.''
How are you responding to that responsibility that you
have?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congresswoman, the safety and security
of the American people is our highest priority. Law enforcement
is most effective when it is executed collaboratively in
cooperation.
Chair Jordan. The time of the gentle--
Ms. Jackson Lee. Wait. I'd like to ask unanimous consent,
Mr. Chair, to place into the record the CBS News, July 18,
``Texas Trooper Alleges Inhumane Treatment of Migrants by State
Officials along the Southern Border.''
Chair Jordan. Without objection.
Ms. Jackson Lee. The Washington Post, ``Southern Border
Eerily Quiet after Policy Shift on Asylum Seekers.'' I ask
unanimous consent to place that into the record.
Chair Jordan. Without objection.
Chair Jordan. The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from
Florida for five minutes.
Mr. Gaetz. Two million encounters and releases under your
watch. So, not including the Title 42 expulsions, not including
violent criminals, of those two-million-plus that you've
encountered and released, how many have you told to go home?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, individuals who are
released are placed in immigration enforcement proceedings
under the law, where they can make their claim for relief. If
their claim for relief is not satisfied, they are subject to
removal from the United States--
Mr. Gaetz. Right. ``Subject to removal'' sounds very
different than actually removed. So, I'm not interested in the
process. I'm not interested in what people are subject to. Two
million people encountered and released--not the expulsions
under Title 42, not the criminals--how many of those people
have you deported?
Secretary Mayorkas. So, Congressman, a few points. No. 1--
Mr. Gaetz. Just how many of the people? I just want to know
how many. Just a number.
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, we are dealing with a
completely broken immigration system.
Mr. Gaetz. I get it. No, no, Mr. Secretary, I'm not going
to let you burn my five minutes.
Do you know the answer? Do you know the number of people,
out of that two million, that you've removed that aren't
criminals?
Secretary Mayorkas. I do know that we have removed more
aggravated felons than--
Mr. Gaetz. Right. I'm not asking about them. I've caveated
that away.
Because here's what I'm sort of getting and what your
nonresponsiveness is demonstrating. The Mayorkas doctrine is
this: If you show up at the border and get released into the
country, if you don't commit a specific aggravated felony--
which, by the way, doesn't include a lot of assault and
battery; doesn't include a lot of bad domestic violence--but if
you're not one of the people who commit those crimes, you get
to stay forever. Is that a fair characterization of your
doctrine?
Secretary Mayorkas. No, that is false.
Mr. Gaetz. Then, tell me how many you're sending home.
Secretary Mayorkas. No, that is false.
Mr. Gaetz. OK, well, but you don't know the number of how
many you've sent home.
Here's another number: 1.2 million people today have been
through your entire process, right? They've been through what
you call a removal proceeding. It's just an amnesty dance.
Because after the 1.2 million people get an order from the
judge saying that they don't have a basis to be here, you still
don't remove them. Like what's your plan to remove those
people?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, that is false.
Mr. Gaetz. OK. Well, how many of them then? Just give me
the number.
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, in this country--in this
country--there are between 11-12 million undocumented--
Mr. Gaetz. Right, but I'm asking about a subset that you
won't send home. The reason you're smirking about it, and the
reason you won't answer my question, is because everybody gets
the joke. The sad thing is it's not just us here. It's the
cartels who get the joke, too.
So now, what you've done to execute this Mayorkas
doctrine--where so long as you don't commit a crime, you get to
stay here and burden our hospitals, burden our schools, burden
our social services, burden our jails--you've sent the message
to the cartels, and then, you've taken this app and you've
digitized illegal immigration and you've scaled it to the moon.
Like this app that you've got everybody downloading is like
the Disney FastPass into the country, never to be subject to
actual removal; just removal proceedings, as you call them.
That app doesn't do any search of their criminal history in
their home country, does it?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, I disagree with everything
you have said.
Mr. Gaetz. Well, I'm sure, but just answer the question:
Does the app that you are out there promoting do any search of
people's criminal history in their home country?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, Customs and Border
Protection screens and vets individuals whom they encounter
early--
Mr. Gaetz. Your app, it either has the functionality to
test their criminal history in their home country or it
doesn't. By the way, if it did, you would have already told me.
It doesn't.
Then, the other epic failure of this that's empowered the
cartels is that, in these processing centers you've set up in
other countries--so, just wave them all in at a rapid pace--
you've had to shut them down in Nuevo Laredo because the
cartels were standing outside extorting people. Isn't that
right?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, that is false.
Mr. Gaetz. Oh, really? So, why did you shut down that
facility in Nuevo Laredo?
Secretary Mayorkas. Understand that the point of safe,
orderly, and lawful pathways is to reduce the number of
encounters at our Southwest border--
Mr. Gaetz. Wait a second. You've just shifted those
encounters. Because, right now, for the first time in modern
history, more people are showing up at the ports of entry than
running through some bush in Yuma, Arizona. The reason they're
showing up at the ports of entry is because you've got the
turnstile open--where, so long as they've gone and downloaded
this app, you just let them in.
I've got one final question for you, and it's an important
one. Is Mexico an ally in this fight against illegal
immigration?
Secretary Mayorkas. Yes, it is.
Mr. Gaetz. So, it's hilarious and somewhat troubling that
you say that, because, like, I'm looking at the El Chapo trial,
where President Nieto took a $100 million bride from the
Sinaloa cartel. Do you think that the subsequent Presidents
following Nieto weren't offered a bribe by the cartel, or
didn't take the bribe?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, I disagree with everything
you have said.
Mr. Gaetz. Right, but--
Secretary Mayorkas. I have worked--
Mr. Gaetz. You can disagree all you want, but what you
won't provide is any number. When you sit there and just kind
of ostensibly disagree without any facts, it shows people what
the real gig is.
The Mexican government is captive to the cartels. They are
doing the bidding of the cartels, and based on your response
today, so are you.
Mr. Cohen. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Welcome, Mr. Ambassador. Appreciate your service and
appreciate your testifying today.
Last week Director Wray sat in the hot seat. By the way, is
it still warm or did you bring some potholders?
Secretary Mayorkas. I am prepared to answer the questions
of this Committee--
Mr. Cohen. Thank you, sir.
Secretary Mayorkas. --Congressman.
Mr. Cohen. Director Wray testified that a lot of the animus
that has been conjured up against government, in this Congress
particularly, but around the country, have given White
supremacists of the belief that their actions may be justified,
and it has hurt morale at his agency, and it has jeopardized
the lives of some of his agents. A situation in Cincinnati
where a man went out and--he didn't kill anybody, but he tried
to; was going to go to the Cincinnati base. There have been
others. Has your division of government, Homeland Security,
been affected, the employees' morale been affected by these
White supremacist threats and statements and have you been
the--any of your agents and sites been the victim of violence?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, it is the antigovernment
sentiments and their connectivity to violence that is the
subject of my discussions with many of our front line
personnels--personnel and the threats that they have
encountered as a result.
Mr. Cohen. Has there been any violence directed at any of
your sites?
Secretary Mayorkas. There has. We have an agency within the
Department of Homeland Security, the Federal Protective
Service; remarkable men and women in uniform who protect
Federal facilities and the personnel who work in them.
Mr. Cohen. There was a court ruling yesterday, and I didn't
get into depth, but I believe it suspended a program that the
President; and that includes you, tried to have for border
entry and who could come to this country and seek asylum and
limit it to some extent. It was stayed I believe by a court. Is
that correct?
Secretary Mayorkas. Yes, Congressman. It's the
Circumvention of Lawful Pathways Regulation that we promulgated
as part of our process to expand lawful pathways for
individuals and at the same time deliver consequences for those
who do not use those pathways.
Mr. Cohen. Were there similarities to the program that
President Biden and you had stayed that President Trump had
also tried to implement, or did implement?
Secretary Mayorkas. It is a different program than the one
that President Trump implemented, Congressman.
Mr. Cohen. OK. Did it have any parts of it?
Secretary Mayorkas. No, the--and I will not speak much
about this, Congressman, because the matter is the subject of
litigation, but President Trump issued a transit ban on
individuals, and our regulation is not a ban. It shifts the
evidentiary burden. It raises it and creates a rebuttable
presumption, which is quite distinct from a ban.
Mr. Cohen. Could you say that was a middle ground between
what President Trump had and what the Court maybe wanted
because the Court stayed it and didn't allow it to occur?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, I'm able to comment any
further given the fact that it's a matter of pending
litigation.
Mr. Cohen. Thank you, sir. I have had a problem which is
more local in nature, I guess, constituents who have complained
that the opportunity to get certified by the Global Entry
Program in Memphis, Tennessee has been thwarted, that they have
been told they need to go to Jackson, Tennessee. Memphis is a
city of over a million people. Jackson is a city of about
100,000. Why our folks would have to go to Jackson to get their
global entry form is hard for me to comprehend. They said they
had to travel there.
We tried to get in touch with the people at Global Entry. I
think we got a phone call Friday. We found it very difficult to
get in touch. The phone number that we were given by some
people with TSA as a kind of speedy number, the number we need
to get action. My staff said that they--the phone was hardly
ever answered. They mostly stayed on hold.
Could you ask the folks, because they come under you, at
Global Entry to look into why citizens in Memphis have to go to
Jackson? They were told it was because some of their people
have to work to help FedEx. Everybody should help FedEx.
Besides that, they need to help the citizens of Memphis get
their global entries as well. So, can you look into that for
me?
Secretary Mayorkas. I will, Congressman. The Global Entry
Program is one of two trusted traveler programs. Global Entry
is under U.S. Customs and Border Protection and PreCheck is
under the Transportation Security Administration. Those are two
very successful trusted traveler programs that enhance the
security of travel in the United States, as well as facilitate
that travel. I'd be pleased to look into that issue.
Mr. Cohen. Thank you, sir. Are you from Miami?
Secretary Mayorkas. No, I was born in Cuba and fled the
communist takeover of Cuba to the United States.
Mr. Cohen. You didn't come to Miami at all?
Secretary Mayorkas. I did. We lived in Miami for a couple
years before my father found work elsewhere.
Mr. Cohen. Thank you. Well, I am in the same status except
I didn't go to Cuba first. I did go to Miami and then my father
found better employment elsewhere. Thank you and appreciate
your work. Yield back.
Mr. Issa. Mr. Chair, I would ask unanimous consent that the
regs of the Secretary's agency dated March 29, 2022, be placed
in the record in which a quote contained says,
Full 83 percent of the people who were subject to removal
between 2014-2019 were referred to an immigration judge and in
fact were not found to have a credible fear.
So, when the Secretary said that I was wrong about the
majority, he was wrong. It is 83 percent according to his own
documents in the period 2014-2019. Perhaps it is improved, but
I doubt it. Yield back.
Chair Jordan. Without objection.
Chair Jordan. The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from
Louisiana.
Mr. Johnson of Louisiana. Secretary Mayorkas, we have the
frustrating responsibility on this Committee of providing
oversight of your agency, but I have to be honest and tell you
I am not sure exactly what you do at the Department of Homeland
Security other than great harm.
On your watch the data is pretty clear. We have had record
levels of illegal immigration, a rapid decline in deportations,
skyrocketing fentanyl deaths across our country. The Secret
Service, which is a DHS component, can't determine who left
cocaine at the White House.
In the middle of all this you created the Cybersecurity and
Infrastructure Security Agency, CISA, which is a division of
your--of DHS. It is one of the Biden Administration agencies
that colluded with and coerced the social media companies to
censor Americans' protected free speech online. That is
specifically detailed in a 155-page Court Opinion that came out
of the Federal court in Louisiana in the landmark litigation of
Missouri v. Biden.
Have you read that Court Opinion?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, I have not. The
Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency does not
censor speech.
Mr. Johnson of Louisiana. OK. Well, the court found
otherwise. It is really curious to me--actually it is quite
alarming that you haven't read the opinion because your agency
is listed in this opinion. The Federal court looked at volumes
of evidence over months of litigation and they determined,
among other things, that if the allegations made the
plaintiffs, the States in this case, are true--and hold on. The
preliminary injunction was granted against your agency, sir,
and other Biden Administration agencies, including the DOJ and
FBI. The court said it involves the most massive attack against
free speech in United States history. You are telling me this
opinion issued July 4th has not reached your desk? No one has
briefed you on it?
Secretary Mayorkas. I have been briefed on the Missouri
litigation.
Mr. Johnson of Louisiana. OK. You haven't taken the time to
read it yet?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman--
Mr. Johnson of Louisiana. No, hold on. Have you read it or
not?
Secretary Mayorkas. I have read parts of it, Congressman.
Mr. Johnson of Louisiana. Oh, parts of it? Did you read the
parts where it said that this is Orwellian and dystopian and
that your agency is involved in a massive coverup of
specifically conservatives' free speech online?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, the Cybersecurity and
Infrastructure Security Agency is not involved in such conduct.
Mr. Johnson of Louisiana. OK. Well, the court found
otherwise. You stand here under oath and you give us these
answers that we know are not true, because this is demonstrably
untrue. I am suggesting to you that you are saying things to us
under oath that are proven by the record to be untrue.
Let me ask you about this specifically: CISA was created
to--we call it the Misinformation and Disinformation
Subcommittee of CISA. Are you familiar with that?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman--
Mr. Johnson of Louisiana. MDM. The MDM Subcommittee. You
are familiar with that?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, I am very well aware of
the threat of disinformation emanating from adverse Nation
States.
Mr. Johnson of Louisiana. Are you familiar with the
Subcommittee? Just answer the question.
Secretary Mayorkas. I am.
Mr. Johnson of Louisiana. OK. Does it still exist?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, are you speaking of the--
Mr. Johnson of Louisiana. Does the MDM Subcommittee still
exist?
Secretary Mayorkas. I would have to get back to you on
that.
Mr. Johnson of Louisiana. OK. All right. Kind of a big deal
in your agency. I am kind of shocked that you don't know the
answer to that.
Can you define what misinformation is?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, misinformation is false
information that is disseminated to--
Mr. Johnson of Louisiana. Excellent. Who determines what is
false?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, our focus--
Mr. Johnson of Louisiana. No, who determines what is false
in your agency?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman--
Mr. Johnson of Louisiana. If you are going to pull
something off the internet and collude with a social media
platform to make sure Americans don't see it, who determines
what is false?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, we don't do that.
Mr. Johnson of Louisiana. That is not true. That is not
true. That is not what the court has found. This is not a
Republican talking point. This is what the documents show. We
have had people testify under oath that say--and you just
defined the term. You are telling me that you don't know who
determines what is false?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, what we do at CISA, the
Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, is identify
the tactics that adverse Nation States use to weaponize
disinformation--
Mr. Johnson of Louisiana. OK. What is disinformation? What
is disinformation?
Secretary Mayorkas. Disinformation is inaccurate
information--
Mr. Johnson of Louisiana. Who determines what is
inaccurate? Who determines what is false? You understand the
problem here? The reason the Framers of our Constitution did
not a create an exception for, quote, ``false information''
from the First Amendment is because they didn't trust the
government to determine what it is. You have whole committees
of people in your agency trying to determine what they
determine, they define as false or misinformation.
Secretary Mayorkas. That is not true.
Mr. Johnson of Louisiana. Well then what is true?
Secretary Mayorkas. What we do--
Mr. Johnson of Louisiana. Please enlighten us.
Secretary Mayorkas. --is what we do is we disclose the
tactics that adverse Nation States are utilizing to weaponize
disinforma-tion.
Mr. Johnson of Louisiana. No, sir. No, sir. The court found
specifically--it is a finding of fact that is not disputed by
the government defendants: The Biden Administration, your
agency, the FBI, or DHS. Not in the litigation. They determined
you made--you and all your cohorts made no distinction between
domestic speech and foreign speech. So, don't stand there and
tell me under oath that you only focused on adverse adversaries
around the world.
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman--
Mr. Johnson of Louisiana. Foreign actors. That is not true.
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, the Missouri case, the
litigation to which you refer, is the subject of continuing
litigation.
Mr. Johnson of Louisiana. The facts were not disputed. I
so, so regret that I am out of time. I hope I get some more
yielded. I yield back.
Chair Jordan. The gentleman yields back.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Georgia.
Mr. Johnson of Georgia. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I don't trust the government of Florida to tell teachers
how to teach history, particularly Black history, wanting to
put a revisionist idea that somehow slaves benefited from being
slaves. I don't think that that is the truth, but I will tell
you my friend Donald Trump will have his folks thinking that
that is the truth.
At any rate, MAGA Republican extremists want to sell us on
an apocalyptic fantasy. They want the American people to
believe that the border is out of control, that drugs are
flowing in freely, that September 11th-style terrorists are
infiltrating with impunity, and that Latino immigrants are
coming to rape, rob, and murder our families. In reality the
greatest threat facing our homeland is White nationalist
ideology that lies beneath such rhetoric.
Experts agree that dangerous speech from elected officials
creates a climate that foments violence and threatens public
safety. Republicans in the 118th Congress have amplified the
White nationalist invasion conspiracy theory over 80 times in
their official capacity. Eleven Members of this very Committee
pedaled this dangerous anti-Semitic, racist conspiracy theory.
Dr. Heidi Beirich, co-founder of the Global Project Against
Hate and Extremism, has said, quote,
When migrants are described as invaders, that leads to violence
because how else does one stop an invasion.
Mr. Secretary, as the Ranking Member mentioned, next month
is the anniversary of the El Paso shooting. The shooter was
inspired by White nationalist theories like the great
replacement theory and claimed that there was a Hispanic,
quote, ``invasion.'' He drove hundreds of miles to, as he
admitted, target Hispanics and to murder 23 people. He is far
from the only person inspired to kill as a result of these
theories.
In October 2018, a domestic terrorist infiltrated the Tree
of Life Synagogue in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania and murdered 11
congreg-
ants during Shabbat services. That man targeted Jewish--he
targeted a Jewish community because he believed in the great
replacement theory. Unfortunately, this has become a repeated
pattern which includes the attack in Poway and Buffalo.
Regardless of political views we should all stand for the
principle that hate is unacceptable.
Mr. Secretary, what kind of impact does this White
nationalist rhetoric of invasion or replacement have on
minority communities?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, when an act of hate
occurs, it's not just the community that is impacted. The
adverse impact is felt across this Nation. One of the most
prominent terrorism-
related threats that we face in the homeland is what we term
domestic violent extremism. It is--
Mr. Johnson of Georgia. It is White nationalist extremism,
is it not?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, there are diverse
ideologies that underlie the acts of violence. White
nationalism is one of them. We do not focus on the ideology
itself. We focus on its connectivity to violence and our effort
to prevent that violence. We see a diverse range of ideologies
of hate. Antigovernment sentiment, personal grievances, false
narratives fuel acts of violence in this country. It is the
connectivity to violence.
Mr. Johnson of Georgia. Well, when elected officials repeat
great replacement rhetoric, including the language of invasion,
are they putting a target on the backs of immigrants and people
of color?
Secretary Mayorkas. It certainly fuels the threat landscape
that we encounter in the--
Mr. Johnson of Georgia. What kind of dangers does this
rhetoric impose on law enforcement?
Secretary Mayorkas. We have seen the number of ambushes of
law enforcement officers increase year over year recently. I
could provide that data to you.
Mr. Johnson of Georgia. Thank you. My time is about to
expire, and I will yield it back.
Chair Jordan. The gentleman yields back.
The gentleman from Arizona is recognized.
Mr. Biggs. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Secretary, who must take responsibility for the creation of
the Disinformation Governance Board, you as the Secretary of
Homeland Security or President Biden?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, the Disinformation
Governance Board, which has been mischaracterized--
Mr. Biggs. So, did President Biden tell you to do it or did
you guys decided to do it? Did you take responsibility for
creating that?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, it is my responsibility,
and I will share with that--
Mr. Biggs. Very good. So, the last four days 5,300 people
have been encountered in the Tucson sector. Last four days.
Fifty-three hundred. In the last week over 9,000 in the Tucson
sector. That is not my made-up numbers. That is from Sector
Chief Modlin. Who must bear responsibility for that? You or
President Biden?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, our approach--
Mr. Biggs. Is it you or President Biden? Who made the
policies that--let's get there. Did President Biden tell you to
open-up the border or did you?
Secretary Mayorkas. The border is not open, Congressman.
Mr. Biggs. Oh, so that is why there is 5,300 in the last
four days that illegally tried to enter the country?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman--
Mr. Biggs. That doesn't include the got-aways in that
sector, which is the No. 1 sector three to one. You are saying
it is somebody else's fault. It is not open.
Well, let's talk about this then: Recently retired CBP
Chief Raul Ortiz has testified under oath that the U.S. does
not have operational control of the border as required. Is it
your responsibility or President Biden's responsibility to make
sure there is operational control?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman--
Mr. Biggs. These are not hard questions. It is either your
responsibility or President Biden's. Whose is it?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, the men and women of the
Department of Homeland Security work tirelessly--
Mr. Biggs. So, look, I am going to tell you I get down to
the border. I love the CBP agents. You know what they keep
saying? We just want to enforce the law. So, who is preventing
from enforcing the law? Is it you or President Biden? It is
that simple. Because your policies are allowing millions of
people to get through, across this border. So, since January
20, 2021, millions of illegal aliens have cross the Southern
border and have been released by DHS into the interior of the
U.S. Did you implement this catch and release program or was it
President Biden?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, individuals who pose a
public security--
Mr. Biggs. So, look, you and I have had this song and dance
before. You never want to answer the question. You never want
to answer the question. Look, there is a whole side over there.
