Nomination of Leon Rodriguez to be Director of the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services, Department of Homeland Security

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. SESSIONS. Colleagues, there is an unprecedented crisis unfolding on our border. The crisis threatens the very integrity of our national border, our laws, and our system of justice. It is something I have been talking about for a number of years, but it has reached unusual and dangerous proportions. It is a crisis of this administration's own making and a crisis the administration's policies continue to encourage.

America deserves leaders in the executive branch who will stand up and say clearly: The crisis must end now. The border is closed. Please do not come unlawfully to America. If you do come unlawfully, you will be deported. This is what we expect from our Chief Executive, the chief law enforcement officer in America and, for that matter, the head of Homeland Security, the office in charge of Border Patrol and ICE officers.

But President Obama and Secretary Johnson at the Department of Homeland Security refused--just refused--to plainly make this statement. How can they not? It is their duty. It is the law of the United States, and it is causing people around the world, particularly in Central America, to believe they can come unlawfully to America. It is encouraging this to happen. They are getting wrong messages from the leadership in our country.

So let's review the evidence.

On March 20, 2014, the University of Texas at El Paso did a study that was funded and supported by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security Science and Technology Directorate, and it states that ``both Border Patrol and ICE officers agreed that the lack of deterrence for crossing the U.S./Mexican border has impacted the rate at which they have apprehended UACs.''

UACs are unaccompanied alien children.

Officers assert that ``UACs are aware of the relative lack of consequences they will receive when apprehended at the U.S. border.''

Get this: Officers are certain the UACs are aware of this.

UTEP [University of Texas El Paso] was informed that smugglers of family members of unaccompanied alien children understand that once a UAC is apprehended for illegal entry into the United States, the individual will be reunited with a U.S.-based family member pending the disposition of the immigration hearing.

There will be some sort of hearing set for them.

This process appears to be exploited by illegal alien smugglers and family members in the United States who wish to reunite with separated children. It was observed by the researchers that the current policy is very similar to the ``catch and release'' problem that the Department of Homeland Security faced prior to the passage of the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004.

If we catch somebody in the United States unlawfully, they will be given some minimal process and then released on bail and told to return back to court in so many weeks or months. In many cases, they do not show up. They enter the country unlawfully against the laws of the United States. They are apprehended but released--and why would they show up?

Recently Border Patrol agents in the Rio Grande Valley questioned 230 illegal immigrants about why they came. These are particularly related to children, and 95 percent said they believed they would be allowed to stay and take advantage of the ``new'' U.S. ``law'' that grants a free pass or ``permiso'' being issued by the U.S. government to adults traveling with minors and unaccompanied children.

So this is what they said 95 percent of the people who came illegally believe. This memo that leaked out of the Department of Homeland Security continued:

The information is apparently common knowledge in Central America and is spread by word of mouth and international and local media. A high percentage of the subjects interviewed stated that their family members in the United States urged them to travel immediately, because the United States government was only issuing immigration `permisos' until the end of June 2014.

On June 10, 2014, newspapers in Honduras and Guatemala quoted Secretary of Homeland Security Jeh Johnson as saying this--this is what he is being quoted as saying in Central America: ``Almost all agree that a child who crossed the border illegally with their parents or in search of a father or a better life, was not making an adult choice to break our laws, and should be treated differently than adult violators of the law.''

This conveys a message. Isn't it clear that people who are not students of the esoteric aspects of American law would hear the Secretary of Homeland Security basically saying if you are a young person and you come you will be treated differently? Then they hear they will be given a ``permiso'' and allowed to stay and be taken care of, that there is no risk or danger in coming to the United States unlawfully.

On June 13, the Washington Post published an article entitled ``Influx of minors across Texas border driven by belief they will be allowed to stay in U.S.'' How hard is it to reverse that belief? We have not done it.

On June 19, Democratic Congressman Henry Cuellar of Texas said, ``As long as they know they are going to be released and allowed to stay here, they are going to keep coming.'' Isn't that true?

The New York Times quoted one teenager from Honduras whose mother had sent for him: ``If you make it, they take you to a shelter and take care of you and let you have permission to stay.''

Records show the administration knew this surge we are seeing at the border, which is unprecedented in our history, was coming, and they knew of it for some time and did nothing to stop it or to send the message: Don't do this. Do not come to America unlawfully. Make your application if you feel you are justified in coming, and it will be processed in regular order. Indeed, the administration sought, rather than to stop this dramatic surge, to accommodate it.

Even before the public became aware of the beginning of the surge of this nature at our border, on January 29 of this year, the Federal Government-get this--posted an advertisement seeking bids from a contractor to handle 65,000 ``unaccompanied alien children'' crossing the southern border. This was in January.

