ICE whistleblower to speak at Senate hearing

[0:00] court authorization is necessary and violate their rights. People should be shocked and horrified [0:09] by what they will hear today, and so should my colleagues, so much so that I am hoping we will [0:19] have bipartisan support for fundamental and far-reaching reform, that this hearing will be [0:24] an impetus, among others, that we are having toward reforming ICE in a root and branch way, [0:33] not just cosmetically, but fundamentally, so that the kind of misconduct that we are seeing [0:45] in America's communities and streets will be stopped. This training to break the law is not [0:55] a thing of the past. It's ongoing. It is not accidental. It is purposeful and deliberate. [1:04] It is not only sanctioned, but it is ordered at the very top of this organization through a memo [1:12] that explicitly states ICE policy, and Mr. Schwenk will testify about it. It is not a momentary lapse. [1:23] It is not isolated misconduct. It is purposeful and intentional instruction and teaching about [1:34] breaking the law. The truth that we will hear today completely discredits statements and testimony, [1:42] some under oath, by DHS officials within the last few weeks. And we will see and hear evidence today, [1:51] both in documents that we are releasing and a testimony from Mr. Schwenk about the training of [2:01] ICE agents and deliberate concealment of illegal ICE policies, directly refuting sworn testimony of [2:10] acting director Lyons and other administration officials. His testimony shows not only internal chaos [2:18] and incompetence, but intentional calculated action that accompanied the brutal violence and violation of [2:27] rights that we have seen on the streets. A lot of people are wondering, how could this kind of brutality [2:36] and violence happen at the hands of government officials in America, if they had the right training [2:44] and the right people? And the answer is, they had the wrong training, and in many instances, [2:51] the wrong people. The numbers of people have skyrocketed from 500 a year to more than 3,500. [3:00] And the training has been truncated and reduced, both in numbers of courses and substantive policy. [3:14] Two weeks ago, the head of ICE sat before members of Congress and promised that no cuts have been made [3:21] to the content of officer training. He claimed that fewer days of training are being made up for [3:28] with extra hours every day. But as Mr. Schwenk will share, this contention is simply not true. The same [3:38] head of ICE who contended incorrectly about officer training also testified about the memorandum in which [3:45] he announced the administration's new policy to invade American homes based on a permission slip signed by [3:55] his own employees in violation of the Constitution, which was distributed to all ICE personnel. [4:02] When I asked for the email distributing that memo, he assured me that ICE would produce it. They still [4:09] haven't responded because the email doesn't exist. Clearly, that claim was untrue as well. Today, [4:23] we're also going to hear about the brutal reality of policies that the Trump administration worked so [4:30] hard to keep secret. Anna Gibson Brown, who is with us today, experienced the reality of that policy on [4:38] January 11th of this year. She's here today to share her story of her home being violently invaded and [4:46] her husband being taken without a judicial warrant in one of the most egregious violations of the [4:52] Constitution I have seen in America. For centuries, our government and our courts have recognized the [5:02] sanctity of people's homes. John Adams believed that Britain's warrantless entry into American homes, [5:10] their breaking down doors and forcibly entering people's houses was the spark for the American [5:17] revolution 250 years ago. The hurt and harm caused to Ms. Gibson Brown and other victims of this law [5:26] breaking will be deep and enduring. But perhaps most troubling, Ms. Gibson Brown, is that what happened [5:38] to you was not some isolated mistake or accident. It was the result of a strategy, a conscious and deliberate purposeful strategy, [5:53] taught to agents carefully with a memorandum that was shown to Mr. Schwenk when he was told what to train them about breaking the law and violating your rights. [6:07] That is unconscionable. I want to finish by saying that I am hopeful that Mr. Schwenk's example of courage will inspire others to come forward. [6:25] It has already inspired us on this committee and I think that the example of others before him are perhaps one of the reasons why he is here. [6:38] We need more protection for whistleblowers. We need reforms, fundamental and far reaching of ICE and DHS. [6:47] We need America to be as shocked and horrified by what we see here as they should be because that's the way we will inspire [6:58] bipartisan reform and it must be bipartisan. I hope my Republican colleagues will take note and join us in welcoming whistleblowers [7:10] and they're speaking the truth, truly speaking the truth to power. With that, Representative Garcia. [7:17] Well, thank you, Senator Blumenthal, and I want to of course thank you again for your leadership and for [7:22] partnering with the oversight committee in the House to really spotlight all the horrors that are happening across the country. [7:30] We, of course, this is our third hearing on DHS and ICE. We've taken testimony, we've heard important stories, [7:38] we've talked about the misconduct and, quite frankly, the crimes of this administration. [7:42] Now, at our first hearing, we documented how Secretary Noem has been lying when she has talked about not [7:48] arresting American citizens or detaining U.S. citizens. At our second hearing, we talked about [7:54] immigration enforcement and how agents have been brutalizing, blinding, beating and killing Americans and [8:02] others on the ground. And oversight Democrats and our Senate partners have been fighting for [8:06] accountability for truth and for the rights of all people. Now, we have documented horrific and terrible [8:12] violence by this administration and will continue to do so. Now, ICE and DHS are operating like Donald [8:18] Trump's personal and private military force. They're attacking communities, they're targeting people [8:23] who are exercising their constitutional rights. And the results, of course, are all around us. We've heard [8:30] testimony from teachers, from veterans, from people on the ground who have been arrested, shot or attacked [8:35] with zero justification. Now, as of February of this year, oversight Democrats have documented over 530 [8:44] credible and verified instances of possible abuses and misconduct by President Trump's federal [8:51] immigration agents, including 224 incidents just with use of force. This is chaos that's been unleashed across the [8:59] country. It's not just what we have seen, of course, in Minnesota, but everywhere in my home state of [9:03] California, Chicago and places across the country. Now, as we look here today, ICE agents have been ordered to [9:11] disregard the Constitution and to violate the rights of American citizens and immigrants in this country. [9:17] And we all understand why the Fourth Amendment is so important and why the Constitution is also so clear. [9:24] Now, when you look at the Fourth Amendment, the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and [9:32] effects against unreasonable searches and seizures shall not be violated and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable [9:41] cause supported by oath or affirmation and particularly describing the place to be searched and the persons or things to be seized. [9:48] Now, what's the most important here is the amendment specifies people, not just United States citizens, [9:56] but all people for a specific reason. And that's been so important to our founders, to the Constitution, [10:04] and for so many of us that all people are protected. Now, Donald Trump cannot legally send his private police force [10:13] to smash down your door and take you away or to enter your house without a legal warrant. Right now, [10:20] the Trump administration is trying to take away that right. Instead of getting a warrant approved by an [10:25] independent judge under his worldview, he believes it's his right to go into