They want to feed you pablum so you can say whatever you want,
but I think the American people know it is either you or
President Biden. I want to know is President Biden giving the
directions on the implementation of these policies or are you
the one that is creating this?
So, let's go to some of this stuff that you have written.
September 30, 2021, you issued guidance that we had a Senior
DHS official come and tell this Committee that your guidance
from September 30, 2021, led to ICE officers not submitting,
quote, ``through their chain of command as many cases as they
would have submitted previously.'' It was under your name. Did
President Biden tell you to write that memo or is that your
policy?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, the memo that you refer to
is the Enforcement Priorities Memo.
Mr. Biggs. Did you--
Secretary Mayorkas. Priorities that--
Mr. Biggs. Is that your policy then or is that President
Biden's?
Secretary Mayorkas. The priorities that we established in
that memo--
Mr. Biggs. I will take it that it must be yours I guess
that is all we can take then.
OK. So, since we have been sitting here, since 10, that is
the number of drug overdoses due to fentanyl in the country.
So, my question for you is who is responsible? Is it Joe Biden
as President of the United States or is it you as Secretary of
Homeland Security for the open border where fentanyl is coming
across and we have American citizens dying? That is since 10
a.m., Eastern Time.
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, the border is not open.
The challenge of fentanyl is one that has been escalating for
more than five years.
Mr. Biggs. Look, let's just--you cited a figure that was
50,000. Since you came in it has been more than double every
year. Who is responsible for that? Is it you and your policies
or is it President Biden? It is a simple thing. You don't want
to answer it because you know it is you. You know it is your
policies. You are driving it. On October 27, 2021, you issued
guidance that restricted the ability of ICE officers to arrest
aliens in protected areas such as courthouses where they knew
aliens to be. That has made it more difficult and dangerous for
ICE officers to go and enforce the law. These are people had
already had--generally, many of them had already had their day
in court. Did President Biden order you to issue that guidance?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, our policies are driven to
protect the American people, safeguard--
Mr. Biggs. Who issued that policy? Was it the President?
Were you following the President, or did you create the policy?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman--
Mr. Biggs. Or will you ever give us an answer?
Secretary Mayorkas. --that is a policy--
Mr. Biggs. Yield back. Disgusting.
Mr. Johnson of Georgia. Mr. Chair--
Chair Jordan. The gentleman from--
Mr. Johnson of Georgia. --I have a unanimous consent to
enter into the record.
Chair Jordan. The gentleman is recognized.
Mr. Johnson of Georgia. Thank you. Data from the U.S.
Sentencing Commission which shows that 88 percent of the people
conflicted for fentanyl trafficking crimes are United States
citizens, not immigrants crossing the border.
Charm Jordan. Without objection.
The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from California.
Mr. Schiff. Mr. Secretary, welcome to the Committee. It is
wonderful to see you. You and I served together in the U.S.
Attorney's Office in Los Angeles now some 30 years ago. I had
great admiration and respect for your integrity and your work
ethic then and I do today. I am grateful for you taking on what
may be the most difficult job in the U.S. Government today. So,
thank you for being here. My colleagues have a lot of questions
for you, but they don't seem to want to give you the time to
answer them.
I would like to ask you about the Cyber Information--
Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency. In 2016, the
Russians intervened heavily in our election to try to elect
Donald Trump. They intervened with a massive social media
campaign run out of St. Petersburg. They intervened by hacking
the Democratic Party and its emails and releasing them through
cut-outs.
In 2020, the Cybersecurity Agency, having learned from the
experience of 2016, I think did an admirable job in protecting
our elections infrastructure. Its primary sin, although the
Republicans won't say it, is that its then Director asserted
after the election that it was the most secure election in our
history. That was the sin of the agency, doing its job and
doing it well.
As we look forward to the next Presidential election, I
want to ask you about what you see as the threats to our
elections infrastructure or the threats of misinformation/
disinformation from whatever source.
I am particularly concerned about YouTube's recent
decision--I think the Republican badgering has had an effect
and this is part of the effect. YouTube recently decided to,
quote,
Stop removing content that advances false claims that
widespread fraud, errors, or glitches occurred in the 2020 and
other past U.S. Presidential elections.
YouTube has not decided it is not going to remove content
it knows to be false. Other social media platforms like Twitter
have decided to fire those that would be in the business of
security or looking for misinformation/disinformation campaigns
from whatever sources.
So, in light of that changed environment what do you see as
the principal threats to our elections in 2024?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, I would identify at least
three threat streams:
(1) The threat of disinformation propagated by the Nation
states of Russia, China, North Korea, and Iran.
(2) Would be the cybersecurity threat, something that we are
always vigilant in guarding against. It is because of that
threat that we seek to build redundancies in our election
systems to best protect them.
(3) Third is something that we saw manifested last year, and
that is the threat of physical intimidation of individuals at
the voting booth.
Those are three threat streams that I can identify right
off the bat. We are very focused on each of them. Of course,
the physical security is not something that we ourselves
provide but work in collaboration with local jurisdictions and
give them advice as to how they can best secure the facility
and the integrity of the voting process.
Mr. Schiff. Today you may have seen it was reported that
Rudy Giuliani has acknowledged in a court filing that the
statements he was making about these Georgia election workers
were just patently false. Those election workers' lives were
put at great risk. Some of your own personnel, their lives have
been put at great risk by those who would attack our elections
or attack efforts to prevent misinformation and disinformation.
What efforts can you make to protect election workers and
your own staff from these relentless falsehoods advanced to
facilitate the campaigns of some of my colleagues' Presidential
hopeful?
Secretary Mayorkas. Some of the things that we do,
Congressman, is we provide information to State, local, Tribal,
territorial, and campus law enforcement with respect to the
threat streams that we are observing. We also have protective
security advisors in each State that give advice to local
communities about how best to secure facilities and make them
safe areas for people to vote. Those are two examples of the
work that we perform.
Mr. Schiff. I appreciate what you do, Mr. Secretary, and I
hope that these constant and unfounded attacks on you, on your
agency, on the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency
don't make your work that much more difficult. We are grateful
to you. With that, I yield back.
Chair Jordan. The gentleman yields back.
The gentleman from Wisconsin is recognized.
Mr. Tiffany. Mr. Chair, I want to issue a quick correction
here. As we started it was mentioned earlier that Congress has
not acted in decades to security the border. This House of
Representatives in this session of Congress did act. We passed
H.R. 2 to secure the border.
How many Afghans, Mr. Secretary, have been admitted to the
United States through parole since the fall of Kabul two years
ago?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, I would be pleased to
provide you with that data. I don't have it--
Mr. Tiffany. There were 70,192 Afghans that were brought
into the United States. They were brought here on parole for
two years. Will you be reviewing each individual status on a
case-by-case basis as this expiration happens?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, you're referring to what
we termed Operation Allies Welcome, a program that we are very
proud of that we instituted to provide refuge for individuals,
many of whom--
Mr. Tiffany. Will you be reviewing those--they came in on
parole. Will you be reviewing them on a case-by-case basis?
Secretary Mayorkas. We reviewed them on a case-by-case
basis. When those parole periods are subject to renewal, we
will do so again.
Mr. Tiffany. The commander down at Fort McCoy in my State,
when I interviewed him two years ago, he said they were not
interviewed on a case-by-case basis. In fact, in the terror
hotbed of the world, Afghanistan, which should have a special
immigrant visa process--the previous administration used that
to make sure to fully vet--not one of those people that came in
from Afghanistan were sent through the special immigrant visa
process. They were simply given parole.
Do you know how much damage was done to Fort McCoy during
that period when those 12,000-plus Afghans came in?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, the individuals who
benefited from Operation Allies Welcome were indeed screened
and vetted by government personnel.
Mr. Tiffany. They were brought in categorical parole, Mr.
Chair.
There was $145.6 million of damage that was done to Fort
McCoy. Did you realize that?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, we're very--
Mr. Tiffany. The place was virtually destroyed.
I want to move on. The poster behind me. We are seeing all
sorts of very serious, very serious criminal threats that come
from across the border. That was two weeks ago from FBI
Director Wray, in other words saying the border is out of
control. You say it is under control. Who is lying, you or FBI
Director Wray?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, we are very proud of our
efforts to secure the border. We are relentless in our efforts
to strengthen--
Mr. Tiffany. FBI Director Wray said it is becoming more and
more of a priority for us, under oath, just two weeks ago. Who
is lying to us, Director Wray or you?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, we work very closely with
the FBI to ensure the safety and security of the American
people. That is your highest priority.
[Video plays.]
Mr. Tiffany. Cartels are the winners. Sheriff Mark Dannels
under questioning here a few months ago before this Committee,
Cochise County down on the border of Arizona, he said the open
border has led to a significant increase in the amount of
fentanyl coming into this country. Do you agree with his
assessment?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, we have taken it to the
cartels--
Mr. Tiffany. Do you agree with his assessment? He said the
amount of fentanyl has gone up significantly as a result of the
open borders policy implemented by this administration January
20, 2021. Is he lying to us? Did Sheriff Dannels lie to us?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, I respectfully disagree
with Sheriff Dannels, whom I know well. I can say--
Mr. Tiffany. So, Sheriff Dannels is lying to us?
Secretary Mayorkas. That is not what I said, Congressman,
and let me share with you--
Mr. Tiffany. Someone is not telling the truth here, Mr.
Secretary. Someone is not telling the truth. It is either
Dannels or it is you.
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, we have interdicted more
fentanyl at the ports of entry than in the prior
administration.
Mr. Tiffany. Mr. Chair, I will go to close here.
The most urgent lethal threat in America was in this man's
testimony. There is one person in America who can reduce the
number of fentanyl deaths in America. By the way, the term
fentanyl overdoses are used. That is not the case anymore, is
it? It is fentanyl poisonings. We have had them here. The
Rachwal family from my State of Wisconsin.
When you hear of fentanyl poisonings here in America, there
is one person that can do something about it, and he sits right
before us today.
You, sir, are responsible for reducing fentanyl deaths in
America. Will you ever do anything about it. I yield back.
Chair Jordan. The gentleman yields back.
Mr. Johnson of Louisiana. Mr. Chair, I have got a unanimous
consent request quickly.
Chair Jordan. The gentleman from Louisiana.
Mr. Johnson of Louisiana. Two things actually: I wanted to
enter into the record a report, a Fox News report, April 27,
2022, which details the testimony of Mr. Mayorkas that created
the Disinformation Governance Board within DHS to combat
alleged disinformation and misinformation, terms that he is not
able to explain here.
The second document is the public statement on the Hunter
Biden emails with the 51 former intel agents. That has now been
debunked, but they also refer to misinformation. So, it is an
important term. Enter those into the record.
Chair Jordan. Without objection.
The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from California.
Mr. Lieu. Thank you, Chair Jordan.
The House Judiciary Committee is responsible with helping
to ensure the rule of law. Unfortunately, the Chair of this
Committee ignored a bipartisan Congressional subpoena. The
actions of the Chair have undermined the credibility of all
Congressional Committees in seeking information from witnesses
and damaged the rule of law.
Secretary Mayorkas, thank you for your public service. I
would like to discuss with you the history of the Southern
border. In September 1969, a few years before Watergate
consumed this Presidential Administration, the President
launched Operation Intercept which basically shut down the
Southern border. Less than three weeks later that operation was
stopped because it largely failed to address the issues at the
border.
Secretary Mayorkas, who was the Republican President in
1969?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, I have to think back
sequentially in reverse chronology, but I'm sure you know the
answer--
Mr. Lieu. He resigned.
Secretary Mayorkas. --immediately.
Mr. Lieu. I will give you a hint: This Republican President
resigned.
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, I know the President,
President Nixon.
Mr. Lieu. Thank you. After Nixon resigned in 1974, his Vice
President became President, but the issues at the border
continued, and in 1976 the President stated, quote, ``80-90
percent of the heroin that comes into the United States today
comes across from our Southern border.''
Secretary Mayorkas, who was the Republican President in
1976? The Vice President to Nixon.
Secretary Mayorkas. I'm sorry?
Mr. Lieu. He was the Vice President to Richard Nixon.
Secretary Mayorkas. Gerald Ford are you speaking of?
Mr. Lieu. Yes, that is correct.
Secretary Mayorkas. Yes, I'd--
Mr. Lieu. Then--
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, I'd prefer not to answer
questions of history right now. My focus is on the--
Mr. Lieu. Right. I am going to help you with it.
Secretary Mayorkas. --work of the Department of Homeland
Security.
Mr. Lieu. I am going to help you with this. In the 1980s
the Republican President had promised morning in America again,
but the issues at the Southern border continued prompting him
to offer a partial shutdown of the border in 1985. This
operation aptly named Operation Intercept II was stopped after
only a few days because it also failed to address the issues at
the border. This was a President that knew about these issues
because he was a former of Governor of California.
Secretary Mayorkas, who was the Republican President in
1985?
Secretary Mayorkas. Ronald Reagan, Congressman.
Mr. Lieu. Thank you. The border issues continued into this
century. In 2006, the President, who was also familiar with the
border because he was a former Governor of Texas, declared
that, quote, ``for decades the United States has not been in
complete control of its borders.''
Secretary Mayorkas, who was the Republican President in
2006?
Secretary Mayorkas. President Bush, Congressman.
Mr. Lieu. OK. In the prior administration the Republican
President tried to solve the issues at the border and he
failed. I would now like to show a video of what was actually
happening during the prior administration in 2018.
[Video plays.]
Mr. Lieu. In May 2019, the situation got even worse.
Politico published an article on June 5, 2019 that was titled,
``Border Arrests Rose to Nearly 130,000 in May as the Border
Surge Continues.''
Secretary Mayorkas, who was the Republican President in
2018 and 2019?
Secretary Mayorkas. President Trump, Congressman.
Mr. Lieu. Now we are here in 2023. Secretary Mayorkas, last
month in June border crossings declined to the lowest level in
over two years, correct?
Secretary Mayorkas. I'm sorry. Can you repeat the--
Mr. Lieu. Border crossings last month declined to the
lowest level in over two years, correct?
Secretary Mayorkas. Yes.
Mr. Lieu. OK. Politico published an article last week that
stated approximately 99,545 individuals were apprehended last
month, the first time the figure dropped below 100,000 in more
than two years. That data is largely correct, right?
Secretary Mayorkas. I believe so, yes, Congressman.
Mr. Lieu. All right. So, based on the facts that you have
testified to here is this chart. Shows that under Trump there
were 130,000 border apprehensions in May 2019, and last month
under the Biden Administration there were less than 100,000
border apprehensions. The facts show the Southern border is
doing better last month than it was under Trump in May 2019.
Thank you, Secretary Mayorkas, for your public service. Now
that the Republicans want to impeach you, good luck with that
one. I yield back.
Chair Jordan. The gentleman yields back.
The gentleman from Texas is recognized.
Mr. Roy. I thank the Chair.
Secretary Mayorkas, on April 28, 2022, I asked you, quote,
``Will you testify under oath right now do we have operational
control, yes or no?'' You responded with, quote, ``Yes, we
do.'' I then asked we have operational control of the borders?
You responded, quote, ``Yes, we do.''
Followed up. I read to you the definition of operational
control. I actually held up this chart. Operational control as
defined under the Secure Fence Act. Put it for plain reading,
plain as day. I put up the second part of the same statute
which defines operational control. Means the prevention of all
unlawful entry into the United States including entries by
terrorists, other unlawful aliens, instruments of terrorism,
narcotics, and other contraband.
I said to you do you stand by in your testimony that we
have operational control in light of this definition? You
responded with, quote, ``I do.''
Earlier you testified I didn't give you a chance to finish,
yet you specifically when asked--and held up a statute defining
exactly what operational control meant under the Secure Fence
Act you said, quote, ``I do.'' I believe that was purposeful. I
believe you want the American people to believe we have
operational control of the border when we very clearly do not.
Less than a month later in Homeland Security you testified,
quote, ``Under that strict definition this country has never
had operational control.''
This year House Homeland Security. Then Border Patrol Chief
Raul Ortiz testified before the Homeland Committee that DHS did
not have operational control of the border either by the
statutory definition or not. Now, that is an honest answer.
In the Senate Judiciary Committee shortly thereafter you
testified with respect to the definition of operational
control, I do not use the definition that appears in the Secure
Fence Act. The Secure Fence Act provides statutorily that
operational control is defined as preventing all unlawful
entries into the United States, and by that definition no
administration has ever had operational control.
If you will recall when you testified here in front of me,
when I asked that question, when you very clearly stated we do
have operational control. When presented with the actual
definition of operational control, you didn't hesitate. You
said I do. You, in fact, then referred back and said I believe
that my predecessors would have said the same thing.
I asked Chad Wolf that question in this room and Chad said,
Well, no, we didn't use that framing to say we have operational
control. We are striving to achieve operational control.
You didn't do that. You looked straight at the American people,
straight at me, straight at every person on this Committee, and
said, ``we have operational control.'' Why?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, two points: (1) You did
not let me complete my answer.
Mr. Roy. Hold on. Or give me your second point. Go ahead.
Secretary Mayorkas. Thank you. (2) The Secure Fence Act
defines operational control as not a single individual crosses
the border--
Mr. Roy. I am aware. I read it. I read it to you. You read
it. In fact, you said, ``I do.'' You didn't hesitate. You
didn't say I do. I need to explain what I mean by I do. You
said I do over and over again.
Here is the problem with that: This is a pattern. Did you
lie another time when you said on September 24, 2021, at a
press conference, quote,
We know that those images painfully conjured up the worst
elements of our Nation's ongoing battle against systemic
racism.
When responding to the alleged whipping incident by the
bipartisan agencies who report to you, when in fact on October
22, 2022, it was reported that 2\1/2\ hours before that press
conference Marsha Espinosa, Assistant Secretary of DHS Public
Affairs emailed you and CC'd other DHS leadership alerting you
all that the photographer who took the images did not see any
whipping occur invalidating the initial claim?
It wasn't until May of this year that you corrected the
record to say well, let me just correct you right there because
actually the investigation concluded the whipping did not
occur.
Don Rosenberg in this very room testified a few weeks ago
that you lied. It is a perpetual pattern. The fact is, there
are real people that are impacted by that.
We have now since you testified, we have had something like
200 people a day dying from fentanyl death, which would amount
to 90,000 people. I showed you before when you were here the
lost voices of fentanyl, the hundreds, the thousands of
Americans that continue to die. Ninety thousand since you came
into this Committee and lied to us saying we have operational
control. I yield back.
Chair Jordan. The gentleman yields back.
The gentleman from California is recognized.
Mr. Swalwell. Mr. Secretary, you have a serious job and
occasionally you have to deal with some very unserious MAGA
colleagues of mine. Your serious job is to secure the border of
the greatest country in the world, a country that is neighbor
to some of the most violent and economically insecure countries
in the world where people are willing to risk everything to
come here. Somehow you have to secure the border, but also make
sure we are not pushing little girls back into the river so
they can drown.
It is a hard job. If it was an easy job, we wouldn't have
asked you to do it, but you were asked to do it because you are
qualified, you are competent, you care, you show compassion,
and you show up every day and you deal with this.
Frankly, sir, I think sometimes you are too nice because if
I had a Chair who failed to honor his own lawful subpoena about
500 days after it was submitted to him, I would say catch me
when you are serious. Come talk to me when you are going to
follow the law about whether you think I follow the law. That
is not how you are. You take your job seriously even in front
of a lot of unserious people.
In fact, the Chair that you are sitting in, you may not
know this, but the last person who sat in that Chair was called
by the Chair an anti-vaxxing, anti-Semitic witness, in RFK, Jr.
So, you have brought immediate credibility to the Chair that
you are sitting in by just being here.
They are not serious people. They chide people for their
pronouns, they obsess and display in this Committee and other
Committees a private citizen's nonconsensual nude images. We
are not talking about serious people. We are not talking about
people who are on the level.
So, what do we want to do? We want to acknowledge the
seriousness of your job and hopefully one day in the majority
give you the tools to deliver on what we believe ultimately can
put us in the most secure place, which is comprehensive
immigration reform.
In the spirit of that I want to as you, because I believe
in that and my colleagues believe in that, in January, DHS
established a new set of processes for lawful entry of Cubans,
Haitians, Nicaraguans, and Venezuelans that drastically reduced
encounters of those nationals at the Southern border. This
freed up department resources to combat drug trafficking and
other cartel crimes. Democrats applauded the measure while
Republicans scrambled to find a new way to turn it into
campaign fund raising emails.
Last Congress Democrats proposed increases to funding for
CBP personnel to patrol the Southern border and investments in
technology to interdict smuggling through ports of entry.