In 2011 we had approximately 6,000 coming into the country unlawfully. So in January of this year they posted an advertisement to handle 65,000. So this raises serious questions. Why would the administration claim to be surprised by the current influx of unaccompanied minors when they were taking bids in January for a contract to handle the exact situation--almost the exact number--we are seeing? This year it is expected to hit about 90,000 children; whereas, in 2011 it was 6,000. Projections from official sources say we may hit 130,000 next year. How did the administration anticipate the very numbers it seems we have at least to date?

In March of this year the Department of Health & Human Services estimated in its fiscal year 2014 budget proposal that the number of unaccompanied illegal alien children apprehended in 2014 this year would rise to 60,000, which is up 814 percent from the 6,560 who were apprehended in the United States only 3 years ago.

Over the weekend the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security published an ``open letter to the parents of children crossing our Southwest border'' on a Spanish language wire service. I had demanded of him in the Senate Judiciary Committee that he send a clear message, and he actually refused to do so. I had to ask him about three or more times before he would finally say: It is unlawful to come here, and that is the reason you shouldn't. He said: You shouldn't come because it is dangerous. He said: You shouldn't come. It is not a good idea. But he was not simply saying: Do not come unlawfully.

In newspapers in Central and South America and on Univision's Web site the letter noted, in part, that the Senate comprehensive immigration bill ``provides for an earned path to citizenship, but only for certain people who came into this country on or before December 31, 2011.''

The Senate bill died in the House and will not become a law, and it was wrong to have done that very thing. That is what the law said, but it wasn't passed. But the very fact that Mr. Johnson is advertising in foreign countries an earned path to citizenship for illegal immigrants undermines his primary responsibility, which is to enforce the law. The most primary responsibility for Mr. Johnson is not to see how many people he can apprehend and actually go through the cost and process of deporting; the primary job is to deter criminal activity to begin with, to send a message and back it up that people cannot come successfully illegally. Don't come.

Then you will see a large dropoff instead of this 800-percent increase we see today.

Human beings are rational actors, and if they believe the United States is granting citizenship to illegal aliens who arrived before 2012, it stands to reason that the U.S. Government will move that date back if more illegal aliens arrive in the years to come. Why wouldn't they think they would be given amnesty too? That is what happened in 1986--amnesty was given. There were 3 million people who were given legal status, and the message was heard.

Some say that today, we have over 11 million illegal aliens in the country.

Even a 2009 internal Department of Homeland Security report on approaches for implementing immigration reform recognizes this fundamental fact. This 2009 report said:

Virtually all immigration experts agree that it would be counterproductive to offer an explicit or implied path to permanent resident status (or citizenship) during any legalization program. That would simply encourage the fraud and illegal border crossings that other features of the program seek to discourage. In fact, for that reason and from that perspective, it would be best if the legislation did not even address future permanent resident status or citizenship.

That is from an official government report.

Contrary to the administration's claims that illegal immigrants are acting on mere rumor and misinformation, it is the sad reality of lax enforcement plus the lack of a clear message that is driving the surge. The reality is if you get into the country today, you are not going to be deported. That is true.

A leaked May 30 internal memo written by the top border official, Deputy Chief Ronald Vitiello, said:

Currently only 3 percent of apprehensions from countries other than Mexico are being repatriated to their countries of citizenship, which are predominately located in Central America.

I repeat, only 3 percent are being repatriated back home.

According to the former head of Enforcement and Removal Operations for ICE, the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency, Gary Mead:

It's taking a year or more in some places for people to come up on a hearing and many times, they don't have an attorney, or they've lost an attorney, and they get an extension, and maybe it's two years before they have a hearing. And in the interim period, they enroll in school, or they get a job, or they are reunited with family members, and then they are no longer an enforcement priority.

That is significant. Even if after 2 or 3 years a judge finally orders removal--assuming the individuals show up in court at all--many illegal immigrants simply ignore that order, and having been here for a period of years, no one makes them leave.

As former ICE Director John Sandweg said: ``If you are a run-of-the-mill immigrant here illegally, your odds of getting deported are close to zero.''

Yesterday, Byron York published in the Washington Examiner the findings of Jessica Vaughan, Director of Policy Studies at the Center for Immigration Studies, which shows that the United States deported a total of 802 minors to Guatemala, Honduras, and El Salvador in 2011, 677 in 2012, and down to 496 last year. Weighed against the tens of thousands pouring in, it is clear that once again the reality on the ground--not merely rumor, talk, or policy--of the lax enforcement has influenced decisionmaking in Central America.