any house in any city and do [10:33] what he pleases. ICE wants to write its own permission slip without a judge to break down your door [10:40] and to violate your rights. And this should terrify everyone. The same people overseeing and spreading [10:46] violence and chaos right now are avoiding the Constitution, are breaking down doors, are causing [10:54] harm. And in some cases, even back in my home state of California, we've seen video footage of agents [11:02] going to homes without warrants and terrorizing communities. Now, oversight, of course, is critical. [11:10] And the administration knows that they are being watched carefully. We're forcing them every single [11:16] day to reevaluate their positions and to ensure that we're pushing the courts to do the right thing. [11:23] Now, just at our last hearing, Fox News went absolutely crazy because they got upset that we [11:30] called out Stephen Miller. And in fact, we use this image of Stephen Miller to emphasize the terror [11:36] that he was causing. And in fact, Jesse Waters and other Fox News podcasters and right-wing media [11:44] personalities get upset every time that we call out Stephen Miller. Let's be very clear. This is one of [11:50] the most dangerous men in the administration as it relates to violations of the Constitution. He is terrorizing [11:56] communities. He is sending ICE out across this country. And he's willing to destroy the law and our [12:02] constitution so that he can move forward with his own bigoted worldview of how he views our country. [12:10] And he is accused, not just Democrats, but folks across this country, of putting immigrants ahead of [12:18] American citizens. And that is a flat out lie. We've heard testimony over and over again from American [12:25] citizens. War veterans like George Rhetas, who was arrested just going to work. Teachers like Miramar [12:32] Martinez was shot five times and had seven bullets put in her that went in and out of her body by her [12:39] own government. We had agents that bragged about shooting U.S. citizens to their friends in other [12:48] agencies. We've heard about testimony from Renee Goods brothers about Americans across the country who [12:54] have been impacted, like themselves, who lost their own sister because a DHS officer shot her dead without [13:01] justification. And we heard testimony today from Tayana Gibson Brown, a citizen and a health care worker [13:08] whose home was sworn by federal agents with military equipment and without a legal warrant. We're looking [13:17] out for the Constitution and the rule of law. And Stephen Miller, Kristi Noem and Donald Trump are not [13:24] going to stop that work. Thank you, Senator Blumenthal. And I yield back. [13:28] Thank you, Congressman Garcia. I'm going to introduce the witnesses and then call on them for your testimony. [13:38] Uh, Tayana Gibson Brown is a United States citizen and resident of Minneapolis. In January, federal [13:49] immigration agents raided her home, her family's home and took her husband without a judicial warrant. [13:59] Eric Schwenk was formerly an assistant chief counsel with ICE from September of last year until [14:07] earlier this month. He served as a trainer for ICE. He dealt with recruits at the federal law enforcement [14:16] training center in Glencoe, Georgia. Steve Bunnell is a former general counsel of the Department of [14:24] Homeland Security and a former chief of the criminal division at the United States Attorney's Office [14:30] in the District of Columbia, distinguished longstanding prosecutor. We welcome all of you and [14:39] uh, Ms. Gibson Brown, if you would please begin your testimony. I'd like to start by saying thank you for [14:48] the invite to be here to tell my story. Um, I would also like to start by saying 1229 was the date my husband [15:00] and checked in with ICE. He had another appointment at, um, on January 26th. This all happened on my oldest [15:10] son's birthday. My name is Tiana Gibson Brown and today I stand before you not just to speak but to [15:17] bear witness. I am here to share a deeply personal and painful experience how me and my family's fourth [15:25] amendment were violated. Most days when I get off of my night shifts, the mornings have a usual routine [15:33] for me. I know what to expect and I expected the same routine of my morning on January 11th. I got off [15:40] of work around 7 30 a.m., got home and went to sleep at around 8 30. Except on this day, I was woken up to [15:49] my husband Garrison William Gibson Brown at around 9 30 a.m. telling me that ICE was outside of our home, [15:58] banging at the door. The second I woke up, I could tell how terrified my husband was. This fear [16:04] intensified when the constant banking at the door woke our nine-year-old daughter Miss Anna up and [16:13] from there the fear only intensified. Garrison went to the door and asked the officers through the closed [16:20] door about why they were at our home. Followed with this, he asked them if they had a warrant. The [16:29] officers at the door told Garrison that they did have a warrant and it was signed by a judge. When Garrison [16:37] asked to see the warrant, the officer simply ignored his request. Although my husband and I may not be [16:44] experts in the legality of some situations, we are aware of the fundamentals and understood how the [16:52] Fourth Amendment shielded us from arbitrary government searches and seizures. Given this, [16:59] my husband repeatedly requested to see the warrant. The circumstances outside of our home [17:05] only intensified. We knew our rights though. We knew no one could just barge into our homes without a [17:14] warrant because this space was ours. The officers started surrounding our property. Our neighbors [17:21] and other protesters started gathering around demanding that the officers leave. There was patent fear [17:28] that filled our home. Although me and Garrison tried to calm ourselves down knowing that no matter what, [17:34] our constitutional rights could not be breached by authorities that claim to be law enforcing bodies [17:40] themselves. In no time, the scene only became more violent. Officers from the truck started shooting [17:47] pepper spray at the protesters. Am it all of this? But 10 officers approached my front door. They looked [17:56] like SWAT agents holding each other's shoulders like a barricade. One of them grabbed a protester that was in [18:04] the front of my yard from the front of his neck and the back of his head and slung him in the icy ground. [18:13] The officers walked up to my door and started ramming the door. They hit the door three times until the [18:19] door popped open. My stomach fell. I heard the door pop and I realized we were no longer protected. [18:27] Far away from ever experiencing anything like this. We've never known anything of the sort. [18:34] The officers stood at the door and they were pointing their guns at us. 10 officers that were all armed [18:41] were standing in front of me and my family. Words can never be sufficient for me to portray what sorts [18:48] of horror we felt in this moment. I stood between the officers and Garrison and I asked the officers yet [18:56] again to show me the warrant. Despite all of this, they did not show me anything. My daughter and my little [19:02] cousin, both children, were rushed in the room by my sister and were told to hide in the closet. [19:10] The fear in my daughter's eyes is something you can't imagine. Thank you. Thank you very much. [19:21] Mr. Schwenk. Thank you, Senator. Thank you, Senator Blumenthal, Representative Garcia, [19:36] members of the committee. My name is Ryan Schwenk. I swore an oath to uphold the Constitution when I joined ICE [19:44] on August 1st, 2021, as an Assistant Chief Counsel. I followed that oath for four and a half years, [19:53] working side by side with ICE officers. And I followed it when I resigned on February 13th, [20:00] 2026, a little over a week ago, so that I could speak to you today. I am here because I am duty-bound [20:08] to report the legally required training program at the ICE Academy is deficient, defective, and broken. [20:20] Five months ago, I was asked to teach the law to new cadets at the ICE Academy in Glencoe, Georgia, [20:27] where ICE is training its new, inexperienced recruits. I volunteered—those without law enforcement [20:34] training—I volunteered to take on this assignment based on my experience in law enforcement oversight, [20:40] including at the state and local level prior to my work with ICE. On my first day, I received secretive [20:46] orders to teach new cadets to violate the Constitution by entering homes without a judicial warrant. [20:54] For the last five months, I watched ICE dismantle the training program, cutting 240 hours of vital [21:05] classes from a 584-hour program—classes that teach the Constitution, our legal system, firearms training, [21:13] the use of force, lawful arrests, proper detention, and the limits of officers' authority. For example, [21:22] they ceased all of the legal instructions regarding use of force. This means that cadets are not taught [21:31] what it means to be objectively reasonable—the very standard which the law requires them to meet [21:36] when deciding whether or not to use deadly force. Our jobs as instructors are to teach them so well [21:43] that they can make split-second decisions about what they can and cannot do in life or death [21:49] situations. Yet, in the name of churning out an endless stream of officers, DHS leadership has [21:56] dismantled the academic and practical tests that we need to know if cadets can safely and lawfully [22:02] perform their job, all to satisfy an administration demanding they train thousands of new officers [22:10] before the end of the year. DHS told the public that new cadets receive all the training they need to [22:19] perform their duties, that no critical material or standards have been cut. This is a lie. ICE made [22:29] the program shorter, and they removed so many essential parts that what remains is a dangerous husk. [22:36] No reasonable person would believe a training program suddenly cut nearly in half could meet the [22:42] minimum legal requirements. These aren't abstract rules. They're required in regulations such as 8 CFR 287G1. [22:51] Congress requires immigration officers to meet minimum standards for a reason. ICE cannot lawfully [23:00] perform their duties, make arrests, carry weapons, and use force without passing appropriate training. [23:07] New cadets are graduating from the academy despite widespread concerns among training staff that [23:12] even in the final days of training, the cadets cannot demonstrate a solid grasp of the tactics [23:19] or the law required to perform their jobs. Without reform, ICE will graduate thousands of new officers [23:27] who do not know their constitutional duty, do not know the limits of their authority, and who do not [23:34] have the training to recognize an unlawful order. That should scare everyone. DHS assures the public [23:41] these cadets can get the job training compensated for anything missing at the academy. This is a lie. [23:48] Many graduates go to their home office just long enough to get their gun, their badge, and their body [23:54] armor before deploying to places like Minneapolis and other ICE operations with minimal supervision. [24:00] It's shocking that anyone would think this is safe or responsible, and this pattern of lies is not [24:06] isolated. It extends beyond the training program to include deceiving Congress and the public about [24:12] the rules followed by ICE officers once they graduate. On my first day at the academy, I was instructed [24:18] to read and return a memo in my supervisor's presence which claimed ICE officers could enter homes without [24:24] a judicial warrant. The acting ICE director authorized the very conduct that DHS in its own 2025 legal [24:32] training materials had called the chief evil against which the wording of the fourth amendment is [24:37] directed. That is physical entry of the home without consent or a proper warrant. Never in my career had [24:45] I ever received such a blatantly unlawful order, nor one conveyed in such a troubling manner. Incredibly, [24:53] I was being shown this memo in secret by my supervisor who made sure that I understood that [24:59] disobedience could cost me my job. ICE is teaching cadets to violate the constitution, and they were [25:07] attempting to cloak it in secrecy by demanding that I lie about it. I am here to convey to the public the [25:15] danger that is being created at the ICE Academy. I know from my conversations with many facility members, [25:21] many of the faculty, that I am not alone in my fear. Law enforcement is a deadly [25:27] serious business. It is not a place for shortcuts. Deficient training can and will get people killed. [25:35] It can and will lead to unlawful arrests, violations of constitutional rights, and a [25:40] fundamental loss of public trust in law enforcement. ICE is lying to Congress and the American people about [25:48] the steps it is taking to ensure its 12,000 new officers faithfully uphold the constitution and can [25:54] perform their jobs. I am grateful for the opportunity to speak to you today and happy to answer any [26:00] questions you have now or in the future. Thank you for your attention. Thank you, Mr. Schwenk. Mr. Brunel. [26:06] Thank you, Senator Blumenthal, Representative Garcia, and the members of the committee, both for your [26:16] leadership on immigration issues and for giving me an opportunity to speak with you today. My name is Steve [26:22] Bunnell. I was the general counsel of the Homeland Security Department from 2013 until 2017. I previously [26:31] had served 17 years as a career federal prosecutor, including several years as the chief of the criminal [26:37] division in the U.S. Attorney's Office here in Washington, D.C. I am one of six former general counsel [26:45] and acting general counsel of DHS who recently co-authored a guest essay in the New York Times, [26:51] disagreeing with ICE's new policy of relying on administrative arrest warrants to forcibly enter [26:59] private residents to arrest someone for a civil immigration violation. The six of us included top [27:06] DHS lawyers from the Bush administration, the Obama administration, the first Trump administration, [27:13] and the Biden administration. This is a group that doesn't agree on policy issues always, [27:20] but we all agreed on this point. The judicial warrant is a requirement of the Fourth Amendment and it [27:26] applies to ICE just like it applies to every other federal, state, and local law enforcement agency. [27:33] What also united and frankly offended all of us who signed that New York Times op-ed was the current [27:41] general counsel characterizing career DHS lawyers as, quote, deep state operatives, with some sort of [27:49] hidden agenda to undermine the department's mission. This is a cheap shot and it's wrong. It's not the so-called [27:57] deep state that for decades has kept ICE from entering a home using just an administrative warrant. [28:04] It is the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution and the lawyers who took an oath to support and defend it. [28:11] During our time at DHS, the six of us worked with thousands of DHS lawyers. [28:17] Those lawyers sought to ensure that DHS's actions are lawful and to protect the constitutional rights [28:23] of the people DHS agents encounter during operations. To smear career lawyers as deep state [28:31] operatives for giving legal advice that is faithful to the Constitution is not only offensive but also [28:38] dangerous. It sends a message. If you give your best professional advice and urge the department to respect [28:44] the law, you will be attacked for doing your job. It is a basic principle of the Fourth Amendment [28:50] that searches and seizures inside a home without a judicial warrant are presumptively unreasonable. [28:56] Indeed, as Mr. Schwenk just said, the Supreme Court has stated that the physical entry of the home [29:03] is the chief evil against which the working of the Fourth Amendment is directed. The law is also clear, [29:09] as Representative Garcia pointed out, that you can't enter someone's home without a warrant that's [29:19] been issued by a neutral and detached magistrate or judge. In other words, the police can't sign their [29:24] own warrants. This is a basic check and balance against tyranny and also a recognition that in the [29:32] competitive enterprise of law enforcement, even a good, well-intentioned police officer is subject to the [29:38] natural human biases that we all share and therefore needs the