Again, my Republican colleagues failed to support common-sense
measures to secure the homeland. My colleagues on the other
side of the aisle, they don't have solutions. They want the
chaos.
So, Mr. Secretary, they have put forth proposals to defund
the CBP One app, which has helped alleviate strained manpower
at the Southern border. What impact would that have on our
homeland security?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, the CBP One app is one
element of our approach of building and expanding lawful
pathways for people to reach the United States in a safe,
orderly, and lawful way, as well as delivering consequences at
the border for those individuals who do not use them.
The CBP One app,
(1) Reduces the number of irregular encounters at our Southern
border.
(2) Critically, cuts out the smuggling organizations that
impose such tragedy and trauma on vulnerable individuals purely
for the sake of profit.
(3) Allows us to screen and vet individuals before they arrive
at our border.
It is of tremendous utility to us, and its results have proven
productive.
Mr. Swalwell. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. As I said, you have
a serious job. Border crossings are down despite my MAGA
colleagues constantly saying we have an open border which only
invites people South of the border to believe that they should
try and come here. They are rooting for that chaos. You are
trying to bring solutions to stop that. Fentanyl seizures are
up. Congratulations to the brave men and women who wear the
badge every day and walk the beat at CBP. That should be
celebrated, but rather it is used by my MAGA colleagues as a
political weapon to suggest that they would rather the fentanyl
get past CBP, past the ports of entry and into our schools and
our communities. You have got a tough job, you are a serious
person, and we are grateful that you are doing it. I yield
back.
Chair Jordan. The gentleman yields back.
The gentleman from Kentucky is recognized.
Mr. Massie. I thank the Chair.
Secretary Mayorkas, the Department of Homeland Security
issued a national terrorism advisory system bulletin this year
in February. It said the United States remains in a heightened
threat environment fueled by several factors including an
online environment filled with false or misleading narratives
and conspiracy theories and other forms of mis-, dis-, and
malinformation. Can you define malinformation for us?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, we're dealing with false
information that is used for a particular purpose.
Mr. Massie. Isn't malinformation actually true information
that may be inconvenient to the establishment orthodoxy?
Secretary Mayorkas. I'm sorry, Congressman.
Mr. Massie. Isn't malinformation a made-up word that refers
to information that is actually true, but just inconvenient to
the government narrative?
Secretary Mayorkas. That is not true, Congressman.
Mr. Massie. Let me ask you this: You said that the
proliferation of false or misleading narratives sow discord and
undermine public trust in U.S. Government institutions. Is it
illegal to undermine public trust in U.S. Government
institutions?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, we become involved as we
believe in the First Amendment right, and we have safeguards to
protect it. We actually have a statutorily created Office for
Civil Rights and Civil Liberties. We become involved not with
respect to a particular ideology. We are ideology-neutral. It's
the connectivity to violence.
Mr. Massie. Isn't larger government an ideology, the bigger
government? Let me ask you my original question: Is it illegal
to undermine public trust in U.S. Government institutions?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, we understand First
Amendment principles. We embrace and protect them.
Mr. Massie. Doesn't the--
Secretary Mayorkas. Individuals can espouse whatever
ideology they believe it.
Mr. Massie. So, it is--
Secretary Mayorkas. That is a--
Mr. Massie. So, let me ask you the question. If you would
just answer it directly. Is it illegal to undermine public
trust in U.S. Government institutions? Isn't that in fact what
we are doing here today when we point out that you have
released a million or two million people into this country
without trying to deport them? Are we in fact undermining trust
in U.S.--in your institution? Aren't we doing that? Isn't that
actually healthy when we point that out?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, may I share with you what
the Department of Homeland Security does with respect to
ideologies?
Mr. Massie. I need to ask you another question since you
haven't answered any of these yet.
You say that there is widespread online proliferation of
false or misleading narratives regarding COVID-19. Is the claim
that natural immunity is real--is that a false or misleading
online narrative?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, we do not evaluate
particular ideologies or particular narratives. We're focused--
Mr. Massie. How about the claim that vaccines don't stop
the spread of the virus? Was that a false or misleading COVID
narrative?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, what we do is we are
involved when there's a connectivity between an ideology,
whatever that ideology--
Mr. Massie. I am not talking about ideology. I am talking
about COVID-19. Is the notion that masks were ineffective in
stopping transmission--was that a false or misleading
narrative?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, allow me to repeat. What
we engaged in is a connectivity to violence. It is our
responsibility to prevent violence from occurring. We work very
closely--
Mr. Massie. I want you to give me an example of a false or
misleading narrative that encouraged violence. You say that
there were grievances associated with these themes inspired
violent extremist attacks during 2021. Did hydroxychloroquine--
did that inspire violent extremist attacks? What are you
talking about in this document when you say that false or
misleading narratives about COVID-19 inspired violent extremist
attacks during 2021? Can you give us a single example? I have
given you some questions. Was it the narrative that this may
have leaked from a lab in China? Was that the thing? If so,
what did it inspire? What is the violence?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, would you like an example?
Mr. Massie. Yes.
Secretary Mayorkas. Yes. COVID-19 is caused by 5G cell
towers, an attack on a cell tower. That attack on a cell tower
triggers the involvement of the Department of Homeland
Security. That is an example. It is the connectivity to
violence. We do not condone violence--
Mr. Massie. You think COVID-19 caused attacks on cell
towers?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, that is a--
Mr. Massie. I think you are chasing ridiculous things.
Mr. Schiff. Mr. Chair?
Mr. Massie. People watching this at home--
Mr. Schiff. Mr. Chair?
Mr. Massie. --they have got to be just amazed that you
would espouse this.
Mr. Schiff. Mr. Chair, can the witness be allowed to
answer?
Mr. Massie. He is not--he said that false or misleading
narratives about COVID-19 need to be censored. He is implying
that they need to be censored because getting out this
information--free speech is somehow dangerous to our country--
Mr. Nadler. Mr. Chair, he didn't say that.
Mr. Massie. --in the context of COVID-19. I completely
disagree. He didn't give us an example.
Mr. Schiff. Mr. Chair, can he answer--
Mr. Massie. I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. Nadler. Mr. Chair, can he answer the question because
he is being misquoted.
Chair Jordan. The time belongs to the gentleman. He has
yielded back. The time now goes to--and before I yield to the
gentlelady from Washington, I am sure she will be willing to
yield to you, Mr. Secretary.
We have been going almost two hours. If you need a break,
just let us know, but we will keep going.
I will yield to the gentlelady for her five minutes. If you
want to respond to Mr. Massie in that five, go right ahead. The
gentlelady from Washington is recognized.
Ms. Jayapal. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Secretary, thank you for coming here today. I am going
to give you a brief opportunity, because I have a full five
minutes, but a brief opportunity to respond to the gentleman.
Secretary Mayorkas. I don't even know where to begin with
the grotesque distortion of information. I just don't even know
where to begin.
Ms. Jayapal. Mr. Secretary, I want to thank you for your
service, for your leadership. I am sorry what you are--for what
you are experiencing today. As the Ranking Member of the
Immigration Subcommittee, I want to take a step back and just
remind everyone of the mess that you inherited from the
previous administration and the steps that your department
under your leadership is taking to move us in the right
direction.
Let's be really clear: The Trump Administration considered
every undocumented immigrant a priority for removal. The Trump
Administration separated children from their parents. Perhaps
what escaped attention the most was that the Trump
Administration simply did not believe in legal immigration. The
previous administration enacted over 400 changes designed to
shut down legal immigration.
The truth is that it is our job in Congress to fix this. We
have not updated the immigration system in over three decades.
In that time America's population has grown by 80 million
people. The economy is five times larger. Our inability to
modernize American laws, immigration laws has resulted in
record-level backlogs for the legal immigration system making
it nearly impossible to come to the United States.
A decade ago, the U.S. Senate passed with 68 bipartisan
votes a comprehensive immigration reform bill only to be
stymied by Republicans in the House who refused to bring it up
for a vote because they knew that it would pass if they did.
Today, thanks to a concerted Republican strategy to vilify
immigrants, it is hard to imagine a bill like that garnering
that kind of bipartisan vote in either chamber.
So, given that the Republican-controlled House will not
move forward meaningful reform, Mr. Secretary, you and the
Biden Administration have used your legal authorities granted
by Congress to add additional legal pathways. Much to some of
my colleagues' chagrin, with much success. You are working to
provide order and relief to immigrants.
The administration announced the opening of regional
processing centers across the Western Hemisphere that will
allow migrants to have their protection and benefits claims
assessed in a humane way without having to make the dangerous
journey to the U.S.-Mexico border.
The administration has embraced the use of parole following
a bipartisan tradition of Presidential Administrations going
back 70 years. In addition, the administration also formally
announced new family reunification parole processes for El
Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, and Columbia. These are modeled
after the Cuban family reunification process which Republicans
have supported in the past.
In addition, you have increased the number of appointments
that will be available under the CBP One app, which, while far
from perfect, will increase CBP's ability to process more
migrants.
As you know, Mr. Secretary, I have serious concerns about
some policies including a new asylum regulation which was just
declared unlawful in Federal court that I fear undermine due
process and right to seek asylum. Despite that, despite that I
am very clear about the Republican opposition to any sensible
and humane immigration system and who the good guys are in this
situation.
That is you, Mr. Secretary. The good guys are you, the
Democrats, and this administration who understand the great
importance of immigration to America on every level and are
determined to take steps to expand pathways for entry and move
us forward. For that I am tremendously grateful to you and I
thank you for your service and for your leadership.
Now, Mr. Secretary, Republicans projected terrible things
after Title 42, but in fact Politico has called it the migrant
crisis that still hasn't arrived.
Mr. Chair, I seek unanimous consent to enter an article
into the record with that exact title.
Chair Jordan. Without objection.
Ms. Jayapal. Can you talk about the administration's
attempts to expand legal pathways and why you think it is so
important?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congresswoman, our approach is to
expand lawful pathways so that individuals who qualify for
relief under the laws of this Congress do not have to place
their lives and their life savings in the hands of unscrupulous
smugglers who only exploit them for profit, to bring greater
security and strength to our border, and to allow our agencies
to screen and vet individuals before they arrive here in the
United States. Those are three very significant benefits of our
lawful pathways.
I know you and I disagree on the other element of our
approach, which is to deliver consequences for those who do not
use those lawful pathways.
Ms. Jayapal. I thank you, Mr. Secretary. I hope we always
hold up the Constitution and I thank you for your service.
I yield back, Mr. Chair.
Chair Jordan. The gentlelady yields back.
The Chair recognizes himself.
Mr. Secretary, you know what the number is, don't you, the
number that Mr. Gaetz was trying to get an answer--get a
response from? You know what that number is, right?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, I would--
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, I would be pleased to
provide this Committee, you, Mr. Chair, with--
Chair Jordan. You don't know now? You don't know what that
is? I mean, again just to--because what Mr. Gaetz is trying to
get at, I think what the country would like to know is, we know
that there's been an influx of people coming in, over two
million encountered in our Southern border, inadmissible aliens
on our Southern border.
We know that number has come in since Joe Biden has been
President. We know it's a big number. All he was asking was:
How many of that two-point something, over two million, how
many have went through the adjudication process and actually
been removed?
Secretary Mayorkas. Mr. Chair--
Chair Jordan. You're telling the Judiciary Committee today
you don't know what that number is?
Secretary Mayorkas. Mr. Chair, what I am sharing with you
is that we will provide you with whatever data you request.
Chair Jordan. No, no, that's not what--I want to go right--
that's a simple--we've had kind of two simple questions that
you didn't get an answer to. I just want to know--give you a
second chance here if you'll do it. What is that number out of
that two-point something universe of inadmissible aliens
encountered on our Southern border who have come into the
country, been released in the country. How many have gone
through the adjudication process and then been removed?
Secretary Mayorkas. Mr. Chair, I'd be pleased to provide
you with that.
Chair Jordan. Can you guess?
Secretary Mayorkas. Mr. Chair, it is--
Chair Jordan. Can you give an estimate?
Secretary Mayorkas. Mr. Chair, I will not--
Chair Jordan. Why will you not give an estimate to the
American people? Because they would like to know because that
sort of frames it. Here's what's come in. Here's who you've
allowed in since Joe Biden has been President. Here's the ones
who've actually been removed.
Secretary Mayorkas. I would say two things, Mr. Chair.
First, I will provide that data to you. We will do so.
Chair Jordan. You're not really good at that because you've
said that other times here, and you don't give us the data. We
asked that information about the disinformation governance
board and all we get is redacted documents. So, you're not
really good about that.
It's a simple question and frankly a question we ask you to
be prepared for. We wrote you two letters in the last several
weeks to be prepared to answer that kind of question. I think
probably that specific question, and you won't give us an
answer.
Secretary Mayorkas. Mr. Chair--
Chair Jordan. So, the fact that you won't is bad, and the
fact that you don't know is just as bad because it's the one
question the country kind of would like to know what's really
happening. When you say all these pathways and things and
border security and all the things you say, we kind of like to
know what's really happened with the two-point something
million people who've been released into the country since Joe
Biden has been presented. How many have gone through the
adjudication process and been removed?
Secretary Mayorkas. So, now I--
Chair Jordan. Simple question.
Secretary Mayorkas. So, now I have three points.
(1) We will provide the data to you.
Chair Jordan. God bless you.
Secretary Mayorkas. Two--
Chair Jordan. God bless. I hope you do it this time.
Secretary Mayorkas. (2) We have been cooperating with this
Committee. We have made countless documents and people
available to you. We have provided briefings.
Chair Jordan. Yes, and here's what those--by the way, just
so you know, I'll let you finish with your third point. Here's
what those documents look like. Here's the one you sent to us.
It's Policy and Responsibilities in the Departments,
Information Manipulation Mission.
That sounds scary enough, Information Manipulation Mission.
It's all redacted. This is the kind of stuff you gave us when
we were trying to figure out who was responsible for putting
together the Disinformation Governance Board and I think my
colleague, Mr. Johnson, was asking.
Now, we're asking a simple question about a number. The
fact that you won't give it to us or don't know it is a concern
for all of us. I would say both sides because the Democrats
probably want to know too. That's something that should be so
obvious, and you won't communicate it. Make your third point.
Secretary Mayorkas. Mr. Chair, we'll provide that
information to every Member.
Chair Jordan. Will it be like this or will be a real
number? Will be like that? Will it be a real number?
Secretary Mayorkas. Mr. Chair, the third point I--
Chair Jordan. Let me ask really quick. Can you get that
number to us, like, tomorrow? Or do you have to go back and is
it going to take weeks and months and haggling back and forth
and all the letters we do? Congress writes letters to agencies,
and we haggle back and forth, all that dance we have to do. Or
can you just get us the number?
Secretary Mayorkas. Mr. Chair, we'll provide that data to
you as promptly as possible.
(3) Would be the most fundamental point of all when we
speak of immigration. We are dealing with a fundamentally
broken system. We have between 11-12 million--
Chair Jordan. OK. I've got 50 second. So, I appreciate
that. You've said that before, so I got that point. Don't mean
to cut you off, but I got to get this.
Now, in your testimony, you said you've arrested 14,000
smugglers. Seems like a big number to me. What happened to
those guys?
Secretary Mayorkas. Those individuals, Mr. Chair, are, if
the evidence so supports, prosecuted for smuggling.
Chair Jordan. You've referred them to DOJ. You've arrested
them. You've given them over to DOJ. What's happened to them?
Have they been indicted, taken to trial, found guilty? Are they
in prison somewhere? What's the status?
Secretary Mayorkas. Let me--
Chair Jordan. That is a huge number, 14,000 smugglers. God
bless you for getting them. I'd like to know what happened to
them.
Secretary Mayorkas. I'm very pleased to provide that data
to you. Let me provide some examples.
Chair Jordan. You just told us a couple minutes ago you
work closely with the FBI. We'd like that information, too.
That's important. Have you arrested any of them multiple times?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, I'll provide that
information.
Chair Jordan. You think there's a possibility some of those
smugglers you've arrested more than once?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, when I prosecuted
immigration crimes in the 1990s, we saw individuals who had
repeated violations of criminal laws of the United States and
repeated removals from the United States and prosecuted--
Chair Jordan. You think a smuggler, you catch someone
smuggling people, smuggling drugs, you wouldn't--that guy would
be prosecuted, and you'd think you would again know that answer
too.
Ms. Jayapal. Mr. Chair--
Chair Jordan. We hope you get those answers to us. I yield
now to--
Ms. Jayapal. Unanimous consent request, Mr. Chair.
Chair Jordan. Oh, gentlelady from Washington is recognized.
Ms. Jayapal. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I wanted to ask
unanimous consent to enter into the record The New York Times
article called, ``Burning Cell Towers Out of Baseless Fear They
Spread the Virus.'' This is a conspiracy theory linking the
spread of the coronavirus to 5G wireless technology that
spurred more than 100 incidents in just one month.
Chair Jordan. Without objection.
Ms. Jayapal. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Chair Jordan. The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from
California.
Mr. Correa. Thank you, Mr. Chair and Secretary. Welcome.
Thank you for a good job. I really believe you have a thankless
job. You've done a hell of a job.
When I became Ranking Member of the Homeland Security
Border Subcommittee, I made it my priority to visit every major
port of entry on the Southern board. I visited, met with men
and women and uniform, both blue and green uniforms. Wanted to
see what the job was about, what the challenges were.
Mr. Secretary, let's talk refugees. COVID-19 has changed
the world. Today, we're probably seeing the biggest movement of
refugees in recent history, if not in the history of the world.
Title 42, when Title 42 was about to be lifted, everybody
was expecting total chaos at the border. A week before that, a
few days before that event, I went to San Ysidro, myself and
the Border Port Director, visited Mexico. We met with Mexican
officials, Federal, State, local, as well as Mexican
stakeholders interested in making sure everything went well at
the border.
Everybody expected chaos. Title 42 was lifted, no chaos.
Everything went unexpectedly well. I think you were the
architect of that policy, carrots and sticks. You made sure
that people had a pathway, had incentives to come legally. You
also put criminal sanctions on those that would break those
laws.
Of course, you also worked with some of our partners South
of the border to make sure that this job was not just United
States, but that the burden was shared with other people like
Mexico, Columbia, and other Nations around the world. Mr.
Mayorkas, you're doing a good job. So, my question to you today
is how can we, U.S. Congress, assist you in doing a better job
for the United States?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, thank you. We are taking
the actions that we think will strengthen the security of our
border, uphold our values as well to the best of our abilities,
operating within a broken immigration system. The most
fundamental benefit that we could receive from Congress is
legislative reform.
Mr. Correa. I'd like to see us move to immigration reform.
You were trying to say earlier we have 12 million undocumented
workers working in this country, some having been here for 10,
20, or 30 years. No hope of an adjustment of status. We have
another 10 million job openings in this country today.
Let's quickly, my last minute or two, talk about fentanyl.
It's ruining Main Street back home, deaths. The 80-90 percent
of the fentanyl comes through our ports of entry, yet right now
you only have enough funding to maybe inspect two percent of
the vehicles coming through our ports of entry. Does that sound
about right?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, we have harnessed advanced
technology, most notably the nonintrusive inspection
technology, to be a force multiplier for our personnel. We rely
on funding from Congress for not only that technology but also
the personnel who operated the extraordinary people of U.S.
Customs and Border Protection, both our Border Patrol agents
and our Office of Field Operations personnel and--
Mr. Correa. Mr. Secretary, if we wanted to stop more
fentanyl from coming into the country, I'd say you need more
personnel, more technology, more of those drug sniffing dogs
that are so effective. You need more funding. You want to go
from two percent of inspections to 4-10 percent of those
vehicles being inspected. You need the funds.
Secretary Mayorkas. We do, Congressman. It is a two-part
challenge. It is addressing the supply which your question is
focused on, of course. We also have to address the issue of
demand in this country.
The scourge of drugs has been a long enduring one. I will
say I prosecuted many narcotics trafficking cases in my time as
a prosecutor. The toxicity of fentanyl is something I've never
seen before.
Mr. Correa. Mr. Secretary, thank you very much for your
good work. We want to partner with you to make sure we protect
America on those negative elements coming into this country.
Mr. Chair, I yield.
Chair Jordan. The gentleman yields back. The gentleman from
North Carolina is recognized.
Mr. Bishop. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Secretary, let me
focus on CISA a moment and something very specific. Jen
Easterly, the Director of CISA, testifying before an
appropriation's Subcommittee here in the House earlier this
year said, quote,
We don't flag anything to social medial organizations at all.
We are focused on building resilience to foreign influence and
disinformation.
Is that true or false that CISA does not flag anything to
social media organizations at all?
Secretary Mayorkas. I believe that is true, Congressman. I
will verify that, but I believe that is true.
Mr. Bishop. Are you familiar with Brian Scully. Do you know
who that is?
Secretary Mayorkas. I do not, Congressman.
Mr. Bishop. He was, the MDM--person responsible for MDM as
you call it. He testified about switchboarding, that CISA was
engaged in switchboarding, in which, for example, it was
essentially an audit official to identify something on social
media that they deemed to be disinformation aimed at their
jurisdiction. They could forward that to CISA, and CISA would
share that with the appropriate social media companies.