It is obvious to me. I have been a Federal prosecutor. You have to send the message, and if the message is heard that if you violate a certain law, you will be disciplined, the number of people who violate the law will drop. If you never enforce speeding tickets, people will speed. If you enforce them systematically, people will slow down.

York quotes ex-ICE official Gary Mead:

If you're getting 90,000 a year, or 50,000 a year, or even 25,000 a year, and you only remove 1,200, you're not eliminating the backlog.

How obvious is that?

Additionally, those here illegally have taken advantage of an asylum system that is easily open to abuse and that the administration has sought to widen rather than narrow. This asylum question is very serious. House Judiciary Committee Chairman Goodlatte recently stated:

Many of the children, teenagers, and adults, arriving at the border are able to game our asylum and immigration laws because the Obama administration has severely weakened them and many thousands have already been released into the interior of the United States. What does President Obama plan to do with those who have already been released from custody?

That is a good question. We have a situation now where illegal immigrants seek out and turn themselves in to the Border Patrol officer. They come across the border and go straight to them and turn themselves in. That is a fact. What happens then? They are taken farther into the United States to be reunited with family members, apply for a job, attend school, have children in U.S. hospitals, and stay in the United States--whether through skipping court hearings, receiving asylum, or simply ignoring orders to leave.

We can all expect that 5 or 10 years from now--and correct me if I am wrong--politicians in this body will probably say these illegal immigrants ``came here through no fault of their own'' and are entitled to citizenship. Is this a policy of a great nation? It is a policy of a nation that believes and advocates for open borders, but it is not a policy that is compatible with a system of law, duty, and order.

If people apply and wait in line, why should other people be able to come from the outside, break in line, move ahead of them unlawfully, and then ultimately receive the very thing they sought unlawfully? The chaos continues.

Indeed, the President actively continues to incentivize even more illegal immigrants. That is the effect of what he has accomplished here. He reauthorized his DACA program--based on a bill that did not pass the Senate or the House--for 2 years, which is a policy that exempts whole classes of certain individuals, particularly young people, from the immigration laws of the United States. He held a White House ceremony in the White House honoring 10 DACA recipients. DACA recipients are people who enter the country illegally. He also unilaterally authorized an additional 100,000 guest workers, and now the Justice Department is hiring lawyers to represent unaccompanied alien children in immigration court to maximize the number of those who will receive permission to stay in the country.

Claims that DACA--this policy of nonenforcement unilaterally carried out by the President of the United States not to enforce the law--does not apply to these new arrivals is simply a distraction. DACA is a unilateral action that established the precedent that those who come to America at a certain age will receive special exemptions from the law. That is what it says.

ICE officers report they are often forced to release even high-risk individuals of unknown ages and dates of entry who simply assert DREAM Act privileges.

In the internal Border Patrol memo, Deputy Border Patrol Chief Vitiello stressed the only way to stop the flow is to show potential illegal immigrants that there will be real consequences for their action. He said:

If the U.S. government fails to deliver adequate consequences to deter aliens from attempting to illegally enter the U.S. the result will be an even greater increase in the rate of recidivism and first-time illicit entries.

Our immigration system is unraveling before our very eyes. It is unbelievable. The American people have been denied the protections they are entitled to under our immigration system. Washington is failing the citizens of this country in a most dramatic and open way. Laws are passed by elected representatives of the people. We have passed laws that say you can't come to America without permission, and you need to file your papers and follow the rules. It is unlawful to just walk across the border because you want to come to this country. That is not lawful in this country.

I am calling on all the leaders and officials in this town to take the firm, bold, and decisive steps that are necessary to restore order and restore our borders. It is important for the children who are at risk. Many of them are having a difficult time. They have run out of money and the coyotes and smugglers have taken their money and mistreated them. We have heard a lot of horrible stories.

What is the best way to fix this problem? The best way to fix it is to have the President of the United States and the Secretary of Homeland Security say we are not going to accept you coming unlawfully. Please do not come. Don't do it. Make your application like everybody else. Wait your turn like everybody else. We are not against immigration or young people, but it is unacceptable to have a lawless system--as we have today--that is placing children at risk and overwhelming our enforcement officers.

One TV program today said the Border Patrol officers, instead of doing their duty, are changing diapers. We have gone from 6,000 to maybe 90,000 to 100,000-plus next year. The cost of the budget item last year for these kinds of things was about $800 million. I think they are now saying they need $2.28 billion a year just to handle this overflow. We don't have money to do that. It is not the right thing. It is dangerous for children, it is corrosive of the law.

The President must send a clear message: Do not come. Please follow the law, and if you come anyway, contrary to the law, you will be apprehended, you will be deported, and you will be required to return home.

I thank the Chair, yield the floor, and note the absence of a quorum.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source