approval of a neutral and independent [29:44] judicial officer before taking an action as consequential as a forced entry into a person's home. [29:51] And as Representative Garcia noted, it's important to point out that in the context of immigration [29:57] enforcement, the Fourth Amendment says the people have the right to be protected from unreasonable searches [30:03] and seizures. It doesn't say citizens. It says the people. It's thus well established that the Fourth [30:09] Amendment applies to everyone within the physical boundaries of the United States, including [30:15] immigrants who are not lawfully present. ICE claims that its general statutory detention authority [30:22] combined with a final removal order by an immigration judge is sufficient to satisfy the Fourth [30:28] Amendment. But that argument doesn't work. Immigration judges are not neutral and detached judicial [30:36] officers within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment. They work for the executive branch and are subject to the [30:41] control of the president and the attorney general. Immigration judges also lack the statutory authority [30:48] to issue warrants, either for an arrest or for a search. I'm happy to flesh out these points and others [30:54] during my testimony. In closing, I urge the Homeland Security Department to adhere to the Constitution [31:00] and end the un-American practice of conducting forcible entries into homes without judicial warrants. Thank you. [31:06] Thank you, Mr. Brunel. We have been alternating the gavel and the questioning. I'm going to ask [31:16] Congressman Garcia to go first. I will follow him, and then we're going to go back and forth between [31:22] the House and the Senate colleagues who have joined us here. And we'll have five-minute rounds. [31:28] Thank you, Senator Blumenthal. Of course, I want to thank our witnesses again for being here. A really important [31:35] testimony. I particularly want to thank, you know, Mr. Schwenk, your courage for coming forward and your [31:42] story, I think, is just obviously so important. I just want to thank you for pointing out how critical [31:47] it is that we are following the law and the Constitution. And I want to just also make something [31:52] really clear. This is also about safety in your own home. This is about ensuring that every single [31:56] American feels that their home is a place for safety for themselves and for their family. Now, [32:03] Ms. Gibson-Brown, you experienced the results of the Trump administration's new unconstitutional [32:09] policy in person, and it was an attack on your own home and your own family. I want to thank you [32:14] for telling your story. And the American people should understand and see exactly what this looked like [32:20] in practice. Now, with your permission, we have asked to show a video so that people can understand [32:25] what actually happened and what the federal government actually did to you. So this video is [32:29] because it's just a short minute. We're going to play it real quick on the screen. [32:32] Oh, you know, that's really, I think, that's hard to watch, I think, for anybody. And I'm sorry, [33:32] Ms. Gibson-Brown, that you had to experience that. But I think it's important for the American public [33:37] to see that video. That could happen to any person in this country. And some of what you said, [33:45] there are kids in this house, show the warrant first. Where is the warrant? Shameful what you had to go [33:53] through and your family had to go through. Now, Ms. Gibson-Brown, you are an American citizen, [33:56] is that correct? You asked for a warrant, is that correct? Yes. And did they show you a valid [34:04] warrant signed by a judge? No, they did not. They did not. Now, Mr. Schwenk, before this new policy [34:10] that you reported about, would it have been legal for these officers to come into Ms. Gibson's home [34:16] without a warrant signed by a judge? Thank you, Congressman. No, the answer is it would not have been [34:22] legal either before or after this memo came out for them to go into that home. Thank you. Now, [34:27] Ms. Gibson, ICE brought overwhelming military-style force into your home. Is that not correct? [34:33] Correct. They forced their way into your home with no warrant, correct? Correct. [34:39] They put your children in danger. Is that how you felt? Yes. Can you think of any justification [34:47] why this level of force, military force, would be needed to forcefully enter your home? No, [34:55] I can't think of any. This is what happens when we disregard the Constitution, when we disregard [35:03] the rights of people in this country. This is wrong, it's outrageous, and every person should be ashamed [35:09] of our own government for causing this kind of terror, not just to you and to your own family and [35:15] neighborhood, but to folks across this country. There's no other way to describe what they're [35:21] trying to do than to terrorize communities and neighborhoods. I want to say I am sorry for what [35:30] you've had to experience. I know that is not enough. This government should be not just apologizing to [35:36] you, but for righting. They should try to right that wrong and the obligation of all of us here in this [35:42] room and across the country to stand up to this charity. So thank you. And Senator I yield back. [35:48] Thank you, Congressman Garcia. I'm going to hold up two posters. One of them you've just seen [35:52] is what happened at your home. The other is of a memo. Mr. Schwenk, I think you'll recognize this memo. [36:09] It is a memo written by Acting Director Lyons. We've seen it before at this hearing. It says, [36:17] in effect, ICE officers should violate the Fourth Amendment. Were you taught or told that you should [36:26] train ICE agents in accordance with this memo? Thank you, Senator. Yes. On the very first day I [36:34] arrived at Glencoe to teach, I was told that we were to instruct cadets to follow the instructions in [36:41] this memo, but that we would not write down any of those instructions, that we would not keep a record [36:48] that we taught it to them. That's a critical point because I asked Acting Director Lyons whether [36:58] this memo was distributed, and he said, in fact, that it was with an email that so far they have [37:05] failed to produce. What you're saying is that you were told not to reveal it, correct? Thank you, [37:13] Senator. Yes. I was told not to discuss this memo. In fact, when it was shown to me, I was told not to [37:17] take notes on it, that I was not allowed to write down any part of it. And for the record, [37:22] as an attorney for ICE and someone who routinely receives memos and memoranda issued by the agency, [37:28] this had never crossed my desk before I arrived at the Academy. So, in effect, you were told as an [37:36] instructor on the law that you were to train ICE agents how to break the law. I think every American [37:43] should be absolutely horrified by that fact, and you were not alone. This memorandum was the basis for [37:54] training ICE agents generally, hundreds, thousands of them during this fiscal year. Let me ask you about [38:04] topics that there were practical exams on. And I'm going to show you another chart, which, in effect, and you've [38:16] seen it. It's difficult to decipher in this form, but it depicts the topics of exams that were given, [38:26] practical exams and coursework. You've testified as to the reduction. Is it a fact that there was an [38:36] elimination, not just a reduction in hours of training by almost half, but also on critical substance [38:47] matters, topics that should have been trained? Thank you, Senator. That is accurate. What you're [38:54] looking at on those two charts, the shorter one is the amount of testing that's given now and [38:59] practical exams. The longer one are the practical exams that were given by ICE in its training program [39:05] before the current surge trainings course. Those exams that you see there, the longer list, every single [39:13] one of those was designed to test whether or not cadets could apply in the real world the things they [39:18] were learning in the academy. Vital lessons on things like how to use their firearms safely, [39:24] how to encounter an individual they intended to detain, much like Ms. Gibson Brown's husband, classes that [39:32] teach