Now, that was a quote from his testimony. That sounds like
flagging to me, flagging to social media companies, and all his
testimony was of similar import. How does that reconcile with
what you just said Ms. Easterly correctly answered before the
appropriations Subcommittee?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, a few points on switch-
boarding.
Mr. Bishop. No, no, no, no, no. Would you--
Secretary Mayorkas. Yes?
Mr. Bishop. Would you reconcile those two statements,
please?
Secretary Mayorkas. Yes.
Mr. Bishop. I don't really have enough time to go from
dissertation.
Secretary Mayorkas. Yes, I will.
Mr. Bishop. OK.
Secretary Mayorkas. If you'll allow me.
Mr. Bishop. Quickly, thank you.
Secretary Mayorkas. That practice--my understanding is that
practice was in 2018, in 2020 is no longer employed by CISA.
What it amounted to was serving as an intermediary between
election officials and social media companies. We were not
making a judgment. Back in 2018 or 2020--
Mr. Bishop. I get your point. I get your point. I know you
were going to elaborate, and I appreciate that. I think the
point you just said, and I'd like to inquire further, you said
is no longer the practice. When did it stop?
Secretary Mayorkas. I'd be pleased to provide that
information to you, and I will defer to the Director Easterly.
We will provide that information to you.
Mr. Bishop. You do not know when they stopped doing it?
Secretary Mayorkas. I do not.
Mr. Bishop. You have said in your testimony here today
several times that we are taking it to the cartels to an
unprecedented degree dismantling those criminal organizations.
Those are two things you said. Have Mexican drug cartels become
stronger or weaker during your tenure as Secretary?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, we are taking it to the
cartels to an unprecedented--
Mr. Bishop. You already said that. In fact, I just repeated
it to you. Have they become stronger or weaker on your watch?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, the cartels have been a
challenge for not only this country, but many countries around
the world.
Mr. Bishop. Are you not able to say whether they're
stronger or weaker on your watch?
Secretary Mayorkas. We through our efforts, our efforts
have weakened those cartels by the investigations and
prosecutions that we have conducted with our international--
Mr. Bishop. The cartels are weakened under your tenure?
Secretary Mayorkas. When we--
Mr. Bishop. Is that what your testimony is, sir?
Secretary Mayorkas. When we disrupt a cartel, when we
arrest an individual with our partners, we have weakened them.
That is what the men and women of the Department of Homeland
Security are dedicated to doing.
Mr. Bishop. How much revenue have the cartels received
during your tenure?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, I don't have that data.
Mr. Bishop. You have no estimate about that whatsoever that
you bear in your mind what revenues Mexican drug cartels have
received during your tenure as Secretary?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, the cartels are very
profitable. They were very profitable three years ago, and they
were very profitable six years ago.
Mr. Bishop. Are they making more or less revenue under your
tenure now that under previous administrations?
Secretary Mayorkas. I will tell you this, that we are
unrelenting in our attack against the cartels.
Mr. Bishop. More or--I understand your effort, sir. What
I'm talking about are your results. Are they making more or
less revenue under your tenure than your predecessors?
Secretary Mayorkas. We have arrested more criminals
involved in cartel activity than in the prior--
Mr. Bishop. Do you not know whether they're making more
revenue? Or are you simply evading my question?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, I believe I answered your
question that I do not have that data.
Mr. Bishop. Our drug deaths--
Secretary Mayorkas. I will say this.
Mr. Bishop. --due to penetrating the Southern border the
United States increased or reduced during your 30-month tenure
over prior periods?
Secretary Mayorkas. The cartels outside of the United
States have also stretched their jurisdiction to other
countries around the world.
Mr. Bishop. How does your record on achieving operational
control compare to other administrations, worse than any other?
Secretary Mayorkas. No, Congressman. The approach that we
are taking, expanding lawful pathways--
Mr. Bishop. You've had larger numbers of entries in
violation of that statutory definition, have you not, sir?
Chair Jordan. The time of gentleman--
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, the approach that we are
taking of expanding lawful pathways and delivering consequences
for those who do not use them are proving results. It continues
to be a challenge as the border has been in the absence of
legislative action. We are achieving results.
Mr. Bishop. I yield back, Mr. Chair.
Chair Jordan. Gentleman yields back. Mr. Secretary, we'll
go a few more rounds, if that's all right, then we'll get a
break.
Mr. Gaetz. Mr. Chair, I have unanimous consent.
Chair Jordan. Unanimous consent from gentleman from
Florida.
Mr. Gaetz. Yes, from Reuters, ``U.S. Suspends Asylum
Appointments in Texas Border City After Extortion Reports.''
From U.S. News & World Report, ``U.S. Halts Online Asylum
Appoints at Texas Crossing After Extortion Warnings.'' The
Associated Press, ``U.S. Halts Appoints Using Migrant Phone App
at Texas Border Crossing,'' seems to be in direct contradiction
of the Secretary's testimony. I seek unanimous consent to enter
it.
Chair Jordan. Without objection. The Chair now recognizes
the gentlelady from Pennsylvania.
Ms. Scanlon. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Secretary
Mayorkas, for being here. As you well know, immigration and
border security are complicated issues that require
comprehensive solutions to address national security,
humanitarian concerns, workforce issues, gun and drug smuggling
in both directions, and fidelity to the rule of law which is,
of course, the foundation of our country.
Our colleagues across the aisle have made clear with their
tone and questions today that their primary interest is in
scapegoating you and the Biden Administration for the
consequences of Congress failing for decades to address either
the root causes of immigration at our Southern border,
including climate change, corruption, and poverty, or the
underfunding and all but complete collapse of the U.S.
immigration system which hasn't been updated for decades to
respond to current conditions. Instead of investigating and
proposing real solutions to these immigration issues, our
colleagues prefer to push and sometimes create apocalyptic
scenarios to scare Americans. So, chaos, anger, and fear with
heated rhetoric and political theater designed to cast blame
rather than solve problems.
So, this is allegedly an oversight hearing, and there's an
issue I would like to address. First, I appreciate your clarity
and your nuance even when responding to some of the more
outrageous rhetoric from our colleagues. Can we just clarify
one more time in case it's gotten lost? Have you or the Biden
Administration ever tries to adopt an open border policy?
Secretary Mayorkas. No, we're not.
Ms. Scanlon. OK. I didn't think so. Just wanted to make
sure we were clear there. In the interest of conducting actual
oversight and finding solutions, I'd like to turn your
attention to an issue that I've been following since I first
participated in a multi-year ABA investigation on the topic
almost 20 years ago, and that's access to counsel by immigrants
when they're seeking legal entry into our country.
It's critical to ensuring the fidelity of our country to
the rule of law as well as improving functioning of the asylum
system. Studies have consistently shown that access to counsel
is critical to successfully navigating our laws. Those seeking
asylum are often unable to access counsel even if they can
afford a lawyer or volunteers are willing to take their cases.
This past spring when your agency launched expedited asylum
screenings at Border Patrol facilities, a commitment was made
to provide access to such counsel to all immigrants.
According to recent reporting by advocates, that promise
has remained unfulfilled. The thousands of migrants screened at
these facilities, only a small number have been able to
consult, however unpredictably, with attorneys by phone. Even
fewer have been able to complete formal legal representation.
So, I know that the failure to ensure uniform or consistent
access to counsel when available is not a new issue. The
problem appears to be worsening despite commitments to do
better. So, moving forward, is your agency able to better
guarantee attorney access for asylum seekers screened at Border
Patrol facilities or held in detention facilities?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congresswoman, when we built this
approach of lawful pathways and the delivery of consequences,
one element of it was the screening of individuals in Border
Patrol facilities. A sub-element of that effort was, in fact,
to safeguard access to counsel. I have visited the border
approximately 20 times.
My last visit, I saw the consultation booths that we
developed, we built in a Border Patrol processing facility
deliberately to provide that access to counsel. I am aware of
the concerns that some have raised with respect to our success
in ensuring access to counsel. We are reviewing those concerns.
Ms. Scanlon. I appreciate that, and I echo Mr. Correa's
offer to please let us know how we can assist you in making
sure that your efforts are more effective and what we as
Congress need to do at this belated time to help address the
issue at the Southern border. Mr. Chair, I would request
unanimous consent to insert into the record an article from The
New York Times titled, ``Lawyers Say Helping Asylum Seekers in
Border Custody is Near Impossible.''
Chair Jordan. Without objection.
Ms. Scanlon. Thank you. I yield back.
Chair Jordan. Gentlelady yields back. The gentleman from
Texas, Mr. Gooden.
Mr. Gooden. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Countless NGO's,
nongovernment organizations, provide ways and means to illegal
immigrants to cross the border and stay here indefinitely. Some
of the ones that we are most familiar with because they're the
biggest and have the largest presence are Jewish Family
Services, Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Services, and
Catholic Charities.
Secretary, you've often spoken about your partnership with
these NGO's. Many of these are activity encouraging and
enticing poor illegal immigrants to cross our border with the
promise of assistance. They promise to provide financial,
logistical, and transportation assistance in the form of money,
food, lodging, and transportation to anywhere in the country.
I've seen this with my own eyes. I've been to these
organizations, facilities, and our borders. They are welcoming
folks and sending out the message that the border is open and
that we'll provide assistance. Their help comes even with legal
guidance and cheat sheets for what to do when they get to
wherever it is they'd like a free plane ticket to. My question
to you, since they seem to not be interested in respecting our
laws, are you aware of who's funding them?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, the pernicious enticement
of individuals to come to the border at great danger is
perpetrated by the smuggling organizations. They are the ones
that traffic in misinformation and seek to exploit vulnerable
people exclusively for profit.
Mr. Gooden. So, you didn't open-up an operation where
you're saying if you get here, we'll pay for your way to
wherever you want to go? We'll put you up in a hotel. We'll
give you debit cards with money on it. You don't think that's
an enticement?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, I believe that you are
mischaracterizing the work of nonprofit organizations.
Mr. Gooden. So, they don't do that. So, is it your
testimony that nonprofit groups at the border do not provide
financial assistance? They do not provide transportation across
the United States, and they don't put them up in housing?
Secretary Mayorkas. That is not my testimony, Congressman.
As I have said--
Mr. Gooden. OK. So, you agree that they do. Let me go back
to my original question which was who's paying for this? Are
you aware of who's funding these NGO's?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, to what NGO's do you
refer? Because if--
Mr. Gooden. I'll give you an example, Catholic Charities,
Jewish Family Services, Lutheran Immigration and Refugee
Services. My question is are you aware of who is funding them
and their operations at the border?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, we are grateful--
Mr. Gooden. Are you aware of who's funding them was my
question.
Secretary Mayorkas. Yes, and I'm answering your question.
Mr. Gooden. OK. Who's funding them?
Secretary Mayorkas. We are grateful for the appropriations
that Congress have issued.
Mr. Gooden. So, the United States taxpayer is funding them
is what you're saying. Just to be specific, Catholic Charities
received over 1.4 billion dollars from the United States
taxpayers for their operations encouraging illegal immigration.
Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Services reported it received
179 million dollars in U.S. Government grants.
That makes over 80 percent of their total support. So, let
me ask you this question. Since they're receiving this money,
do you believe the number of grants and contracts awarded to
NGO's is something that should be made known to the American
taxpayer? Should that be public information? Should we know how
much money they're receiving for their operations?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, we do make that
information public. What we do is when an individual makes a
claim of credible fear under the asylum laws of the United
States--
Mr. Gooden. So, the American should know how many grants
and contracts are awarded to the NGO's. That's a fair request,
right?
Secretary Mayorkas. As I mentioned, we do make that
information--
Mr. Gooden. So, the American taxpayer should be aware of
that information, right?
Secretary Mayorkas. Yes.
Mr. Gooden. OK. Let me ask you this. If I wanted to know
where these NGO's are sending illegals that coming across that
they're helping facilitate with financial support, is that a
fair ask? Is that something the American people should know,
where these folks are going?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, you are
mischaracterizing--
Mr. Gooden. No, no. I'm not characterizing anything. I'm
asking a question. Should the American people, should we know
where they're being sent when they're entered into these
organizations that are providing the assistance? Is that a fair
ask?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, your question misstates
the underlying facts. If I can explain what occurs.
Mr. Gooden. Let me explain to you what occurred. I have
requested for years, over two years, this information from
Homeland. I've requested this information from Catholic
Charities, Jewish Family Services, Lutheran Immigration and
Refugee Services, FEMA, three different airlines, and even
hotels.
Each request has gone unanswered. It seems to me that if
our taxpayer dollars are being used to fund an operation
whereby we're encouraging illegal immigration, we're
encouraging through funding these organizations people to make
these deadly treks across our Southern border, it seems to me
that we should be able to get some answers to questions. I'm
really disappointed that I can't get answers to those
questions. I can't even get acknowledgment from you about
what's happening there when you've stated that you're partners
with these organizations, and I yield back.
Chair Jordan. Gentleman yields back. If you can, Mr.
Secretary, we'll go two more fives and then we'll take a break
if that's OK with you guys? So, let's go--I think the
gentlelady from Pennsylvania is next.
Ms. Dean. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I appreciate that. Thank
you, Secretary Mayorkas. Please express my thanks to all the
good people under your watch and under your guidance in the
Department of Homeland Security for what you do to keep us
safe.
Three hundred people a day, in this country on average, 300
people a day die of overdose. We know that 80 percent of those,
fentanyl poisoning. We have a serious problem.
I thank you for taking it seriously and doing what you can
to interrupt and interdict the poisoning of Americans and
interdict illicit drugs coming across our country. It wasn't so
long ago; it was back in May that I joined Representative
Escobar at the border in El Paso. Got to meet with really
terrific folks doing this work. What I'd like to say is we have
a serious problem. We don't have folks on the other side of the
aisle serious about solving it.
When they blame you, you are responsible for every one of
the fentanyl deaths, what a disservice and a disgrace to the
families in my district have lost children and who will lose
children to this fentanyl poisoning. It is a disgrace for folks
to just demonize you, demonize those coming across our border
seeking refuge. Can you tell us on average what are the facts
about what's coming across our border through ports of entry in
terms of illicit drugs, specifically fentanyl?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congresswoman, the U.S. Customs and
Border Protection data evidence shows that more than 90 percent
of the fentanyl that is brought into this country is trafficked
through the ports of entry which is why we have surged
operations to those ports of entry to increase the interdiction
of fentanyl that is causing so much death and destruction in
our country.
Ms. Dean. Who is bringing it across?
Secretary Mayorkas. I believe the data suggests that
approximately 70 percent of the people arrested are U.S.
citizens.
Ms. Dean. Which makes perfect sense. Would you put your
resource for the cartels and those who are selling this? Would
you put that resource on the back of a migrant likely not to
make it across so that you would be able to sell this valuable
deadly resource?
It makes perfect sense coming mostly through ports of
entry, coming mostly by way of Americans, American citizens.
It's shocking. The seriousness that is lacked on the other
side, they don't want to hear the facts. They don't want to
solve this problem.
They don't want to save lives because if they did, they'd
stop demonizing you and they'd stop demonizing the migrant. Can
you tell us about what you said in your testimony? In your
words, you said fentanyl is one of the most urgent and lethal
threats to American communities today. Could you tell us about
Operations Blue Lotus and Four Horsemen that stopped nearly
10,000 pounds of fentanyl from entering the U.S.?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congresswoman, these operations reflect
a surge of personnel and technology to enhance or interdiction
capabilities and to arrest the perpetrators of this
trafficking. I served as a prosecutor for 12 years. I
prosecuted cocaine traffickers, methamphetamine traffickers,
and even black tar heroin traffickers.
We have not seen a drug as dangerous as fentanyl and other
synthetic opioids. Their toxicity makes it extraordinarily
challenging as well as the profitability and ease of
manufacture. It is because of the extraordinary work of U.S.
Customs and Border Protection personnel, Homeland Security
Investigations personnel, other personnel throughout the
Department of Homeland Security working with our law
enforcement and international partners that we have been able
to enhance and increase our interdiction and arrest
capabilities. We are seeing the results.
Ms. Dean. I'd like to say again on the topic of
seriousness, if my friends on the other side of the aisle were
serious about saving lives from this fentanyl crisis, they
would've voted for the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act,
which included 430 million dollars of investment to modernize
our ports of entry and to help improve CBP. Maybe they
would've--not a single person on the other side of the aisle
voted for the 2023 Omnibus Bill, all House Judiciary
Republicans opposed. It funded additional staffing for CBP's
ports of entry.
They're not serious people. They don't want to solve this
problem. I wear this band for Jake, the son of a friend of mine
who died from fentanyl poisoning. They said, ``please do
something about it.'' I thank you for what you and your Members
are doing about it.
Chair Jordan. The gentlelady yields back. The Chair
recognizes the gentlelady from Indiana.
Ms. Spartz. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'll be brief and yield
my time since kind of wasting my time here. I'll be honest with
you. Secretary Mayorkas, do you take full responsibility for
all decisions of action or inaction made at your agency? Do you
personally take full responsibility for all the decisions made
at your agency?
Secretary Mayorkas. I am the Secretary of the Department.
Ms. Spartz. So, that means yes.
Secretary Mayorkas. I bear ultimate responsibility for the
decisions made.
Ms. Spartz. So, yes. Yes, OK. So, you mentioned earlier
that in your definition, you have operational control of the
border. Can you define what you mean by that?
Secretary Mayorkas. What we mean because under the Secure
Fence Act, it means that not a single individual would cross
the border under that definition. No administration has
operational control.
Ms. Spartz. So, what number do you have, five million, 10,
less than five or 10 or let a couple hundred thousand get away?
What is your definition?
Secretary Mayorkas. What we do, Congresswoman, is we--
Ms. Spartz. Do you have a number?
Secretary Mayorkas. What we do is we look at the resources
that we have available to us and ask ourselves, are we
deploying those resources to achieve the most effective results
for the American people. That is what we do, and we are hopeful
working with you and other Members of this Committee to
increase the funding for the Department of Homeland Security--
Ms. Spartz. I've been at the border, and you've been at the
border too. How would you grade your job on a scale of zero to
ten? How would you grade yourself?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congresswoman, I am immensely proud--
Ms. Spartz. How would you grade yourself?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congresswomen, I am immensely proud to
work with the men and women of the Department of Homeland
Security.
Ms. Spartz. No, yourself, your job. Not all the women. I'm
sure there are a lot of great men and women in your department.
How would you rate your job as a head of your agency?
Secretary Mayorkas. It is the honor of my life--
Ms. Spartz. From zero to ten. So, you can't grade it. How
about grade your preparedness to this Committee meeting on a
scale from zero to ten. We ask information. You--all these
promises.
I'm not wasting my time. I'm sorry. I don't want to use bad
word, what you can do with all this status because we keep
giving money and sending lad. You tell us BS back. So, how
would you rate yourself, your preparedness to this Committee?
Secretary Mayorkas. It is the honor of my lifetime to work
with the men and women--
Ms. Spartz. From scale zero to ten, how will you say how
prepared you came to this hearing?
Secretary Mayorkas. I will repeat what I said.
Ms. Spartz. You're not answering any questions. You're not
answering any Republican question. Is it something that your
intent to not respond to any questions of Republicans? You came
with that intent.
Secretary Mayorkas. That is incorrect, Congresswoman.
Ms. Spartz. You're not answering any questions.
Secretary Mayorkas. It is--
Ms. Spartz. Every time I hear, you say, we will, we will,
we shall, yes, I don't know. You don't know any numbers. You
don't even know how many people you actually prosecuted, how
many people you deported. You have nothing. How can you say you
know how your department is run? As an Executive, you don't
know those numbers?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congresswoman, let me share with you--
Ms. Spartz. You haven't shared anything useful here.
Secretary Mayorkas. Let me share with you--
Ms. Spartz. I'm sorry to tell you, I'll yield to Chair
Jordan because I'm not going to waste any time with this
charade and circus. You do not have an intent to do that, and
it is a serious national security issue. This border and
cartels are stronger.
A lot of money, NGO's are making who knows what and
probably a lot of corruption over there. We have a national
security crisis. You sit here and say looking at us with a very
smiley face. It's unacceptable, but I yield to Chair Jordan.
Chair Jordan. I thank the gentlelady for yielding. Mr.
Secretary, the 140 illegal aliens you've encountered who are on
the terrorist watch list, again, this is Mr. Issa's question
earlier in the day. What is the status of those 140
individuals?
Secretary Mayorkas. First, let me allow the record to
reflect that I'm not smiling, nor have I smiled. Mr. Chair,
will you repeat your question, please?
Chair Jordan. The 140 individuals who've been encountered
on the border who are on the terrorist watch list, what's the
status of those individuals?
Secretary Mayorkas. I believe that question already has
been posed. I mentioned to the Chair that we will provide that
data to you.
Chair Jordan. Have any of them been released I guess is
another way of framing that?
Secretary Mayorkas. Mr. Chair, let me say this. Individuals
who pose a threat to public safety or national security are
detained pending their removal.
Chair Jordan. Well, that's not what the Inspector General
said. He said, CBP released a migrant on the terrorist watch
list and ICE faced information sharing challenges planning and
conducting the arrest. This is from Mr. Cuffari, the Inspector
General, DHS. Do you disagree with Mr. Cuffari?
Secretary Mayorkas. We respectfully do.
Chair Jordan. You do? OK. I would yield my time to the
gentleman from Louisiana.
Mr. Johnson of Louisiana. I've only got 25 seconds. I'll
just say I don't have time for a question because you'll be
illusive. Just for the record, since we're stating things for
the record, I've been in Congress seven years.
I think you're the most dishonest witness that has ever
appeared before the Judiciary Committee. I think I speak for a
lot of my colleagues. This is such a frustrating exercise for
us because our constituents want answers. They're tired of the
open border. They're tired of people dying from fentanyl
overdoses and it's your fault.
Mr. Ivey. Mr. Chair.
Mr. Johnson of Louisiana. It's my time.
Mr. Ivey. Mr. Chair, point of order.
Mr. Johnson of Louisiana. No, there's no point of order in
the middle of this. This is my opinion. I think it's shared by
millions of American people.
Mr. Ivey. Based on the standard that Chair set out in
previous hearings. Calling a witness dishonest is over the line
that you drew at a previous hearing.
Mr. Johnson of Louisiana. I'm not pulling the words down.
That speaks for the American people.
Chair Jordan. The Chair now recognize--is said to the
Secretary we would go five more minutes and then give you a
break. I know you've been at this 2\1/2\ hours. I believe the
gentleman from Florida is recognized for five minutes.
Mr. Ivey. I don't have a winter house yet, Mr. Chair.
Chair Jordan. I knew it was Maryland.
Mr. Ivey. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Secretary Mayorkas, I want
to thank you for being here today. I do want to say a couple of
things, though. I'm not trying to get too deep into this.
I know this is an oversight hearing. Unfortunately, the
larger picture is this is really about the effort to impeach
you. I also serve on the Homeland Security Committee.
One of the Members of that Committee talked explicitly
about the Republican effort to impeach you, working--the two
Committees working in coordination. He said something about,
pay attention. We can get the popcorn and watch this because
it's going to be a lot of fun.
Unfortunately, you've been sort of thrust into the middle
of that and it's not your doing. That's where we are. There are
also efforts obviously to impeach President Biden.
I've seen Articles of Impeaching with respect to that. The
articles--the first articles to impeach, you came out two years
ago. I'm not even sure you started unpacking in your office
yet. I do appreciate the fact that you're doing a very tough
job under very difficult circumstances.
I want you to continue working forward on that. There's a
couple of things that I hadn't really wanted to get into. My
Republican colleagues have made so much about it, and that's
this disinformation issue.
I know there are differing views about that. We've done
this on Homeland Security as well. I do want to point out that
I think there's an important role for the Federal Government to
play in dealing with disinformation.
By that, I mean false information. The Republican election
deniers including former President Trump, that's disinformation
that needs to be addressed by the government. Not just to deal
with it in the past, but because of upcoming elections.
I know there are election officers across the country at
the State and local level who have been trying to put together
a plan to deal with these issues. A lot of the disinformation
comes from overseas, but we get some of it here in the United
States even by national elected officials. Some are Members
here in the Congress.
I think it's important for us to address that to make sure
that the elections that are done in 2024 and are done in a way
that's consistent with the law and it allows people to base
their decisions on real information. Also, I want to say this
too. The election deniers and the false information that's been
put out there has put a lot of individuals at risk.
Sometimes their lives have been threatened. These people
are volunteer election judges, the State and local level across
the country. Some of them have had to move. There was one in
Arizona I read about who his life had been threatened.
It's not just the election workers either. Nina Jankowicz
who actually worked at DHS briefly got the same kind of
treatment. So, she came under attack again by in some instances
Members of the House Republican Caucus to the point where she
ended up having to not only resign her job, but she had to hire
a consultant to help her with personal protection, and this is
while she was pregnant.
She had to go to some of her appointments with her doctor
in disguise because her life had been threatened to such an
extent. I'll close with this. I think that there are a lot of
things that I would love to see this Commission address.
I made a personal appeal several months ago to my
colleagues on the other side of the aisle about gun violence. I
think you mentioned an aspect of that which is domestic
terrorism that's in some instances let the lone wolves
committing mass killings. We've got a larger problem with it
than that.
I can't get anybody to help me with the ghost guns issue.
I've got a bill about raising the age for assault weapons from
18-21 which I thought would be a reasonable place to go since
we already have the raise the age place for handguns from 18-21
in the previous Congress that got bipartisan support. It would
be important, too, to look at some of the other critical issues
the country is facing.
Cybersecurity, if we're going to dabble in the Homeland
Security world, China just hacked our Commerce Secretary. In
May, CISA was breached, Microsoft, and the NSA. So, these are
very important issues to the American people.
I hope we can take a look at these. One last point on the
immigration piece. I was in a meeting on Friday with a venture
capitalist in New York.
One of the things he said was that he's having trouble
getting the visas taken care of to bring Talon over from
overseas. These are high tech jobs, engineers, and the like.
So, since he can't get it done in the United States, he's now
setting up offices in Canada because they can get the job done
there.
I would love to see us address the immigration issue in a
comprehensive way. So, I mentioned H.R. 2 earlier which I
thought was kind of funny because Senate Republicans were
telling us that was going to be DOA when it got over there. So,
we know that's not a real solution. With that, I yield back.
Chair Jordan. The gentleman from Maryland yields back. Mr.
Secretary, we don't have to take a break unless you want it. If
you want to keep going, we'll keep going. If you want a short
break, we'll take a break.
Secretary Mayorkas. I defer to the Chair.
Chair Jordan. OK. Well, we can sit right there and take
questions. We appreciate that. The gentleman from Wisconsin is
recognized for five minutes.
Secretary Mayorkas. May I reserve my right to be seated?
Chair Jordan. Of course.
Mr. Fitzgerald. Mr. Secretary, I want to go back to the
operational control issue that came up first by the Ranking
Members when Congressman Nadler brought it up. You've addressed
it. I know that Mr. Roy worked through that again. It's so
important. I think it's such a source of frustration because
every time you turn on the TV, there is this imagery that
continues which is people coming across the border.
Whether I was in McAllen or in San Diego Sector, wherever I
was, when you talk to Border Patrol or you talk to your
employees, Homeland Security, none of them say, yes, everything
is going well and there is certainly an operational control in
place. So, even by the definition which you brought up a couple
times, the Secure Fence Act, I don't think anybody asked you
again today directly. Do you believe that we have operational
control at the border right now?
Secretary Mayorkas. Under the statutory definition.
Mr. Fitzgerald. Right, under the statutory definition, do
we have it?
Secretary Mayorkas. Under the statutory definition,
Congressman, not a single individual can cross the border if
one has operational control. Last year, approximately 1.7
million people crossed the border. We provide that information
to Congress on a monthly basis.
Under that definition, no administration has had
operational control. What we do is ensure that the resources
that we have are deployed most effectively to gain the greatest
amount of control that we can. I will tell you that the
greatest resource that we have are the men and women of the
Department of Homeland Security.
Mr. Fitzgerald. What I think I just heard you say was right
now. I heard about the previous administrations. You already
established, I guess, that there was not operational control.
So, right now, we do not have operational control of the
border. Can you tell me that right now in this Committee?
Secretary Mayorkas. Under the definition of the Secure
Fence Act--
Mr. Fitzgerald. Right.
Secretary Mayorkas. --we do not, and no administration has
because that means that not a single individual crosses the
border.
Mr. Fitzgerald. OK, OK. So, we established that we do not
have operational control right now.
Secretary Mayorkas. Under the definition of the Secure
Fence Act.
Mr. Fitzgerald. All right. So, let me ask you a couple
other questions because I think there's an--certainly, we're
acquiring numbers right now that I think are changing the
dynamic of where we're at. Are unlawful entries between the
ports of entry down right now do you believe? Or are they being
measured differently than they had been prior to Title 42?
Secretary Mayorkas. Prior to Title 42, the numbers are
down, Congressman. That is a function of the approach that we
have taken to expand lawful pathways and then deliver
consequences for individuals who do not avail themselves of
those pathways.
Mr. Fitzgerald. So, is that number only migrants stopped by
Border Patrol agents? Is that the number that you're focused
on? Or is it a number of individuals beyond those that even
have contact with Border Patrol?
Secretary Mayorkas. When we speak of, for example, the two-
weeks--let's just pick a period of time, the two-weeks
immediately preceding the end of Title 42 on May 12th. When we
take those two weeks and we compare the numbers that we are
experiencing now, we include not only the apprehensions in
between the ports of entry, Congressman. We also include
individuals who are entering through the ports of entry using
one of the critical lawful pathways that we include.
Mr. Fitzgerald. Found inadmissible at any ports of entry.
Categorical parole, illegal aliens would also be part of that
group. Is that not accurate? Then finally, gotaways. So,
there's three categories of individuals as well.
Secretary Mayorkas. We don't--our parole authority which is
a discretionary authority codified in statue in the Immigration
and Nationality Act is a discretionary authority that we employ
on a case-by-case basis. What we do is we define categories of
individuals who can access that. We make the parole decisions
on a case-by-case basis.
Mr. Fitzgerald. Then so the actual total, these are the
numbers that have been presented, 294,000 or 9,500 roughly a
day right now are coming across. So, do you think at any point
that that number is being padded? I don't know how else to
describe it. Maybe that's not the best term. It's changed
significantly than the way things were being counted prior to
Title 42.
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, we don't pad numbers. We
provide numbers. We act to the Department of Homeland Security
with integrity and honor.
Mr. Fitzgerald. I yield back.
Chair Jordan. Gentleman yields back. The gentlelady from
Texas is recognized.
Ms. Escobar. Mr. Secretary, thank you for your honorable
and selfless public service to our Nation. As the only
representative on this Committee who was born, raised, and has
lived on the border her entire life, I can say with absolute
certainly that if we want to blame anyone for our broken
immigration system, we should blame Congress. Those who yell
the loudest about this issue in Congress need to take a long,
good look in the mirror.
For 37 years, Congress has failed to address our country's
need for comprehensive immigration reform. Instead, we have
followed the Republican playbook which focuses on immigration
solely as a border issue. We've spent hundreds of billions of
dollars securing the border, and it has been an expensive
failure.
Amidst an historic hemispheric refugee crisis coupled with
Congressional inaction, the situation has only grown more
challenging. The longer we wait to pass comprehensive
immigration reform, the more challenging this issue will
become. It doesn't have to be this way.
Over the past three decades, the Federal Government has
chosen to narrow and limit legal immigration pathways which has
shifted the pressure to the border and communities like mine.
The Biden Administration has proven, however, that when we open
up legal pathways for asylum seekers and other migrants, the
border can be better managed. The proof is in the data.
The problem we face today is that the majority of my
colleagues on the other side of the aisle are only interested
in performance, which is why they yell so loudly and try to
turn the Nation's attention away from their own lack of
solutions. That's what this hearing is ultimately about. While
this is an oversight hearing, we know that the spectacle you're
seeing on the other side is part of the Republicans ultimate
distraction strategy, impeachment.
They aren't just focused on impeaching you, Mr. Secretary,
despite the fact that apprehensions at the border are down by
70 percent. They have also promised the extremists in their
party that they will impeach Attorney General Merrick Garland
and even President Biden. In fact, from the complaints we hear
about Catholic Charities, I'm surprised that they aren't trying
to impeach the Pope.
Secretary Mayorkas, I'd like a simple yes or no, if
possible, on the following questions. I have a chart here from
the American Immigration Council that uses CBP data, historical
data on border apprehensions. Isn't it true, Mr. Secretary,
that according to CBP data, apprehensions of families started
significantly climbing around January-February 2019 during the
Trump Administration?
Secretary Mayorkas. Yes, Congresswoman. They did.
Ms. Escobar. Isn't it true according to CBP data that after
a drop of apprehensions that were largely a result of COVID
closures in 2020, apprehensions began increasing again
significantly around May 2020 after the Trump Administration
initiated the use of Title 42?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congresswoman, I would have to defer to
Customs and Border Protection--
Ms. Escobar. Well, I have it right here. Actually, I'd like
to enter into the record the American Immigration Council's
data, border apprehensions, October 2015-June 2023.
Chair Jordan. Without objection.
Ms. Escobar. Isn't it true--and for the record, May 2020
when we began seeing an increase once again post-COVID, that
was a full six months before the 2020 general election, before
President Biden's victory, and eight months before President
Biden's inauguration. Isn't it true, Mr. Secretary, that
opening-up legal pathways as DHS has done via the CBP One app
that that has proven successful in helping manage the border?
Secretary Mayorkas. It is one element of an approach that
has proven successful, Congresswoman.
Ms. Escobar. Isn't it true, Mr. Secretary, that the one
legislative body that can further open-up legal pathways to
best manage the border is Congress?
Secretary Mayorkas. Yes, Congresswoman.
Ms. Escobar. My Republican colleague, Maria Salazar, and I
introduced the Dignity Act which is a bipartisan comprehensive
immigration reform bill. I'd encourage my colleagues who are
seeking a true solution to join our effort to address our
broken system. Anything short of that is a dereliction of
Congress' responsibility and obligation. All this scapegoating
on the Biden Administration and on you, in particular, Mr.
Secretary, is nothing but performance. Mr. Chair, I yield back.
Chair Jordan. Gentlelady yields back. The gentleman from
Oregon is recognized.
Secretary Mayorkas. Mr. Chair, may I impose and accept your
kind offer for a brief break.
Chair Jordan. Oh, sure, sure, sure, sure.
Chair Jordan. We'll take a brief five-minute break. We're
trying to go as quickly as we can because we got votes and 1:30
p.m. and we'd prefer not to come back. I'm sure that's the same
with you. If we have to, we'll come back. So, we'll take a
five-minute recess now, and then we'll be back in action.
[Recess.]
Chair Jordan. The Committee will come to order.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas for five
minutes.
Mr. Moran. Mr. Chair, I yield my time to the gentleman from
Oregon, Mr. Bentz.
Chair Jordan. The gentleman is recognized.
Mr. Bentz. Thank you, Mr. Moran.
Mr. Secretary, before I start, I just want to talk briefly
about what I heard earlier. One of my colleagues from across
the aisle suggested that we Republicans were somehow
manufacturing outrage. The phrase was ``right-wing outrage
machine,'' was the phrase that he used.
I thought, what? Are the folks across the aisle not
outraged about the millions of people that are coming across
the border under, of course, your watch, most of whom probably
don't qualify for asylum?
Yes, don't you think that all of us should be outraged
about the thousands dying from fentanyl that's coming across
the border under your watch?
Don't you think that we should be outraged about cartels
moving into American cities on this side of the border under
your watch?
Don't you think we should be outraged about the billions of
dollars the cartels are raising from the most unfortunate and
vulnerable from Central America and other places under your
watch?
Don't you think we should be outraged about the hundreds
dying in the desert?
It's hard to argue that we're manufacturing outrage when we
look at these incredible, sad things happening under your
watch.
Now, I want to go how we can fix, perhaps, some of that
which you've been talking about for the last couple of hours.
Because you said earlier, in response to a question from
Congressman Issa, that we, the USA, is not, quote, ``alone in
some of its infirmities in its immigration system.'' I'm just
quoting from you. I scribbled it down quickly. ``infirmities in
our immigration system.'' What? Give us a couple.
Secretary Mayorkas. I'm sorry, Congressman--
Mr. Bentz. ``Infirmities in our immigration system,'' is
how you put it when you were comparing our immigration system
to others across the world. Just share two.
Secretary Mayorkas. Let me give you one example in the
economic arena: That the market needs of our country, the
economic needs of our country, are not taken into account when
we admit economic migrants. We have statutory caps, statutory
limits on the number of people we can admit, despite perhaps a
greater need at a particular time. We do not calibrate the
number according to need.
Mr. Bentz. Right.
Secretary Mayorkas. So, for example--
Mr. Bentz. That's--and I understand what I actually
understand what you're saying. Forgive me for cutting you off,
but it leads very nicely to how we might address immigration as
a comprehensive system.
Don't you think that, politically at least, a secure border
is an essential prerequisite to any comprehensive solution?
Because what you were just starting to talk about was one of
the adjustments, we might make to our visa systems.
By the way, I'm enthusiastic about trying to improve those
visa systems. I will tell you this much: If I go back home to
all my constituents, as I'm going to be doing this Friday--and
I'm going to be talking to them on Monday at a Chamber of
Commerce meeting--guess what? They're outraged about the things
I mentioned earlier, and they're not going to want to listen to
me talk about the details that you just suggested.
So, tell me, how do I--what can we do? Those infirmities,
do they include anything when it comes to fixing the border, so
it works better?
Secretary Mayorkas. Yes.
Mr. Bentz. Tell me.
Secretary Mayorkas. So, for example, Congressman, one of
the measures that we have taken to address this infirmity is to
issue a regulation that empowers our asylum officers to make
the ultimate asylum adjudication and shrink the time in between
an encounter at the border and the ultimate asylum
adjudication. That duration now, historically, has been six-
plus years.
Mr. Bentz. Thank you for your thoughts on it.
Secretary Mayorkas. That is an eternity.
Mr. Bentz. Thank you for your thoughts on that. I'd like to
followup with you on it, if you would. I'm serious. Share with
me your thinking on that issue.
Isn't it correct, as we heard--I've been to the border
three times. The folks down there suggest that the cartels are
extracting between $3-$5 thousand, maybe more, per person that
presents illegally at the border. Is that true?
Secretary Mayorkas. Yes, Congressman.
Mr. Bentz. So, that would mean, as the millions of people
come in, we can multiply that times four or five thousand, is
that correct?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, that is correct, which is
precisely why one of our efforts is to cut the smugglers out of
the equation, because of the profits they make; because of
their ruthlessness; because of their criminality. So, while--
Mr. Bentz. Forgive me for cutting you off, but I agreed to
yield the balance of my time to the Chair, Mr.--
Chair Jordan. I appreciate the gentleman yielding.
Mr. Secretary, is the number of people removed and through
adjudication--
Ms. Ross. Objection, Mr. Chair. This isn't Mr. Bentz's
time.
Chair Jordan. That's right.
Ms. Ross. It was yielded to Mr. Bentz.
Chair Jordan. I know. I thought we could get away with it
because it was an important question.
[Laughter.]
Ms. Ross. Well, Mr. Chair, you can have the next person
yield.
Chair Jordan. We're going to do that, yes. All right.
The gentleman yields back.
The Chair now recognizes the gentlelady from North
Carolina.
Ms. Ross. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and that was not done with
any ill will. It was out--
Chair Jordan. No, I knew that from the get-go.
Ms. Ross. Yes.
Mr. Secretary, I know it's been a long day already. I want
you to know that I'm here today to use my five minutes in
support of a group of 250,000-plus young people in our country
who are referred to as ''the documented dreamers.'' They are a
too often forgotten population of talented young adults who are
American in every way, except on paper.
As I'm sure you're aware, since we've talked about them a
few times, the documented dreamers are dependent children of
long-term employment visa holders who are brought to the United
States with documentation when their parents move here to work.
Often, these children come to the United States when
they're still babies, but because they were not born here, they
don't have citizenship or a real path to citizenship before
they become 21.
While many of these young adults are in line for green
cards with their parents, the backlog at USCIS is so long that
they often face a decades-long wait. As a result, they risk
having to self-deport when they turn 21 and age out of their
dependent visas, if they cannot find another status to stay in
the United States legally.
I have a bipartisan, bicameral bill to provide these
children and young adults with a pathway to permanent residency
protections for aging out of the immigration system. I'm
working hard to get that through the House and Senate. We got
it through in two different forms last Congress, through the
House.
However, today, I want to hear about what your Department
is doing to protect these deserving young people and enable
them to stay here. We've educated them using our tax dollars,
which their parents pay. They often self-deport to countries
that compete with us at age 21, after having a few years of
college. So, I'll get into at least one of my questions.
In a 2014 decision on whether the Child Status Protection
Act requires a priority date for retention for children who
have aged out of their visa, the Supreme Court deferred to
agency interpretation of CSPA, which does not provide for a
priority date retention for most individuals who turn 21 while
waiting for green cards sought by their parents.
However, Justice Kagan, writing for the plurality,
emphasized that CSPA permits, not that it requires this narrow
interpretation of the statute that USCIS currently holds.
Allowing documented dreamers to retain their original priority
date and keep their place in line after they age out of their
dependent visas could significantly improve the lives of this
population.
Why has USCIS not adopted a priority date retention for
these individuals, given that the Supreme Court determined that
the agency possesses this authority?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congresswoman, I will consult with the
Director of the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services and
get back to you. I'm not familiar with that precise issue.
Ms. Ross. OK.
I only have about a minute left. So, when I met with the
documented dreamers, which I do quite frequently because they
have learned how to petition the government for redress of
their grievances, I am struck by the love of the country, of
this country, and their eagerness to contribute to all our
welfare. Their stories are some of the most compelling that
I've heard during my time in Congress.