them how to do their job safely and lawfully, were removed from testing. And what testing was left [39:41] was reduced or essentially neutered by the way it was given. Tests that were designed and written to be [39:51] closed book where cadets were tested on what they could remember. Because again, go back to, [39:55] I said this earlier, officers have a split second to decide something. So everything we do is oriented to [40:02] giving them that split second to act, and they have to know everything for it. We took away the [40:08] ability to test whether they could. But what those ICE officers did to Ms. Gibson-Brown, [40:15] what they did to countless people in Minneapolis, what they are continuing to do across the country, [40:22] was not the result of split level decisions. It was the result of a conscious, purposeful, deliberate [40:31] policy carefully taught and trained. And in fact, the reduction in training, for example, on pistol use, [40:40] on use of force, on other vital topics, was regrettable. But the effects were truly shocking. [40:52] Let me ask you, because just in the time that we've released these documents, DHS has come forth [41:00] with a statement. I'm going to quote it. Under these new improvements, candidates still learn [41:06] the same elements and meet the same high standards, ICE has always required. No subject matter has been [41:15] cut. Is that statement accurate, Mr. Schwang? Senator, that statement is not accurate. Not in [41:22] even the slightest sense. It is untrue. Would you agree? Sir, I'd call it a lie. Congressman Garcia, [41:28] if you would call on someone from your side. Thank you, Senator. Representative Ansari. Thank you, [41:35] Ranking Member Garcia and Senator Blumenthal for convening both House and Senate Democrats to [41:41] continue our oversight of DHS's lawlessness and brutality. The Trump regime has used its paramilitary [41:47] force, DHS, and ICE agents to terrorize communities and families all across the United States. These [41:56] agents are told to engage in illegal and unconstitutional activity, including illegal use of administrative [42:02] warrants to invade private homes and mass surveillance to collect data on millions of Americans. [42:08] Here is just one example. ICE agents breaking down the door of Miss Tiana Gibson-Brown without a warrant [42:17] to arrest her husband, Garrison Gibson. This fascist paramilitary force, particularly border control [42:25] agents and ICE, are completely untrained to conduct police activity in American cities, resulting in chaos and [42:32] deadly harm to both members of the public, like Alex Preddy and Brene Nicole Good, as well as to officers. [42:40] It is horrific, it is racist, it is fascist, and it is totally illegal. This is still America. Rules apply, [42:49] and the Constitution matters. Under DHS use of force policies, ICE and Border Patrol agents must comply with [42:56] the Fourth Amendment's restrictions on the use of force. That is, that agents may only use force when, [43:03] quote, no reasonably effective, safe, and feasible alternative appears to exist, end quote. Instead, [43:12] agents are engaging in a free-for-all, shooting, tasing, and pepper spraying wherever they see fit. [43:19] Secretary Noem should resign in disgrace or be impeached. She will go down in history as one of [43:25] the worst accomplices to this massive abuse of power. We need to rein in ICE and hold the Trump-Epstein [43:32] regime accountable for its crimes. Now, I want to turn to our witnesses, and I want to thank all of [43:38] you for being here today and bravely speaking out to shine a light on these abuses. My first question [43:45] is for Mr. Bunnell. Yes or no, in the absence of an emergency, are ICE and Border Patrol agents legally [43:52] allowed to knock down someone's door without a judicial warrant and probable cause? They are not. [44:00] And yes or no, also for you, have ICE and Border Patrol agents acted illegally in forcing entry to [44:07] private homes over the past year without judicial warrants and probable cause? Based on the reports [44:14] that we've seen today and what we've heard about, it sounds like they are, yes. And Ms. Gibson-Brown, [44:20] yes or no, did federal agents present a legal judicial warrant to you when they broke down your front [44:26] door with a battering ram and entered with guns pointed at you while your daughter was home? No, [44:33] they did not. And to Mr. Schweng, thank you so much for your testimony today. Yes or no, [44:39] are ICE agents being told they can force entry into private homes without judicial warrants? Yes, they are. [44:47] And you said in your introduction, quote, there was a secretive order to train officers to violate the [44:54] Constitution. Yes or no, ICE agents are being directed to break the law and violate the Constitution with [45:01] such directions. Yes, they're being instructed to violate the law and enter homes using the I-205 warrant [45:08] process, which is just a permission slip. It's not a real judicial warrant. Thank you. What we are seeing [45:15] around the country is an authoritarian police state, the kind created by a shameless authoritarian [45:23] Donald Trump to preserve and expand his power at the expense of our constitutional rights. I will not [45:29] stop fighting against this fascist paramilitary force. And again, I want to thank the witnesses for your [45:35] bravery and for your testimony and for your patriotism today. Thank you. I yield back. Thank you. Senator Klobuchar. [45:41] Thank you. I thank my colleagues for this important hearing today. And I will say I've repeatedly [45:48] challenged my Republican colleagues that if you believe in the Constitution, then you believe in the [45:54] First Amendment's right to assemble. If you believe in people's liberties. If you believe in the [46:00] Constitution, then you don't go after people for having a legal permit to carry like they did to Alex [46:05] Preddy. Then you believe in the Second Amendment. If you believe in the Constitution, then you believe in the [46:09] Fifth Amendment right to due process. And if you believe in the Constitution, you believe in the Fourth [46:16] Amendment right against search and seizure, which is the major part of this hearing that we're talking [46:22] about today. And I would start with you, Mr. Bunnell. Thank you so much for coming forward. In your written [46:29] testimony, you noted that the DHS legal training materials previously called physical entry into a home without [46:37] consent or a judicial warrant, the chief evil against which the wording of the Fourth Amendment is [46:44] directed. As you know, Justice Scalia once wrote that when it comes to the Fourth Amendment, the home is [46:52] first among equals. Can you explain why the home holds this special importance under the law? [46:59] Justice Scalia. Thank you, Senator. The Supreme Court has spoken to this numerous times over the [47:07] decades and centuries. The home is the core thing that is at the heart of the Fourth Amendment protections. [47:15] It's the sanctity of the home. It dates back to the traditions in England before the Declaration of [47:23] Independence and the sort of notion that a man's home is his castle. And so this is a deeply rooted [47:33] principle of American jurisprudence. Thank you very much. And I know we've had to happen numerous times. [47:39] It wasn't just in the case of sad case of Ms. Gibson Brown in front of her nine-year-old daughter, [47:46] husband, sister. It also happened to a Hmong elder who was dragged out of his house by mistake. [47:52] And the coldest day ever in his underwear and thrown in a car and driven around for 24 hours. [47:58] So Ms. Gibson Brown, you had just come back from your night shift as a nurse, is that right? [48:03] Yes, ma'am. And that's why you're wearing the scrubs in the video? [48:07] I had fell asleep with my scrubs on, yes. And you work in intensive care unit, is that right? [48:13] A pediatric intensive care, yes. And how long have you been doing that? [48:17] 21 years. So there you are, you're home, and then suddenly your husband wakes you up [48:22] and tells you that this has happened. Could you talk about how you felt at that moment? [48:30] I just didn't understand because he had just checked in. And then he had another check-in for [48:36] the 26th. And it was my son's