Does your Department have any plans to protect these
deserving young adults who have done everything right, been
here legally, and are losing their ability to live in this
country through no fault of their own?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congresswoman, I share your concern for
these individuals who have, indeed, contributed so much to this
country and who know no other country, but this one. I can
assure you I will followup with vigilance on the questions that
you have posed and respond as promptly as possible.
Ms. Ross. Thank you, Mr. Secretary.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I yield back.
Chair Jordan. The gentlelady yields back.
The gentleman from Oregon is recognized.
Mr. Bentz. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I yield my time to you.
Chair Jordan. I thank the gentleman.
Mr. Secretary, is the number greater than zero? Can you
tell us that? The number of people who have been encountered on
the border, over the two million number encountered on the
border, put in removal proceedings, adjudicated, and then,
removed, is that number greater than zero?
Secretary Mayorkas. Yes.
Chair Jordan. Is it greater than a hundred?
Secretary Mayorkas. Yes.
Chair Jordan. Greater than a thousand?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman--or Mr. Chair, forgive me--
Mr. Chair, as I have stated before, the data that you wish to
have we will provide to you as promptly as possible. What I
don't want to do is misspeak when it comes to data. I do not
want any--
Chair Jordan. I can appreciate that, but we have a history
where we've asked questions before in a hearing, and you told
us the same thing, and you don't get it back to us. So, we're
trying to get as much as we can on the record in a public
hearing. You've now told me it's greater than a hundred, but
you don't know if it's greater than a thousand out of the 2.1-
something million who've come to the country, been encountered,
and put in removal proceedings. So, we know it's greater than a
hundred. You say you're going to get back with us, but the
history has been not too good on your part in getting us those
answers.
Secretary Mayorkas. Mr. Chair, of course, it's more than a
thousand, but what I want to assure you of, because--
Chair Jordan. Is it more than 100,000?
Secretary Mayorkas. Because, quite frankly, Mr. Chair, we
have been cooperative with this Committee.
Chair Jordan. No, you haven't.
Secretary Mayorkas. We have provided you with documents. We
have provided you with data.
Chair Jordan. I can keep putting up the redacted documents,
but you have not.
I would yield back to the gentleman--I appreciate the
time--so, he can yield to another Member.
Mr. Bentz. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I yield my time to Mr. Johnson from Louisiana.
Mr. Johnson of Louisiana. Thank you.
Mr. Mayorkas, in answer to my questions earlier today, you
defined misinformation and you acknowledged that CISA created,
in 2021, the Misinformation and Disinformation Committee.
On April 27, 2022, you testified in the House
Appropriations Committee that your Department created, then,
another agency, or another subdivision, the Disinformation
Governance Board, and you said under oath it was to combat
misinformation ahead of the 2022 elections.
Earlier this month, the Federal Court in the landmark case
of Missouri v. Biden affirmed lengthy findings of fact to
justify its preliminary injunction, and in the ruling found at
page 94, the White House and your agency pressured and
encouraged social media companies to suppress free speech that
you determined--you and your employees determined--to be
misinformation.
However, a couple of hours ago, when I asked you about
this, you said under oath, ``We don't do that.'' Which time
were you telling the truth, today or on April 27, 2022?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, we do not suppress free
speech.
Mr. Johnson of Louisiana. Did you or anyone working for you
work with the social media companies prior to the 2022 election
to pull things off the internet, suppress things off the
internet, that your folks determined to be false or
misinformation?
Secretary Mayorkas. Not to my knowledge, Congressman.
Mr. Johnson of Louisiana. So, you had no idea what the
Misinformation and Disinformation Committee was doing during
that period?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, I have answered that
question previously. Let me assure you that we safeguard the
First Amendment rights of individuals. That is what we do.
Let me explain to you what the Cybersecurity and
Infrastructure Security Agency--
Mr. Johnson of Louisiana. I know all about CISA. What I'm
concerned about is this Committee and dystopian Disinformation
Governance Board and put Nina Jankowicz in charge of for about
three weeks, until the public blew their tops over that, and
you--that suddenly disappeared and she resigned.
How were you--how did you instruct Nina Jankowicz to
discern what is misinformation and false information that the
government should pull off the internet?
Secretary Mayorkas. You are assuming facts that actually
did not exist.
Mr. Johnson of Louisiana. Tell me what the facts are. What
guidance did you give her?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, the reality is that
disinformation is a tool that adverse Nation-States use to
undermine our democracy.
Mr. Johnson of Louisiana. OK.
Secretary Mayorkas. Four adverse Nation-States include--
Mr. Johnson of Louisiana. No, no. Hold on.
Secretary Mayorkas. --North Korea--
Mr. Johnson of Louisiana. Hold on. Don't talk about foreign
adversaries because the court and the witnesses on your behalf
in the court testified under oath different than what you're
saying today; that they made no distinction between foreign
people who put things on the internet and domestic voices. Do
you disagree with that statement?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, can you share with me the
context of that statement?
Mr. Johnson of Louisiana. It would be awesome if you had
read the Federal Court opinion that directly says that your
agency is involved in the greatest coverup of free speech in
U.S. history.
I'll tell you what the court says. It says people involved
with your agency were meeting regularly with the social media
platforms and giving them lists of persons and information that
they said should be pulled off the internet, suppressed. That
means turned down, volume censored, so no one saw it.
The court said millions--millions--of free speech protected
postings where not seen by the American people prior to the
2022 election because your employees subjectively determined
that they shouldn't see it. That's the problem.
The idea that you would sit here in front of us and pretend
like you don't know that was happening is just alarming. I'm
out of words to describe how frustrated we are with you and
your department.
I'm out of time.
Chair Jordan. The gentleman from Oregon yields back.
The gentlelady from Georgia is recognized.
Ms. McBath. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Good afternoon, Secretary Mayorkas. It's a pleasure to have
you with us today. Thank you so much for your time. We
appreciate your patience and your testimony.
Mr. Secretary, as you know, DHS is responsible for the
public safety of the United States of America, and the men and
the women at DHS work very hard every day, so that Americans
can pursue the freedoms of their everyday lives. The mission of
DHS is somewhat ubiquitous; be it at airports or disaster
sites, that many overlook the fact that much of it is the same
Federal agency.
In addition to these crucial areas, DHS has also been
active in combating America's gun violence epidemic, which, of
course, I am extremely invested in. It's an issue that is very
important to me, as many other survivors around the country as
well.
Studies have shown that between 70-90 percent of weapons
recovered from crime scenes in Mexico can be traced back to the
United States of America. With weapons of war commercially
available at low levels of individual scrutiny, gun traffickers
have been taking immense advantage of our guns lack--our
Nation's gun laws, which are very lax, to arm drug cartels that
also fuel a lot of organized crime.
In addition, we have seen that payment for these gun
traffickers has at times resulted in opioids that have helped
our communities be torn apart as well.
DHS has been swiftly, as you have mentioned over and over
again today, combating this kind of illicit dealings through
its joint efforts with the ATF-led Operation Southbound. Mr.
Secretary, DHS has taken a collaborative approach with the ATF-
led Operation Southbound. Can you tell us just a little bit
more about this operation? I believe a lot of people don't
really know that it exists and DHS's role in it. We'd like to
hear about that and the results of this operation.
Secretary Mayorkas. Congresswoman, one of the concerns that
law enforcement has is that the firearms that are in the hands
of the transnational criminal organizations just South of our
border actually emanated from the United States. We in the
Department of Homeland Security, through our Homeland Security
Investigations, working in collaboration, as you have noted,
with other Federal agencies, are conducting operations to
interdict the flow of firearms outside--from within the United
States external, to external countries, and to prevent them
from reaching the hands of criminals.
I would be very pleased, given the law enforcement
sensitivity of the operations, to provide you with greater
details about how we are accomplishing that objective.
Ms. McBath. Thank you so much.
With weapons of war, such as high-capacity automatic
firearms easily available in far greater quantities in the
United States than ever before, can you illustrate how these
firearms trafficking--how the firearm trafficking contributes
to organized crime and gun violence in the United States?
Secretary Mayorkas. Well, the trafficking in the guns
themselves is a criminal activity that is a for-profit
activity. So, when the criminal organizations gain greater
profits, they only, tragically, expand their criminality.
In addition, the transnational criminal organizations that
receive the weaponry from the United States conduct violent
acts that impact individuals who seek to enter the United
States, as well as Americans themselves.
Ms. McBath. Thank you.
Can you tell us a little bit more about how the export of
these weapons of war directly relate to the opioid crisis in
our communities in the United States?
Secretary Mayorkas. The criminality of these organizations
is inextricably intertwined with one another. They conduct
their operations by protecting themselves and addressing law
enforcement through criminal means. That includes violent acts,
and those violent acts are perpetrated with firearms. Sometimes
those firearms originate from the United States.
It is a web of criminality, and we are unrelenting in our
efforts to disrupt and dismantle every aspect of that
criminality. I'm intensely proud of the men and women who
dedicate their lives to their effort in the Department of
Homeland Security and throughout our law enforcement partner
community.
Ms. McBath. Well, thank you so much. We appreciate your
dedication and those that serve right along with you in this
manner. We really appreciate you.
I yield back.
Chair Jordan. The gentlelady yields back.
The gentleman from Virginia is recognized.
Mr. Cline. Thank you.
Mr. Secretary, I have rarely been more gobsmacked by the
lack of cooperation and information from a witness than I have
by you today. It is truly appalling when you consider that
lives are at stake--the lives of children being trafficked
across this border who are being sacrificed on an altar of
radical policies being pushed by your Department.
You talked about it. You threw out a good one-liner in your
testimony about child sex trafficking, human smuggling. Do you
know what does immense damage to our efforts to combat human
trafficking, sex trafficking, and child sex trafficking? A
porous border. Your policies have directly led to that porous
border, Mr. Secretary.
This is ridiculous that I have had to sit here and listen
to you and your denials, your deflections, and your
obfuscations. The mendacity that I am hearing from you is not
just appalling to me; it is appalling to my constituents.
I echo the comments from across this country, Members who
represent people from across this country, over the last two
hours-plus, really echoing their constituents and the
frustration that they have actually shown and talked to them
about.
Back in April, we had a Committee hearing where there was a
witness, a whistleblower, who said that the U.S. Federal
Government has, essentially, become a middleman in a
multibillion dollar human trafficking operation targeting
unaccompanied minors at the Southern border. I'm sure that that
makes you upset. It sure as heck made me upset.
But when U.S. Customs and Border Protection encounters 435
unaccompanied minors per day, drug cartels and traffickers
exploiting 60 percent of these children in prostitution, forced
labor, and child pornography--to make matters worse, in June,
the Biden Administration released 344 children to nonrelated
adults in the United States, most of whom already had multiple
children in their care.
These children are prime targets for traffickers for sex or
for labor. In fact, a February The New York Times article
published showing migrants found laboring, in violation of
child labor laws--notably, half of the U.S. Immigration and
Customs Enforcement's most wanted criminals for child
trafficking, guess where they come from? Mexico. Imagine that.
So, when you actually take actions that reduce operational
control of the border, these are actions that are taken in
contradiction of your official duty to execute the laws enacted
by Congress and your oath to support and defend the
Constitution. You have abandoned the successful border policies
of the previous administration. You've ignored laws requiring
detention of certain aliens; reduced detention capacity; ended
migrant protection protocols; halted border wall construction;
diverted Border Patrol from law enforcement duties; encouraged
a mass illegal immigration with the use of easily exploitable,
credible fear processes; illegally expanded parole; reinstated
catch and release and provided illegal aliens valid work
permits and public benefits during an economic downturn.
You should be ashamed. More so, you should be held
accountable. This Committee will do just that, and I am
committed to making that happen as well.
With that, I'm going to yield the remainder of my time to
the Chair.
Chair Jordan. I appreciate that, the gentleman yielding. I
would yield--well, actually, Mr. Cline, can you yield to Mr.
Roy, and then, maybe to Mr. Bishop?
Mr. Cline. I'll yield to Mr. Roy.
Mr. Roy. I thank the gentleman from Virginia.
Despite enormous levels of encounters--I believe last month
it was about 146,000, far, far exceeding what Obama DHS
Secretary Jeh Johnson said that crisis of being a thousand a
week--we can agree, I think that it's possible there may be a
decrease from Fiscal Year 2022 to Fiscal Year 2023 for total
Border Patrol encounters, right? They're going down maybe 20
percent, according to data I see, at current levels. Does that
sound right?
Secretary Mayorkas. I think they, Congressman, I think
they're going down further, in light of the approaches that we
implemented in a post-Title 42.
Mr. Roy. OK. Well, assuming they're going down, and
accepting that they may be going down by Border Patrol
encounters, hasn't there simultaneously been a significant and
continuing increase at the ports of entry, which more than
offset the reductions and illustrate the shell game?
OFO encounters from Fiscal Years 2022-2023, the data I
have, at current pace, is a 100 percent increase; Fiscal Years
2020-2023, a 356 percent increase from 241,000 to 1.1 million.
In other words, the American people need to be told the
truth about what's actually happening. The total numbers, if
you look at the nationwide encounters, Fiscal Years 2020-2021,
a 202 percent increase; Fiscal Years 2020-2022, a 328 percent
increase; Fiscal Years 2020-2023 at current pace, a 364 percent
increase. In the last 24 hours, for Border Patrol alone,
nationwide encounters are 6,000.
That's the data I have. Is that correct?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, our approach of expanding
lawful pathways and delivering consequences is working.
Mr. Roy. Is that data, correct? Are those the numbers?
Secretary Mayorkas. I'd have to confirm the numbers that
you have cited.
Mr. Roy. Well, those are the numbers that we have, and this
is what the American people are tired of.
I yield back.
Chair Jordan. The gentleman yields back.
The Chair recognizes the gentlelady from Missouri.
Ms. Bush. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you for being here, Secretary Mayorkas.
St. Louis and I are here today, as always, to ask hard
questions about real issues. Secretary Mayorkas, I'm concerned
that the department, and the Office of Intelligence and
Analysis, in particular, encourages the targeting of
protesters, activists, incarcerated people, and progressive
moments.
For example, in 2020, under the prior administration,
Intelligence and Analysis individuals--or labeled individuals
protesting police brutality and racial injustice after the
killing of George Floyd as domestic violent extremists, and
Department leadership instructed officials to create and share
intelligence dossiers about, quote, ``everyone participating in
Portland protests,'' as part of a discredited effort to link
protesters to a nonexistent terrorism plot. These issues still
continue to this day.
Secretary Mayorkas, do you acknowledge that the department
has referred to opponents of the Atlanta Public Safety Training
Center, or what we call ``Cop City,'' as alleged domestic
violent extremists and militants, comprising violent far-left
occupation? That's a yes or no.
Secretary Mayorkas. Well, Congresswoman, a few things I
must say.
First, I'm immensely proud of the men and women who work in
the Office of Intelligence and Analysis under the superb
leadership of Kenneth Wainstein. They do tremendous work in
making sure the American people are safe and secure.
I am familiar with activities in Atlanta that are lawful,
and I am also familiar with activities to which you refer that
are unlawful. We do not condone violence. We do safeguard and
protect the free expression of speech.
Ms. Bush. So, what you're saying is that this alleged
domestic violent extremist or militants that you're saying that
you condemn that language, and you condemn--I'm just, I'm just
trying--
Secretary Mayorkas. Congresswoman--
Ms. Bush. --to be clear because we can't ``both sides it''
when people are actually being hurt. I can speak to it as an
actual activist myself, and I've been there. I've seen what
actually happens to protesters and what actually makes the
media, and what actually makes the reports.
So, I just want to make sure that we're saying that we,
that you're--are you saying you--domestic violent extremists,
because I have the report here. Are you saying that you condemn
that or that this is part of the work?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congresswoman, lawful protest is a
proud tradition in this country. There cannot be a connectivity
between an ideology and the expression of that ideology through
violent means. That is when we get involved to prevent
violence.
Individuals are free to express their ideologies, whatever
we might thing of those ideologies.
Ms. Bush. OK, OK.
Secretary Mayorkas. I cannot express any--
Ms. Bush. Let me--I have limited time--let me reclaim my
time. Let me just go to my next question.
So, are you aware that Georgia law enforcement officials
have used those characterizations to support their charges of
domestic terrorism against opponents of Cop City?
Secretary Mayorkas. I am not, Congressman. I can't speak to
State activities, State law enforcement. What I can do is speak
of what we in the Department of Homeland Security do.
Ms. Bush. Because when we don't call it out, when we don't
address it, that's what happens. I get it; you're not a part of
the State and you can't tell the State what to do. Or you're
not as intricately involved in that. When we don't speak up to
it, and we know it's happening, then they are able to do those
things. That's what this report is about, and it actually
affects real people.
Let me just, also, say the people that show up to protests
are usually the ones that care about the issue and are trying
to save lives. Folks don't show up to protests, usually, unless
they are sent there, and I know that happens, too. Generally,
the people that are at the protest, we care. Those folks are
showing up because they want to see something done about
policing in this community, in this country.
They want to stop the fact that every single year we have a
rise in police killings, and nobody is doing the actual work to
fix it. So, by saying, ``Hey, we're going to show up and put
our bodies on the line,'' and then turning that around to make
as though those are the folks who are violent; those are the
folks who are extreme--if you stop the police violence in this
community, in this country, then nobody has to show up for a
protest. Let me just say that.
Last, I will say, that I'm concerned about the department's
policies against, related to immigration enforcement. I will
make sure that we get this documentation to you because I am
out of time.
Last, I would like, Mr. Chair, I ask unanimous consent to
enter into the record all the documents that I just spoke of.
Chair Jordan. Without objection.
The Chair--the gentlelady yields back. The Chair now
recognizes Ms. Lee, and then, we'll go to Mr. Van Drew.
Ms. Lee. Secretary Mayorkas, Florida's Attorney General has
sued the Department of Homeland Security in the Northern
District of Florida, asserting that the policies of your
administration violent existing Federal law. Federal Judge Alan
Wetherell, who has heard evidence and testimony related to your
policies, described your parole with alternatives to detention
policy as follows:
The evidence establishes that the administration have
effectively turned the Southern border into a meaningless line
in the sand and little more than a speedbump for aliens
flooding into the country, by prioritizing ``alternatives to
detention'' over actual detention and by releasing a million
aliens into the country--on ``parole'' or pursuant to the
exercise of ``prosecutorial discretion'' under a wholly
inapplicable statute--without even initiating removal
proceedings.
Thereafter, after additional proceedings and evidence and
testimony, the judge heard about your ``parole with
conditions'' revision, which allows illegal migrants to be
paroled into the U.S. under the expectation that they will
``check in'' in 60 days and receive a Notice to Appear at a
hearing, where we can initiate removal proceedings in court.
There, the judge noted that, all totaled, only 18 percent
of the aliens released under the parole with conditions policy
after it was enjoined by the court have been issued a Notice to
Appear and placed in removal proceedings. The additional 82
percent are either awaiting an issuance of an NTA or their
whereabouts are unknown.
Secretary Mayorkas, can you tell us, as we sit here today,
where are the people who have entered this country and been
released under your, what you refer to as, ``a parole
program''? Where are they today?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congresswoman, the individuals who are
released, because we do not have the detention capacity--we are
not funded for the detention capacity to detain everyone. Let
me assure you that individuals who pose a threat to--
Ms. Lee. Do you know where they are, Secretary Mayorkas?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congresswoman, if I may, I want to
assure you that individuals who pose a threat to public safety
or national security are detained. That is how we prioritize
our detention authorities. Otherwise, we place individuals who
are not such a threat on alternatives to detention.
Ms. Lee. Do you know where those individuals are?
Secretary Mayorkas. Those individuals also--
Ms. Lee. That would be a yes or no, Secretary Mayorkas.
Secretary Mayorkas. Those individuals are supervised--
Ms. Lee. I'll take it that, in this case, you do not.
Now, about those who do not show up for failure to appear
proceedings, for these notices to come to court, what are the
consequences that those individuals face?
Secretary Mayorkas. Those individuals face the consequence
of apprehension and removal.
Ms. Lee. Is it not true that it would be necessary to know
who they are and where they are to actually initiate removal
proceedings from the United States?
Secretary Mayorkas. There are those individuals who we do
know where they are, and we do initiate removal proceedings. If
individuals abscond, which is a concern that long predates this
administration, Congresswoman--we have had absconders for many,
many administrations. We have between 11-12 million
undocumented people. When those individuals are apprehended,
they are also subject to immigration--
Ms. Lee. Secretary Mayorkas, what I will note is this: In
addition to it being clear that the department has failed to
timely respond to requests for information and data about the
policies of this administration and the status of all these
individuals who have been released into our country, it is also
clear, from reviewing a record of the proceedings in the
Florida Federal Court that the department is failing to comply
with orders of that court.
With that, Mr. Chair, I yield the balance of my time to the
Chair.
Chair Jordan. Would the gentlelady--would the gentlelady
yield to the gentleman from North Carolina?
Ms. Lee. Yes, I will yield the balance of my time to the
gentleman from North Carolina.
Mr. Bishop. I thank the gentlewoman.
Mr. Mayorkas, you've spoken a lot about lawful pathways
you've created. I think you rely on your parole authority to do
that, is that right?
Secretary Mayorkas. That is one of the methods, yes,
Congressman.
Mr. Bishop. What other method besides parole? What other
source of authority besides parole?
Secretary Mayorkas. That is the primary, the primary--
Mr. Bishop. Well, but what's the other one, then, if it's
the primary one?
Secretary Mayorkas. Well, refugee processing is a lawful
pathway.
Mr. Bishop. OK. That's established by statute, the refugee
program.
Secretary Mayorkas. Yes, and the parole authority is also
codified in statute. It's a discretionary--
Mr. Bishop. Right. So, here's what it says. It says,
The Attorney General may in his discretion parole into the
United States temporarily under such conditions as he may
prescribe only on a case-by-case basis for urgent humanitarian
reasons or significant public benefit any alien applying for
admission in the United States.
You've spoken today--it was interesting; it really struck
my attention--you spoke about case by case being an individual
determination. What is the source of authority that allows you
to define categories or classes to, then, operate to bring
people in, and then, look at them case by case?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, as I've stated, we
exercise that parole authority on a case-by-case basis.
Mr. Bishop. You define these categories or classes. What
allows you to do that? What authority do you rely on?
Secretary Mayorkas. That defines the perimeter of
individuals who may become eligible for the case-by-case
adjudications.
Mr. Bishop. It seems intentioned to me.
I yield.
Chair Jordan. Yes, good point.
The gentlelady from Vermont is recognized.
Ms. Balint. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Before I begin, I ask unanimous consent to request to enter
into the record DHS data on U.S. Immigration and Customs
Enforcement.
Chair Jordan. Without objection.
Ms. Balint. Thank you, Mr. Secretary, for being here. Thank
you for your public service.
I'm going to just shift gears a little bit here. As you
know, Vermont has recently experienced the worst flooding in
our State since the 1920's. Farms, houses, apartments, mobile
homes, businesses, and shared community spaces have been
devastating, including nearly every single small business in
our downtown of our State capital Montpelier. I've seen the
destruction firsthand and can tell you the recovery is going to
be long and hard.
Related to this, a larger issue I'd like to highlight with
my time today is the lack of options for small businesses that
cannot take on additional debt to rebuild. SMA loans, of
course, are a great help, but they are still loans. We are a
rural State made up primarily of small businesses. Of the
79,000 small businesses in our tiny State, 78 percent are
independent contractors or nonemployer businesses.
So, it is incredibly challenging for these small businesses
to rebuild and take on more liabilities, but their presence in
these communities is absolutely vital. We are a rural State
made up of small cities and towns and villages--all in these
little river valleys which are, essentially, isolated from each
other. We need the ability to rebuild these small businesses.
So, I've heard directly from these folks that they're
having a really hard time imagining how they will rebuild. FEMA
has been incredible. They were on the ground just a few days
after the emergency. I was able to tour with FEMA leadership,
as well as folks from Region 1. We are grateful for that help,
but I want to make sure that over the long term we are
committed to working with FEMA and DHS to make sure that we
find some long-term solutions for small businesses, in
particular, to fill in this gap in the recovery.
Along these lines, Mr. Secretary, what can Congress do to
aid DHS and FEMA in continuing to react to natural disasters
like this, like the flooding in Vermont, which was supposed to
be a 100-year flood cycle, and it happened as recently as 12
years ago. So, what can we do to partner with you to be more
prepared for these?
Secretary Mayorkas. Thank you very much, Congresswoman. I
look forward to partnering with you and other Members of the
Committee to address the challenges that our Nation faces.
One critical need is, of course, funding for the disaster
relief services and assistance that we provide, whether that is
financial relief, so that businesses and individuals alike can
rebuild and recovery. We also have critical grant programs that
really contribute to the resilience of local communities. That
is one very significant way in which we can partner together,
and I very much look forward to working with you.
Ms. Balint. Thank you.
Just to put a finer point on it, I was speaking with FEMA
Administrator Criswell when she came up to Vermont. Is it
accurate to say that FEMA's primary funding source, the
Disaster Relief Fund, is going to go into the red as soon as
August? Is that correct?
Secretary Mayorkas. That is correct, Congresswoman.
Ms. Balint. Can you talk about the importance of DRF
funding, especially as we prepare for another hurricane season
and these increasingly intense storms that we are bound to see
continually, as the air warms?
Secretary Mayorkas. The Disaster Relief Fund is the nucleus
of our efforts to assist communities in recovering from natural
disasters, which are only increasing in frequency and severity.
That is the core fund through which we provide such needed
relief for communities across this country, whether it's for
hurricanes, earthquakes, wildfires, flooding, the natural
disasters that we are seeing more and more often.
Ms. Balint. Thank you. Just two more questions.
Is there a role for the agency in mitigating future
disasters? We often move emergency supplementals after the
fact. Is there value to more focused funding for pre-disaster
work, and what would that look like?
Secretary Mayorkas. Well, one of the takeaways that I had
when I visited Mayfield, Kentucky with Congressman Comer
following a devastating tornado is assisting communities in
revising their building codes, so that they are ready for the
weather that we encounter today and not the weather that we
encountered 10 years ago. We really, as a Nation, have to
reform our infrastructure architecture to be ready for the
extreme weather events that we are encountering today and will
encounter tomorrow.
Ms. Balint. Thank you.
I know I'm just about out of time. I just want to make the
final point here, is that I think it's going to be important
for all of us long term to think about how FEMA, also, can be a
partner in dealing with the mental health consequences of these
disasters, especially as they're happening more frequently.
Thank you, Mr. Secretary.
Chair Jordan. The gentlelady yields back.
Mr. Secretary, we'll do one more, and then, we've got to go
to votes on the floor, and then, we'll come back after that.
Mr. Van Drew is recognized for five minutes.
Mr. Van Drew. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Secretary Mayorkas, we stand here yet again to address a
crisis that you've continued to make worse. As Secretary of
Homeland Security, the American people have entrusted you with
the security of their communities and the security of their
Nation. You have failed them.
Our Southern border has been turned into a revolving door
for illegal immigration, drug trafficking, human trafficking,
and threats to our national security. Is this the America we
want--an America where every town is a border town? An America
where our communities, infrastructure, and resources are
strained under the weight of unchecked illegal immigration? We
know the answer. Our constituents know the answer. The answer
is no.
The reality is that, under your leadership, you've created
the largest border crisis in the history of the United States
of America--a crisis so badly handled that the International
Organization--and I want everybody to listen to this--the
International Organization for Migration labeled our Southwest
border as, quote, ``the deadliest land crossing in the world.''
Unbelievable for America.
Are you aware of how many illegals have been encountered at
our border and how many known gotaways have escaped into
America? I just want the numbers.
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, you speak of the Southwest
border, and--
Mr. Van Drew. Sir, I just want the numbers.
Secretary Mayorkas. The challenge of migration that we face
at the--
Mr. Van Drew. Thank you. I appreciate your answer. It's 5.6
million illegal alien encounters and 1.5 million known
gotaways.
How about the number of aliens on the terrorist screening
data base who've been caught, not the ones who haven't been
caught, but the ones who've been caught just in the last nine
months? Do you know that number?
Secretary Mayorkas. I'm very pleased to provide that to
you--
Mr. Van Drew. I do. It's 140. Thank you.
How about the number of unaccompanied minors processed in
Fiscal Year 2023? Do you know that number?
Secretary Mayorkas. Similarly, Congressman, I'd be very
pleased to provide--
Mr. Van Drew. I thank you. I know that number myself. It's
152,000.
We have seen a continuous surge of fentanyl coming from
China, being distributed by Mexican drug cartels, and
destroying countless American lives. Are you aware of how many
Americans died, how many Americans died in 2021 at the hands of
fentanyl?
Secretary Mayorkas. I am aware of those numbers,
Congressman.
Mr. Van Drew. Seventy-one thousand. Seventy-one thousand
human souls.
These numbers are staggering, and they are a direct result
of your actions as Secretary--actions that have dismantled
effective immigration policies and broken the rule of law; your
lies to Congress and the American people that put American
citizens in danger every single day, and in my mind this makes
your actions criminal.
All of us, all of this leaves us at a crossroads, a moment
in time where our actions will define the future of the United
States of America. This is a call to action; a call to restore
sanity at our borders and safety in our communities; and a call
to ensure that every town in America is no longer a border
town.
In the words of Ronald Reagan, quote, ``A Nation that
cannot control its borders is not a Nation.''
The time for action is now. Congress cannot stand by. So,
we arrive at an inevitable conclusion that I do not take
lightly. Secretary Mayorkas, you must resign. Will you resign?
Secretary Mayorkas. No, I will not. I am incredibly proud
of the work that is performed in the Department of Homeland--
Mr. Van Drew. I understand. Secretary Mayorkas, if you will
not resign, that leaves us with no other option: You should be
impeached.
I yield back to the Chair.
Chair Jordan. We will stand in recess, Mr. Secretary, for
approximately 30 minutes. So, I'd like to get started at 2:10-
2:15, and then, we have, I think, four, possibly five, more,
but that should go pretty quick.
I think we've got sandwiches and things back for you, if
you need that.
We'll back in approximately 30 minutes.
[Recess.]
Chair Jordan. Mr. Secretary--or the Committee will come to
order.
I apologize for the whole Congress; we're 10 minutes later
than I wanted to be here.
The gentleman from Texas is recognized for five minutes.
Mr. Nehls. Thank you, Chair.
Mr. Mayorkas, Members of this Committee, please turn your
attention to the video screens.
[Video played.]
Mr. Nehls. Mr. Secretary, I can understand why you didn't
stand with me and my colleagues and clap. You didn't want to
clap at that because you and Joe Biden believe just the
opposite of what President Clinton just said. You believe in
open borders and complete chaos.
Did you notice the bipartisan support in the chamber, as
the video was played? Everybody was clapping in that chamber.
If I were in Congress in 1995, I would have also stood. Because
I wasn't, I stand here today.
Other than President Donald J. Trump, the greatest
President in my lifetime with the most safest and secure
border, I believe President Clinton understood just how
important border security is to our Nation.
Boy, have times changed. Twenty-eight years later, the left
has gone off the rails. They've gone completely nuts. They've
done just the opposite of what the leader of the Democrat
Party, President Clinton, stood for on border security in 1995.
This Committee's Ranking Member, he was in Congress in
1995. I assume he stood. I assume he stood. It seemed like the
majority, if not all, of the entire chamber, they stood.
Matter of fact, Mr. Clinton delivered his speech in the
third year of his first term, and he was reelected in 1996. He
beat Bob Dole, won by over eight million votes; won the
Electoral College,
379-159. He had the support of the American people, and I'm
going to assume the Ranking Member also voted for Bill Clinton
in 1996.
We have two other Members, Ms. Jackson and Ms. Lofgren,
they were both freshmen at the time. I will assume they stood
during that powerful speech as well.
Do you know why they supported and voted? They voted for
legislation in 1996 strengthening our immigration laws. I
applaud them for that.
So, what's changed, folks? What's changed with the
Democratic Party? I'll tell you what's changed. If you wouldn't
have heard President Clinton's voice or seen his face, you
would have thought Donald Trump delivered that speech. I don't
believe that President Clinton was called a racist, a White
supremacist who hated immigrants, as the left and the dishonest
media has painted Donald J. Trump to be.
Mr. Mayorkas, there's a reason why you and Joe Biden have
allowed 5.5 million people to cross our Southern border. This
is about votes and elections.
I have a report from the Heritage Foundation titled,
``Tracking Movement of Illegal Aliens from NGO's to Interior of
the USA.'' Why do you think NGO's have moved illegal immigrants
to 431 of the 435 Congressional Districts? The truth is--hear
me--it's because the Democrats' progressive policies are not
acceptable to Americans.
The Heritage obtained a sampling of approximately 30,000
cell phones that were tracked to NGO's along border States.
They tracked approximately 22,000 devices at 20 NGO locations
in January 2022. The same devices were later traced to 431
separate U.S. Congressional Districts, and of the 52 with the
highest rate of tracked devices, 71 of them were Republican
Congressional Districts. The report revealed that it's not a
coincidence, folks.
The flood of illegal immigrants means the continued rise in
supply--surplus laborers. That surplus drives down the wages of
existing middle- and lower-class job holders until they leave
the job forces, and then, they're forced to go on welfare--with
the hopes that they will become loyal supporters of the
Democrats. That's what this is all about.
If this isn't about votes, if this isn't about votes, one-
party rule, keeping the Democrats in power, I make this
suggestion: If you put the American people first, you should
refer back to Trump's border policies. You won't because you
hate him. You despise the man.
So, give Bill Clinton a call, and then, he can help you
with the border crisis. As President Clinton stated, ``we are a
Nation of immigrants, but we are also a Nation of laws.''
You, sir, have betrayed Constitutional order, neglected
your duty, and violated the trust of the American people. As a
Nation of laws, I look forward to your impeachment.
With that, I yield back.
Mr. Moore. [Presiding.] The Chair recognizes the gentleman
from California, Mr. Kiley.
Mr. Kiley. Mr. Secretary, last year you testified before
this Committee that this administration's policies were not
responsible for the surge of illegal border crossings. Today,
you've testified that this administration's policies are
responsible for what you claim is a decline in illegal border
crossings.
So, why is it that you deserve credit when numbers go down,
but not blame with numbers go up?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, two points. First, the
approach that we are taking, expanding lawful pathways and
delivering consequences for those who do not use them, is
working. I want to communicate that the challenge remains. The
challenge is a persistent one at our Southern border. It has
been for decades. What we need is legislation--
Mr. Kiley. OK, Mr. Secretary, you're speaking in general
terms. I think this is why many of us on the Committee are
frustrated with the lack of accountability, is that you have
shattered all records in terms of illegal border crossings,
which you say that has nothing to do with the dramatic change
in policies you had. Then, there's a brief decline, and you
cite that as evidence that you're doing a good job. I think
that's why so many Americans have lost faith in this
administration's ability to secure the border.
I want to, actually, reference some remarks you made that I
found somewhat encouraging. This was on the topic of detainers.
You made these remarks early in your tenure, April 2021, at a
UCLA discussion with the Immigration Law and Policy Center.
You said this. You referred to an example of someone who
crossed the border illegally and went on to commit sex
offenses. You said, ``I do not believe that individual should
be released into the community.'' You said, ``I think the
State, the State facility should turn that individual over to
ICE directly.'' You added, ``I think that is a public safety
need.''
You went on to say that, after such a person had served
their sentence, if they were citizens, there might be no way to
keep them out of the community. You said, ``I have a tool at my
disposal with respect to an individual who unlawfully entered
the country.'' You said, ``I feel strongly about this. This is
a tool that I have at my disposal. It is a tool I feel
obligated to employ. I am going to protect the public,'' you
said.
It's a very strong statement in favor of detainers. Yet,
over the last couple of years, we have seen the actual use of
detainers decline dramatically. Fiscal year 2021, there were
65,000; Fiscal Year 2022, 78,000. That's about half the average
during the Trump Administration, about \1/3\ the average during
the Obama Administration.
So, if detainers are such a powerful tool, why have you
used them so sparingly?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, let me communicate a very
important point; that individuals who pose a threat to public
safety or national security are detained. That is the
immigration policy of the Department of Homeland Security under
my leadership.
Mr. Kiley. Why are you detaining much less than your
predecessor--
Secretary Mayorkas. Individuals--well, (1) is our detention
capacity is limited, which is why we prioritized public safety
and national security threats.
(2) Detainers are sometimes not honored by particular
jurisdictions--
Mr. Kiley. I want to move on to that in a second, but just
briefly, has the White House directed you to limit the use of
detainers?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman--
Mr. Kiley. That's a yes-or-no question. Has the White
House--
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, no, they have not.
Mr. Kiley. OK. Thank you.
So, on this topic of jurisdictions not honoring detainers,
you have been critical of these so-called sanctuary
jurisdictions. In a 2022 speech to the U.S. Conference of
Mayors, you said,
Some of your cities have declined to cooperate with immigration
authorities in the removal, the apprehension and removal of
individuals, even if those individuals pose a public safety
threat.
You said,
I will be coming to you and asking you to reconsider your
position of noncooperation. The public safety, the public's
well-being, for which we are all charged, is, I think, at
issue.
So, Mr. Secretary, you agree that sanctuary policies threaten
public safety?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, what do you mean by
``sanctuary policies,'' because--
Mr. Kiley. The definition that you gave right there where
you said,
. . . declined to cooperate with immigration authorities in
the removal, the apprehension or removal, removal of
individuals, even if those individuals pose a public safety
threat.
Are those sanctuary policies, as you define them, a threat to
public safety?
Secretary Mayorkas. So, sanctuary policies are defined
differently by different communities--
Mr. Kiley. To your definition?
Secretary Mayorkas. If I may--
Mr. Kiley. Is it a threat to public safety?
Secretary Mayorkas. I do not consider it in the service of
public safety to release an individual into the community when
that individual can be released to Immigration and Customs
Enforcement for prompt removal.
Mr. Kiley. Thank you.
Do you oppose State policies that forbid local authorities
from cooperation, cooperating with ICE?
Secretary Mayorkas. I am aware of some that I do oppose.
Mr. Kiley. So, you oppose California's sanctuary State law?
Secretary Mayorkas. I am not familiar with the particulars
of that law.
Mr. Kiley. Have you encountered California's restrictions
on cooperation with local--with Federal immigration
authorities?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, I believe it is imperative
that we cooperate with one another, jurisdictions cooperate
with us, when it serves the public safety need.
Mr. Kiley. Thank you. I'm out of time, but I would like to
restate for the record that the policies you said that you
oppose, overriding the ability of local jurisdictions to
cooperate, that's exactly what California's sanctuary State law
does.
Thank you, and I yield back.
Mr. Moore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from
Colorado, Mr. Neguse.
Mr. Neguse. I thank the Chair.
Mr. Secretary, thank you for being here. Thank you for your
testimony. I know it has been a long day today and I am
certainly grateful to you for your service to our country. I
have some questions about FEMA. As you may recall, we have
spoken previously with respect to some natural disasters that
we have faced in the State of Colorado, which I have the honor
of representing in the Congress, particularly wildfires, and
have very much appreciated the partnership with the department
and your subagencies.
Before I do that, I just want to give you an opportunity; I
know it has been a very contentious hearing, to the extent that
you would like to clarify anything or perhaps expound on a
prior answer that you didn't have ample opportunity to do so.
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, I very much appreciate the
invitation. I can recall there were quite a number of times I
have not been able to complete my responses, but I look forward
to the opportunity to answer your questions.
Mr. Neguse. I do think it is important for those Americans
who are watching to perhaps provide them with some context
about the various ways in which you have served our country.
Maybe you could just talk a bit about--before you were
appointed and confirmed as Secretary of Homeland Security what
kind of work did you do?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, I am in I think it's my
22nd or 23nd year of Federal service. I joined the Federal
Government because this country has given so much to my family.
We came here seeking refuge from the communist takeover of
Cuba.
I began my Federal service as an assistant United States
Attorney, as a Federal prosecutor. I worked in that capacity
for almost nine years before I was appointed by President
Clinton--
Mr. Neguse. Fighting crime?
Secretary Mayorkas. Yes.
Mr. Neguse. Taking on organized crime, taking on cartels,
taking on gang violence?
Secretary Mayorkas. Yes. Smugglers. All sorts of crimes. It
was the largest Federal judicial district in the country, the
Central District of California. I was then nominated--appointed
and nominated and Senate confirmed as United States Attorney.
Mr. Neguse. On a bipartisan basis?
Secretary Mayorkas. Yes, it was unanimous. I returned to
Federal service in 2009 as the Director of U.S. Citizenship and
Immigration Services and then moved from that position after
approximately four years. I became the Deputy Secretary of
Homeland Security. I returned to Federal service after that as
the Secretary of Homeland Security. It's been about 22 years or
so.
Mr. Neguse. I will say, Mr. Secretary, what I said
previously, we are grateful for your service in law
enforcement. While we have many disagreements with my
colleagues on the other side of the aisle from a policy
perspective, perhaps ideological differences, I would hope that
they would show the appropriate respect and recognition of the
work that you have done as a law enforcement officer, someone
who has worked in law enforcement for the last 25 years or so.
I want to talk a bit about FEMA. As I mentioned, we had in
Colorado some of the most destructive wildfires in our State's
history; all happened in the last several years, and in
particular in my district in Colorado, as you will well
remember, the Marshall Fire, which was the most destructive
wildfire in the history of our State, economically and
tragically. We lost the lives of two community members.
There have been recent concerning reports that FEMA's
Disaster Relief Fund, the DRF, which is the main funding
source, as you know, through which you provide support to
State, local, and Tribal governments responding to natural
disasters, is in danger our running out of funding before the
end of this year, potentially even next month.