birthday that day, so I was just in shock. [48:42] And is it true then that Judge Bryant, who used to, for my colleagues, should know this, [48:47] he was an assistant U.S. attorney, worked as a prosecutor, and then in the last few years this [48:54] went through a confirmation hearing and became a federal judge. He's the judge that then issued [49:00] an order that this was illegal, what happened to you, is that correct? [49:04] Yes. [49:04] Thank you. Mr. Schwenk, thank you for coming forward, as my colleagues have noted. And I [49:13] want you to go over again, because it was just so shocking to me, what was eliminated from the [49:20] training of these ICE agents. Just because it's been my constituents that's been dragged out of their [49:24] homes, like the Hmong elder. And it is my constituents that have seen repeatedly the racial profiling and this [49:32] illegal use of force. Tell us what was omitted, taken away from this training, when our colleagues [49:39] in the last few years, coinciding with last summer, when they gave them an extra 75 billion dollars. [49:45] What was taken out of the training, Mr. Schwenk? [49:48] Thank you, Senator. What was taken out of the training were classes on use of force, [49:53] specifically classes taught by the legal department, as well as classes taught by other units. What was [49:58] taken out was almost 16 hours of firearms training, classes that teach them how to use their weapons [50:03] correctly and safely. What was taken out were classes on how the constitution works, what the [50:09] constitutional requirements are for their job, and the constitutional limits on their authority. [50:14] In fact, the class where we talk to the officers and teach them about the rights of protesters [50:19] was cut from a two-hour program, and to about 10 minutes, they got shoehorned into a lecture on [50:24] what the concept of a seizure is. There are others, there are many other classes that were cut, [50:28] but I think these are the most critical for your question. [50:30] Thank you. [50:32] Thank you, Senator Klobuchar. I'm going to call on Representative Randall. [50:40] Thank you so much, Senator, and thank you to our witnesses for being here today to shed light on [50:46] the blatant disregard of the rule of law that we have seen from this administration. They're executing [50:53] illegal warrants in violation of the Fourth Amendment, preventing members of Congress from exercising [50:58] their lawful congressional oversight duty, and failing to uphold tribal sovereignty by rounding up and [51:03] detaining tribal citizens. I visited the Northwest Detention Center in my district six times to ensure [51:10] that immigrants are being treated with dignity, with humanity, and with care. And what I've seen [51:16] on each and every visit is a stark reminder of the chaos, the pain, and the confusion at the hands of [51:24] Donald Trump, Stephen Miller, and Kristi Noem, and what happens when policy is developed from a place of hate and [51:32] not a place of facts. I've heard report after report of the denial of basic rights within the facility in [51:39] my district, and twice I've been illegally denied entry when attempting to conduct an unannounced [51:44] oversight visit to further investigate these concerning reports. And we know that this is only one of the [51:50] many ways in which this administration is acting illegally. There are 12 tribal nations in my district, [51:56] and I've heard concerns from so many of them about how ICE and CBP are racially profiling tribal citizens [52:02] and detaining them, people who are indigenous to this country. I've had tribal citizens tell me they're [52:08] sending their kids to school with their tribal IDs on them out of safety and fear. And when tribal members [52:16] show their tribal IDs to ICE and CBP, those officers lack any understanding of tribal ID cards. Last week, [52:24] Secretary Noem wrote to tribal leaders claiming that no enrolled tribal citizen has been detained and [52:30] that no ICE operations have occurred on tribal lands. And this is a pure lie. She's calling every [52:37] tribal citizen who has spoken out about their experience liars, and it is disgusting. Mr. Bonhomme, [52:46] how are ICE and CBP educating and training officers and agents on the United States government, [52:53] United States government to government relationship with Indian tribes? [52:57] You know, I might want to punt that one to Mr. Schwenk in terms of the training. I'm not familiar [53:07] exactly with, you know, how that topic is covered. I will say it was not an issue that percolated to the [53:16] upper ranks of the department during my time there. And frankly, your description of it [53:22] is quite concerning in a way that I hadn't heard before. So thank you for raising it. [53:30] Yeah, thank you so much. We've continued to hear concerns, not just in my district. When we were in [53:37] Minnesota, I heard the same thing from tribal leaders there who were looking out for and advocating for the [53:44] safety of constituents, of their neighbors, of tribal members who, you know, are stopped because they are brown [53:51] and forced to prove that they are not only indigenous to this land, but that they are citizens. [53:59] This may be a question for Mr. Schwenk also. Given that some tribal leaders have encouraged their [54:07] members to carry tribal IDs to show ICE and CBP in case they're detained, do you know, [54:14] are ICE and CBP agents trained on how to identify a valid tribal ID? [54:20] I do not take the question, but I do not have any particular information on how they're trained to [54:26] identify a tribal ID. I do know there are general classes on identification documents that they take, [54:31] but again, because we have eliminated practical testing, I have no idea if they're actually learning [54:37] it. Yeah. In the materials ITH, where I taught for the academy, the only things we discussed [54:42] involving Native Americans were the possibility that some Native American tribes have the ability to [54:46] cross the United States border. That was really all we ever covered in that side of it. Thank you. What [54:52] about racial profiling? Can you tell us what guidance was provided to ICE agents regarding racial profiling? [54:59] Yes. Yes, Representative. In the training material that we taught, the material calls for the department [55:05] to follow the Department of Justice's guidelines on the use of race and other factors [55:10] in law enforcement operations. But in practice, what the cadets are taught is to follow what's called [55:16] the Kavanaugh stop. That is that they are allowed to use race as a factor, not the sole factor, but a factor [55:23] in their operations. Thank you. I think we've all seen the disturbing effects of that practice in our [55:31] communities and across the country, and I really appreciate you for being here and sharing. Thank you. I yield back. [55:36] Thank you, Representative Brando. Senator Wells. Well, thank you all very, very much. Each of you, [55:43] and we're all horrified at what happened to you, Ms. Gibson-Brown. Let me just ask a question, [55:50] Mr. Schwenk. With respect to that attack on the home of Ms. Gibson-Brown, aside from the warrant question, [56:00] why in the world and in what world did we need a force with automatic rifles, combat fatigues, helmets, [56:10] the whole military operation? What part of Homeland Security requires that to go to this woman's home? [56:19] Thank you, Senator. I can address that question to some degree. Part of that I have to defer on, [56:26] because I believe it might reveal tactical practices of the agency, and I don't feel comfortable [56:30] disclosing that. But to what I can address is that those officers in that situation, regardless of how [56:38] they show up to the scene, however they're dressed, whatever equipment they're carrying, are supposed [56:44] to know their constitutional law, their understanding of what their authority is, well enough that, [56:50] regardless of whatever orders they receive before they show up. Let me interrupt for a second. I get [56:54] that. I'm just shocked that you would have that level of force to show up at this woman's home. [57:02] I mean, my view of that is intended to intimidate not just Ms. Gibson-Brown and terrorize her family [57:09] and her children. It's intimidating