I wonder if you can elaborate on what that shortfall is,
when you predict it may run out of funding, and how that would
impact the agency's ability to support communities in the event
of a disaster. Because of course there are many of us in
Congress, myself included, who are championing efforts to
ensure that this shortfall doesn't happen.
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, we are seeing an increase
in both the frequency and severity of natural disasters:
Hurricanes, tornadoes, fires, and floods. The Disaster Relief
Fund that FEMA administers is the primary vehicle that enables
FEMA, the Department of Homeland Security through FEMA, to
distribute individual and public assistance to communities
devastated by those natural disasters.
If that were to run out, our ability to assist communities,
our neighbors, our friends, our loved ones to recover from and
rebuild after a natural disaster would be virtually eliminated,
almost eliminated. We are hopeful that the Disaster Relief Fund
will receive the requisite funding because the money we expect
to run out as early as perhaps August.
Mr. Neguse. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. I couldn't agree
more, and we will do everything in our power to ensure that
this fund is replenished. On that you have my word.
With that, Mr. Chair, I thank you for the indulgence and I
yield back.
Mr. Moore. Thank you, sir.
The Chair yields to Ms. Hageman for five minutes.
Ms. Hageman. Thank you.
The First Amendment to the United States Constitution rests
on the principle that no person or institution, including the
government, has a monopoly on the truth and that viewpoint-
based suppression of speech by the government is dangerous and
may even spell the death of a constitutional republic.
Under the First Amendment the government has no power to
restrict expression because of its message, its ideas, its
subject matter, or its content. As the Supreme Court has
explained, if there is any fixed star in our Constitutional
constellation, it is that no official, high or petty, can
prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism,
religion, or other matters of opinion.
Labeling speech misinformation does not strip of its First
Amendment protection. That is so even if the speech is untrue.
As some false statements are inevitable if there is to be an
open and vigorous expression of views in public and private
conversation.
In refusing to carve out a First Amendment exception for
false speech, the Framers of our Constitution recognized the
significant danger in making the government the ultimate
arbiters of truth. It is axiomatic in the words of the Supreme
Court that the government may not induce, encourage, or promote
private persons to accomplish what it constitutionally is
forbidden to accomplish.
Secretary Mayorkas, it was reported in May that the DHS
through the Targeted Violence and Terrorism Prevention Grant
Program is funding groups targeting conservatives and equating
them to domestic terrorists. Originally intended to combat
foreign terrorist organizations' operations in the U.S., it has
become yet another government tool weaponized against citizens
to violate First Amendment protection--protected affiliations
and speech.
One grant to the University of Dayton for a program titled
``PREVENTS-OH'' hosted a seminar titled, ``Extremism, Rhetoric,
and Democratic Precarity.'' One of the speakers, a known Antifa
member, as part of his presentation shared a pyramid of far-
right radicalization, which likened the Republican Party to the
Heritage Foundation, the American Conservative Union, Fox News,
Breitbart News, the National Rifle Association, Prager
University, Tea Party Patriots, the MAGA Movement, and the pro-
police Blue Live Matter Movement, and the Christian
Broadcasting Network as the first steps on path leading to
Nazism and militant neo-Naziism, among other appalling
ideologies and groups.
This presenter reportedly also taught tactics on how to
pressure the removal of conservatives from platforms and he
even put it as saying a lot of things we are doing are illegal
and a lot of involves breaking the law.
Secretary Mayorkas, does the affiliation with conservative
or Christian beliefs make someone a Nazi or a domestic
terrorist?
Secretary Mayorkas. Of course not.
Ms. Hageman. OK. Then if that is so, why is your agency
targeting Americans who are Christians and conservatives?
Secretary Mayorkas. We are not.
Ms. Hageman. OK. Secretary Mayorkas, when did you become
aware that the University of Dayton was implementing your grant
funding program to target conservatives and Christians?
Secretary Mayorkas. It is my understanding that it is not.
Ms. Hageman. When did you become--so you are not aware of
that?
Secretary Mayorkas. No, it is my understanding that it is
not.
Ms. Hageman. You are unaware of the information that has
been produced? Have you even seen the pyramid that is up on the
screen right now?
Secretary Mayorkas. I learned about the individual
speaker's comments with which I profoundly disagree.
Ms. Hageman. OK. So, when did you find out about the
speaker's comments?
Secretary Mayorkas. I don't quite recall, Congresswoman.
Ms. Hageman. All right. Well, you know what, Mr. Mayorkas,
I actually really want to thank you as well for coming here
today, for your performance. I have watched with absolute
fascination as you have danced and dodged and lied. Yes, lied.
We know you have lied. You know you have lied. More importantly
the American public knows that you lied throughout your
testimony today. Yet, you believe that you and your fellow
architects of the censorship industrial complex think that you
should be able to determine what is and isn't true, and what is
and isn't untrue.
You are the walking, talking epitome of the very tyrant
that our Forefathers recognized would gravitate toward
government service, and it is because of people like you that
they drafted the First Amendment.
I thank them for their foresight. I thank them for
recognizing that you and people like you would do everything in
your power to control speech, to control freedom, to take away
our rights. They have written a document that isn't going to
allow you to do that.
Fortunately, we still have courts and judges who recognize
that you don't have the power that you are attempting to take,
that you do not have the right to limit our freedom of speech,
our freedom of association, and our right to communicate. Thank
God we have the First Amendment so that we can stop you from
doing what you have been doing. With that I yield back.
Secretary Mayorkas. Your accusations are false.
Mr. Moore. Thank you. The Chair yields to Mr. Hunt from
Texas for five minutes.
Mr. Hunt. A country without borders, sir, is not a country
at all. A home without a roof and a home without a door, sir,
is not a home at all. I have three young children at my home.
They are all under the age four years old. My home is secure
because I lock it up every single night, because I care about
their safety.
Actually, the No. 1 role of our Federal Government is to
keep our citizens safe. I am a combat veteran. I am willing to
give my life for that. West Point guy. Flew Apaches in Baghdad.
Safety is something that is paramount to me. It is actually the
reason why I am in this room right now, is to figure out ways
to keep our citizens safe.
When you are at your home, sir, do you lock your doors?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, thank you very much for
your service in the military.
Mr. Hunt. Yes.
Secretary Mayorkas. It's the highest form of service.
Mr. Hunt. Thank you. Do you lock your doors at your home?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, I take care of the safety
of my family--
Mr. Hunt. Understood.
Secretary Mayorkas. --and we in the Department of Homeland
Security work every day to protect the safety and security of
the American people.
Mr. Hunt. So, you would agree that the American public
should be afforded the exact same level of safety and security
that you provide for yourself and your own family?
Secretary Mayorkas. That is what 260,000 people dedicate
their careers to, Congressman.
Mr. Hunt. Understood, sir. Can you tell me the number of
unaccompanied minors who have crossed our Southern border
during your tenure as secretary?
Secretary Mayorkas. Very pleased to provide that data to
you, Congressman.
Mr. Hunt. OK. I have also heard that there are proponents
of this administration that say that the fentanyl that is
coming across our Southern border is coming through legal ports
of entry. Does that mean that no fentanyl is being smuggled
across our border other than legal ports of entry?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, the U.S. Customs and
Border Protection data evidences that more than 90 percent of
the fentanyl that enters this country is coming through the
ports of entry.
Mr. Hunt. So, that means that there are parts of the border
where fentanyl is pouring into our country?
Secretary Mayorkas. That is precisely why we have dedicated
increased resources, both personnel and technology, to
interdict more fentanyl in these past years and in prior years.
Mr. Hunt. So, I hear that, but I am really speaking for the
American public and the people that are in my district. That is
not what we are seeing because we are seeing an increased
number of people being murdered by fentanyl every single day.
You understand these numbers, correct?
Secretary Mayorkas. Well, I do. Congressman, those numbers
have been escalating for more than five years.
Mr. Hunt. They have escalated exponentially during your
tenure. Chip Roy went through these numbers. I was sitting here
watching him, actually appalled at just how much this has
happened.
Secretary Mayorkas. It is a tragedy, the devastation that
fentanyl wreaks on our communities, and I look forward to
working with you and with all the Members of this Committee
addressing this challenge.
Mr. Hunt. Understood.
Secretary Mayorkas. This requires a united effort. This is
not a partisan issue.
Mr. Hunt. Unfortunately,--
Secretary Mayorkas. This is a--
Mr. Hunt. --sir, it has become a partisan issue. I feel
like we on this side are the ones that are truly trying to
defend the lives of our fellow Americans.
Switching gears on this one: Sir, this woman is Kamala
Harris. She is the current Vice President of our country. She
is also the border czar. Now, that was dubbed by your boss. You
see on March 21, 2021, President Biden tasked Vice President
Kamala Harris with solving the border crisis and finding the
root causes of illegal immigration because as Biden said, ``she
is the most qualified person to do the job.''
I would like to make a motion to submit the transcript of
Joe Biden's March 24th Press Conference to the record, Mr.
Chair.
Mr. Moore. So moved.
Mr. Hunt. It has been 855 days since Joe Biden named Kamala
Harris the border czar. Has she solved the root cause of
illegal immigration in your opinion?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, you have mischaracterized
the Vice President's role. The Vice President is--
Mr. Hunt. No, no, no. I have not mischaracterized.
Actually, that was the job that was given to her by the
President of the United States of America.
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman--
Mr. Hunt. How did I mischaracterize that?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, the Vice President--
Mr. Hunt. OK. That is fine. So, she has not solved the
issue. I think that is actually pretty clear and I think my
colleague Chip Roy did a very good job of articulating that.
I want to go to my next topic, and this is something that
the American public is really frustrated with, because it has
been brought to my attention, and I think I have known it for a
very, very long time. For those who are not watching, the
Secret Service is an agency that is within the Department of
Homeland Security. This has been the case since March 1, 2003.
Now, sir, I am assuming that you are aware that cocaine was
found by the Secret Service in the White House a couple weeks
ago. Is that right?
Secretary Mayorkas. Yes.
Mr. Hunt. According to the Secret Service marijuana was
also found in the White House twice last year. Twice. We don't
know who brought the drugs into the White House, which is the
most secure building on earth. If we can't secure the White
House, then how can we secure the border? Without proper
leadership I am so fearful that we have turned our beloved
White House into a trap house. The American public deserves
more--far, far more than that, sir. Thank you for your time. I
yield back the rest.
Chair Jordan. [Presiding.] The gentleman yields back.
The gentleman from South Carolina is recognized.
Mr. Fry. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Secretary, I have listened both in here and in my
office today your testimony before this Committee. I think the
frustration that I have as the clean-up crew at the very end of
this Committee is that you seem to answer very eloquently all
the questions that the other side of the aisle pose, but when
posed with questions, specific questions about the border on
this side of the aisle, you seem to not have--you seem to dance
and dodge, as Ms. Hageman talked about, the true answers, that
you talk about--you filibuster, if you will, what people really
are asking. These aren't questions that are hatched out of some
think tank. These are questions that our citizens have, because
they see what is going on.
What is remarkable to me since day one of this
administration, you have terminated construction of the border
wall. You restricted the ability of immigration officers to
deport aliens who violate U.S. law. You terminated the MPP, the
Remain in Mexico Policy, despite people on the ground talking
about how successful that it was. You abuse parole authority to
release illegal aliens en masse into the United States and
creating categorical parole programs in violation of the INA's
case-by-case basis.
You refuse to follow Federal law requiring aliens to be
detained during the pendency of their asylum proceedings. You
terminated asylum cooperative agreements with Guatemala, El
Salvador, and Honduras. You refuse to comply with the
provisions of the INA that require the detention of asylum
seekers. You cut immigration judges, ICE attorneys, and the
process of the asylum system itself. You support sanctuary city
policies by giving them grants. You implemented until it was
enjoined a 100-day moratorium on alien removals.
You have misused, as has been talked about here, the CBP
One app that has institutionalized mass parole and release
policies in this country. It has been described as a shell
game, pretty fairly stated, that you otherwise shift things
around. You create definitions within your department that you
think that are appropriate. You create law, which isn't your
function. Then you come before Congress and you say that
everything is fine.
Well, we have been to Yuma, Arizona, sir, and we have seen
the devastation down there. We have talked to people. Seventy
sheriffs just last year said that there is no border at all. We
simply have no border left in Arizona, New Mexico, Southern
California, and Texas. That is the National Sheriffs
Association.
You have been held to account by courts. Texas v. Biden.
DHS' position, quote,
Position that the crisis at the border is not largely of their
own making because of their more lenient detention policies is
divorced from reality and belied by the evidence.
Florida v. The United States in the Northern District of
Florida, quote,
The Biden Administration have effectively turned the Southwest
border into a meaningless line in the same and little more than
a speed bump for aliens flooding into the country by
prioritizing alternatives for detention over actual detention
and by releasing more than a million aliens into the country.
Really quick let's play a video.
[Video playing.]
Mr. Fry. So, the numbers don't lie; 5.6 million illegal
immigration, or illegal alien encounters; 1.5 million known
gotaways; more than 2.2 million illegal immigrants--aliens into
this country, meaning that 3.6 million illegal aliens are in
this country since the start of your tenure. That is
astronomical. A hundred and sixty countries--the people on the
terror watchlist that we know about, 140 just this year. It is
at an all-time high.
So, look, this doesn't lie. These are the stats, Mr.
Secretary. So, you come up here and you blame the former
President and you say that they have gutted the immigration
system. You blame Congress for not acting. These numbers
weren't here for Obama. They weren't here for Trump. They seem
to be here for you. So, you like to blame other people for your
failures in not doing your job. Quite frankly, the American
people want to know how qualified are you to even carry out
your mission?
Because everybody else seems to indicate, from local law
enforcement, to sheriffs, to ranchers, to farmers, to citizens
on the border, when I ask them is the border more secure, they
say resoundingly no. That is on your watch, sir. I yield.
Chair Jordan. The gentleman's time is expired. The
gentleman yields back.
The gentleman--if we could maybe just wait until the sign
is taken down there, Mr. Moore, and then we will let you have
your five minutes with the Secretary.
The gentleman from Alabama is recognized.
Mr. Moore. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Secretary, for being here today. I am
certainly appalled at what is happening at the Southern border
and I know my constituent are, too. Your border policies make
every State a border State. I said my constituents are appalled
about what is happening, but I know a family who has personally
been suffering the consequences of your actions.
In my district, the Second Congressional District in
Alabama, the Autauga County Sheriff's Department arrested Grevi
Zavala, a 29-year-old illegal alien from Honduras, for the rape
of a teenage girl in Prattville, Alabama in a restaurant. The
interesting thing is that Mr. Zavala identified I guess as a
minor, is what I am being told, but he was a 29-year-old.
Mr. Secretary, why do you think it is; and I have been to
the border a few times myself, that we are finding so many IDs
thrown down South of the border? Just it is almost like if
these people are coming here for--to apply for asylum, they
would want us to know who they were and what they were up to.
For some reason ID after ID are just piling up South of the
U.S. border. Why do you think that might be?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, first, I am very sorry of
course to learn of the tragedy that occurred, that was
inflicted on a constituent of yours.
Mr. Moore. I understand that, Mr. Mayorkas. Let me say
this, sir: We have been apologizing to a lot of people for a
long time, at least in the last few months, the last few years,
even when the other party was in charge. They have the White
House, the House, and the Senate. We are continuing apologizing
to parents for losing their children to fentanyl and for people
getting raped in restrooms, and for DUIs or people who are
killing people with cars who have no driver's license. I
understand the apologies, but my people, the constituents in
this country are getting tired of apologies and they want
action.
So, who is responsible for the death--or let's say the rape
of this 14-year-old? Is that you, Mr. Mayorkas, or is that
President Biden, or is it Congress? Who is responsible for
that?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, the criminal who committed
the act is responsible. I look forward to working with you to
address the scourge of fentanyl that is causing so much
devastation and death. I look forward to working with you to
fix what has long been a broken immigration system.
Mr. Moore. I hear you, but let me say this, sir; and you
are aware of this, too. This administration has created two
things on the Southern border: Drug mules and human
trafficking. It is the policies of this administration. Because
we talked about it earlier in here and you said $4,000-$5,000.
Yes, that is just South of the U.S. Southern border. In Yuma,
Arizona there is 109 different countries came through that
small town. Further South of the border they are paying he
cartels $7,000-$8,000. Syrians are paying $19,000. So, the
cartel is getting rich, and the American people are paying the
price in the form of crimes and drug deaths.
So, we can sit here and talk and--for four hours now, three
hours, however long this has gone on--there are a lot of
apologies, but not a lot of answers. We need answers for the
American people. I think you are to be held responsible for
that. Believe me, it is not fun to have parents in here telling
us how they lost their child to fentanyl poisoning, but it is
on your watch, sir. It is on our watch. We have a
responsibility to do something about that.
So, it just--again the policies, we are turning a blind eye
and people are pouring in here. Sheriff Dannels said himself in
testimony a few months ago--he said the safest he has ever seen
the U.S. Southern border; he has four decades on the U.S.
Southern border, was around 2018. He said the worst he has ever
seen is now. So, we have a responsibility to these people.
Let me ask you another question. This is an individual--I
just got this information. Reports in November 2021, DHS
encountered Esem Basi, an alien on the terror watchlist. Now,
``Mr. Basi, despite,'' quote, from the FBI, ``highly derogatory
information''; this was in the FBI's data base,
DHS decided to release him into the U.S. because he was
overweight and may have been susceptible to the COVID-19.
Are overweight terrorists not a threat to the U.S.?
Secretary Mayorkas. I'm sorry, Congressman?
Mr. Moore. Are overweight terrorists--we turned Mr. Basi
loose because he was overweight was afraid he might get COVID.
He was on the FBI's list. So, are they a threat, overweight
terrorists?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, individuals who pose a
threat to national security or public safety are detained. That
is the policy--
Mr. Moore. Unless they are overweight?
Secretary Mayorkas. --of the Department of Homeland
Security. That is false.
Mr. Moore. Well, that is what the report is.
Secretary Mayorkas. I'm not familiar with that report. I
look forward to reading it. Congressman, the weight of an
individual is not relevant to their profile as a threat to the
United States, to the American--
Mr. Moore. It is to catching COVID though, apparently.
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, allow me to repeat myself.
Individuals who pose a public safety threat or a national
security threat are priorities for detention. That is the
policy of the Department of Homeland Security.
Mr. Moore. Who is to blame for the flood gates being opened
on the Southern border, Mr. Mayorkas?
Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, I look forward to working
with you to fix what is clearly a broken immigration system.
The issue of migration, the increase in migration is not
exclusive to the United States. During World War II, there were
60 million displaced people around the world. Now, there are
over 117--
Mr. Moore. We just had a report earlier today. Somebody
said that there is no border anywhere in the globe that is more
porous, if you will, than the United States border, and more
unsecure. It is on your watch, sir.
With that I will yield back, Mr. Chair.
Chair Jordan. The gentleman yields back.
Thank you, Mr. Secretary. Just a couple things to remind
you. I know you have some sharp people there sitting behind you
who work at the department. There are a number of things we
want responses to and I have been keeping a list throughout the
thing, so I just want to reiterate that and then we will
adjourn the hearing, let you get back to your office.
We want to know the number of removals, obviously. We have
asked that several times, so if you could please get us that
number. We will put this in some kind of written correspondence
to you, but we just want to emphasize we want that number.
We want to know the status of the 14,000 smugglers you
referenced in your opening statement. What has happened? Is DOJ
prosecuting? Have you referred them? What is the status? Have
any of those individuals been arrested multiple times?
We want to know the status of the 140 on the terrorist
watchlist this year. The 238 total over the last two years,
what their status is? Specifically, when you said the IG's
report was wrong and the IG's report said that one of these
individuals on the terrorist watchlist has been released into
the country. We want to know specifically how you interpret it
and why you say the IG is wrong.
Then we want to know the parole categories that Mr. Bishop
raised in his questioning, how you can categorize someone and
then still--categorize a whole group of individuals and then
say you are still going case by case to meet the law when it
comes to parole.
Then, finally, actually two last things: The Mis-, Dis-,
Malin-
formation Committee within CISA, within DHS, we want to know
the activities of that group. We will have specific questions
about that. We want to know who is involved in that group, and
if it is still meeting and working with social media companies
in light of the court decision on July 4th from the Western
District of Louisiana.
Finally, to the gentleman Mr. Moore's question about the
tragic situation of the young lady in Alabama. We wrote you
about that specific situation. Mr. McClintock and I wrote you
on behalf of this back on May 24th and you have not responded
to that. So, we would like a response to that previous request
as well.
So, I think that is seven things that the Committee, both
Republicans and Democrats, I believe, would like answers to. We
will get that to you in some kind of written letter ASAP, but
now you know and you can begin working on that and get it back
to us, if you could.
Secretary Mayorkas. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Chair Jordan. You bet. Thank you for being here today.
Without objection, all Members will have five legislative
days to submit additional written questions for the witness or
additional materials for the record.
Without objection, the hearing is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 3:09 p.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]
All materials submitted for the record by Members of the
Committee on the Judiciary can be found at: https://
docs.house.gov/Committee/Calendar/ByEvent.aspx?EventID=116272.
[all]