to everybody in this country to see that level of force. [57:15] How about you, Mr. Bunnell? Thank you so much, by the way. The deep state, I just laughed when I heard [57:23] that because, you know, my sense of what you do and your colleagues and people who've been career [57:30] prosecutors suggest a commitment to the Constitution, a commitment to professionalism, [57:36] a commitment to duty. If that's the deep state, that's a pretty good state to be in. I want to express [57:42] my gratitude for the work you are doing and your colleagues. But what about this question of having [57:49] a decision made by a superior to deploy people in combat gear, automatic rifles, to go out to a [57:58] citizen's home? I mean, leave the warrant part of it alone. With or without a warrant, I'm shocked [58:04] that that is what you had to arrive home to. Well, I share your reaction to it as a kind of [58:15] wildly over the top. I mean, why you need to dress like you're invading a rock in order to go [58:22] apprehend somebody who is not a fugitive. I mean, I think that's the point that gets lost a little bit [58:28] is, yes, there may be some probable cause that somebody is removable, but a warrant is usually [58:37] something for somebody who is a fugitive. Right. As I understand, you know, Mr. Gibson's situation, [58:44] he had removal orders. He received a removal order in 2009, and he'd been checking in regularly as he [58:52] was supposed to, including right up shortly before this. That's a discretionary decision by somebody [59:01] higher up in the chain that sent these officers out in that way, right? Yes. It was not a judicial [59:10] officer. It was somebody, their supervisor in the field office. Yeah, and it's part of the Christie [59:15] Noem terror campaign against Americans. Right. I would also just note that to the extent that [59:22] ICE at least purports to want to have a strong partnership with state and locals and would like [59:28] to improve their reputation in the communities that they say they're trying to protect and serve. [59:34] This strikes me as an extremely, shall we say, odd way to build trust and credibility with either [59:40] the people of the community or the state and locals. You say odd. How about counterproductive? [59:46] They're probably much stronger words that could be at a minimum odd and counterproductive. Let me ask [59:52] both of you. Is there any justifiable reason, any justifiable law enforcement reason that the [1:00:00] standards of training and safety and policing that apply to the Burlington, Vermont police force, [1:00:07] to the Vermont state police force, to police forces in all our jurisdictions in the country should not [1:00:14] apply to ICE? Mr. Schwenk. Thank you, Senator. And my answer to your question is no. At a root level, [1:00:22] all law enforcement should be trained to a minimum standard to understand when they can and cannot [1:00:29] enter a home, when they can and cannot use force, when they can and cannot make an arrest. [1:00:35] And this was the point I was approaching earlier, Senator, is that regardless of how they showed up [1:00:39] at the scene, regardless of how they were told to dress when they came there or what they were told to [1:00:43] carry, every one of those officers was supposed to know what they were allowed to do under the [1:00:48] Constitution. And that was the point of the training program is to teach them to know that and to know it [1:00:52] well enough that even if they got an order that was unlawful, they would know not to follow it. [1:00:57] Thank you. Thank you. My time is up. Thank you very much. [1:01:03] Thank you. Next, I'd like to call up Representative Watkinshaw, please. [1:01:06] Thank you, Ranking Member, and thank you all for being with us. [1:01:10] We're a nation in crisis right now. The Trump administration has turned American cities into [1:01:15] war zones, unleashing massed, minimally trained agents, and claiming, falsely claiming, [1:01:20] that these agents have absolute immunity from prosecution. Now DHS has embarked on a secretive [1:01:27] campaign, as we've heard today, in disregard of the Constitution to allow warrantless entry into [1:01:33] the homes of U.S. citizens. And I just have to say, you know, I serve in the House of Representatives with [1:01:38] a lot of folks who describe themselves as small government, limited government conservatives, [1:01:44] even have a caucus called the Freedom Caucus. If the government, if the federal government, [1:01:49] can smash down your door while your children are sleeping without a warrant signed by a judge, [1:01:58] you do not have a small or limited government. And if you allow that, if you countenance that, [1:02:04] you do not believe in freedom. The action these agents are taking are abuses of civil liberties that [1:02:12] stem from a central truth. Secretary Noem's Department of Homeland Security believes it is above the law. [1:02:19] Judges across the country have documented this lawlessness, including the Honorable Patrick [1:02:25] Schiltz, a Republican-appointed federal judge in Minnesota, who identified at least 96 court orders [1:02:31] that ICE violated across 74 cases. We have lawyers here today with DHS experience and a U.S. citizen [1:02:39] testifying that when the department cannot bend the legal system to accommodate its brutality, [1:02:45] it bypasses the law entirely. In May of 2025, as we heard, ICE Director Lyons issued a memo authorizing [1:02:52] officers to forcibly enter homes without a judicial warrant in violation of the Fourth Amendment. [1:02:57] They were told they could rely on an quote-unquote administrative warrant, nothing more than a piece [1:03:04] of paper signed by a supervisor to use the pejorative that some of my Republican colleagues use, [1:03:10] an unelected bureaucrat. A piece of paper signed by an unelected bureaucrat. The secrecy [1:03:19] is actually illuminating. It shows that this administration doesn't see itself as subject to [1:03:24] our legal system. Rather, it decides to ignore the law behind closed doors and hope that no one notices. [1:03:32] We have concrete testimony today from Mr. Schwenk that DHS has knowingly jeopardized the safety [1:03:39] of Americans by systematically dismantling the training designed to educate ICE officers [1:03:47] on the legal limits of their authority, including the Fourth Amendment. The decision to ramp down [1:03:52] training while simultaneously authorizing unconstitutional searches are deliberate [1:03:57] choices in support of President Trump's lawless and inhumane campaign. This is why Secretary Noem should [1:04:05] resign, should be fired, or should be impeached, and why this Congress must ensure independent oversight [1:04:12] of DHS's actions. That reform has to include a return to targeted enforcement that relies on lawful [1:04:20] warrants, an end to masked officers, protections for sensitive locations, use of force standards, [1:04:27] body cameras, and humanitarian standards for individuals in DHS custody. To quote Judge Schiltz, [1:04:33] ICE is not a law unto itself. I want to ask Ms. Gibson, did the federal agents know that there were children [1:04:44] inside your home when they broke down your door? Yes, I stated that to them. Okay. Can you share with us, [1:04:53] and I remember watching the video after the incident, and I was struck by your composure, [1:05:00] but I could also hear the fear in your voice. I think you said, my babies are in the house, [1:05:05] or a baby's in the house. Can you share with us the impact that this incident has had on those babies, [1:05:13] those children who were in the home? My daughter is terrified of everything. Every little knock on the door, [1:05:20] she'll scream, Mommy, Mommy, calm down. It's okay. She's in therapy. It just shouldn't have happened, [1:05:32] especially if he had an appointment to check in. They could have taken him into custody then. [1:05:37] To do all of this, to traumatize her, me, and my whole family, it was just, it's too much. [1:05:47] Thank you for being here. I yield back. Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you. Thank you all for being here. [1:05:55] And I want to follow up, because I was going to ask this as well, because people forget, [1:05:59] they see the moment that it happens, then they forget what happens afterwards to the family and [1:06:04] the children. And for your daughter and cousin and everyone else who experienced it, how are they [1:06:10] feeling now? They're still in fear. She called me, today she called me 12 times just to make sure I [1:06:21] was okay, make sure I was safe. It's just, she's just fear everything now. She's seen them down the [1:06:29] street from her school, and we had to go pick her up, because she's full panic. Yeah. And as, can you [1:06:37] talk a little bit about even the chilling effect that this has had, not just maybe on you and your [1:06:42] family, but neighbors or people that find out about what happened? Have you heard from neighbors and [1:06:46] others who are also in fear now because of what happened? Yeah. A lot of my neighbors, like, don't [1:06:52] go anywhere now. They've, it's like we're in jail in our own homes, too fearful to leave, to go to the store, [1:07:03] just fear. Right. And, and can I talk about, let me ask both Mr. Shank and Bunil, sensitive locations. [1:07:12] I'm curious, how did ICE handle sensitive locations prior to what we are seeing now, [1:07:18] in your experience? When, and let's, let me clarify, sensitive locations of, of schools and churches and [1:07:28] even the courthouse and where people may be. I'm curious how that has changed. Thank you, Senator. [1:07:35] So the answer to that question is that before the current administration, there were strict rules [1:07:40] about any attempt to make an arrest at those locations. And those rules basically boiled down to [1:07:45] don't do it. Why don't enter those locations, because of their sensitive nature, because, [1:07:51] because an ICE officer entering into a church, a school, a courthouse, has the effect of convincing people [1:07:59] not to go to those places, to avoid them. And when people avoid going to church, school, or court, [1:08:05] they step away from the rights and the roles they have in our civic society. It pushes them away from [1:08:11] it and gives them less power to protect themselves. And wouldn't you agree somebody's home is also [1:08:16] considered a sensitive location? That's why it requires Fourth Amendment, really constitutional [1:08:23] protections it has, and it requires a Fourth Amendment judicial warrant to enter. But wouldn't you agree, [1:08:27] because of what we're hearing right now, the impact it is having to families, because they don't even [1:08:31] feel safe in their homes? Yes, Senator. In fact, I think that's why it's not included in those original [1:08:36] memos. It's obvious to anyone who looks at the U.S. Constitution that the home is a sacred place. [1:08:44] It is a place where everyone should feel safe when they close their door. And for those that may not [1:08:50] be steeped in legal analysis, this isn't criminal. This is civil immigration. This is civil, correct? [1:08:59] Yes, Senator. And can you talk a little bit about that, please? And why [1:09:07] when we're talking about civil immigration enforcement, it does not require the level of force [1:09:14] and it mandates against the level of force we are seeing right now under our Constitution? [1:09:21] Yeah. I actually don't think it makes a difference in terms of the Fourth Amendment, [1:09:29] whether it's civil or criminal, you need a judicial warrant. So that's one point. I think there is [1:09:35] some confusion, certainly in the public discourse, about what ICE is doing when they're out making [1:09:42] these arrests. They are not enforcing criminal law. They're not going after somebody who's a suspected [1:09:49] murderer or a rapist who's out on the lam and they're not arresting them so they can be prosecuted [1:09:56] and put into jail. They are going out to detain and remove that person out of the country. [1:10:03] They're from Mexico. They'll go back to Mexico and they'll be set free. [1:10:07] Not to be detained indefinitely. Just as, I mean, long enough to be removed, basically. [1:10:14] Sometimes that is a long period of time. I mean, there are lots of people who are subject to orders [1:10:19] of removal, like Mr. Gibson, who are not a public safety risk, who are not a flight risk, and therefore [1:10:29] are not detained. They're released into the community with conditions. And in his case, [1:10:34] he was adhering to those conditions for 17 years. So in his instance, these are not the worst of the [1:10:49] worst. These are not dangerous people. But they have civil rights. They have constitutional rights, [1:10:54] just like everybody else. And one of the things that gets lost here kind of dovetails with the lack [1:11:01] of training. All of these agents and the lawyers take an oath to defend and protect the Constitution. [1:11:08] Be nice if they were trained on what the Constitution is. The Homeland Security Act says as part of its [1:11:16] mission, the department is supposed to protect civil liberties, protect privacy. A secure homeland is [1:11:23] a homeland in which you have those rights secured. You have the freedoms and securities that the [1:11:29] country promises. And so we're losing sight of the mission when we don't pay attention to the [1:11:36] Constitution. We don't pay attention to the oath. And we ridicule the, quote, deep state for trying to [1:11:42] follow that oath. And with the chairman's indulgence, I have one final question. Because Mr. Schwenk, you [1:11:49] talked about how the training, they've eliminated some training and then shortened some of the training [1:11:56] around use of force, 16-hour firearms training around constitutional law that you talked about [1:12:01] was so important, and the rights of protesters. It's been diminished about, what, 10 minutes. Let me ask [1:12:08] you this. Who are they hiring though? Are they're not, are they police officers that already have this [1:12:13] training so they don't have to worry about it? Or who's being hired? Is it individuals that don't have [1:12:18] any law enforcement background or constitutional background? I'm curious what we're seeing here [1:12:22] in this surge. Thank you, Senator. So I want to start to answer that question by saying I was genuinely [1:12:30] surprised by two things about the cadets I saw at the academy. One was that I routinely met cadets who [1:12:37] genuinely wanted to learn and understand what they were supposed to do, that they wanted to do their [1:12:42] jobs correctly. I have no doubt that if given the opportunity, they would do that. But they are cadets [1:12:48] who come from a variety of backgrounds. I've had cadets who were 18 years old. I had a cadet who we [1:12:54] celebrated her 19th birthday in one of our classes. We have cadets who don't have college degrees. [1:13:00] We have cadets for whom English is not their primary language. I was genuinely surprised by the sheer [1:13:05] number of cadets we had that were first or second generation immigrants. And these are all people [1:13:10] who I think want to do well, but they don't have the background. And we're not giving them the training [1:13:17] to do this job correctly. We're not giving them the training to know when they're being asked to do [1:13:21] something that's not supposed to do, something illegal or wrong. Thank you. Thank you, all three of you [1:13:26] for being here. Thank you, Representative Tilley. Thank you so much. Thank you all for, of course, [1:13:34] being here. But I want to tell you, Ms. Gibson Brown, I didn't know your name. I saw that image [1:13:39] immediately in front of your home. That's your home, right? I don't know if you realize how much [1:13:47] it connected so many Americans, including myself across the country. It's your porch, your private [1:13:52] home. And all I kept thinking about was looking at the military gear, the silencers. I don't know if [1:13:58] you realize I watched those things, the military gear. And, you know, I start digging and I find out that [1:14:05] ICE is primarily contracting out with two of the, I think federal immigration [1:14:11] agencies contracted primarily two firearm manufacturers to buy guns in 2025. And in the [1:14:18] last hearing, I specifically talked about how they purchased like Taser launches or something, [1:14:25] all this stuff. But now, according to some records, a report that recently came out, [1:14:30] they've already spent about border patrol contract with the same companies. And together, [1:14:35] ICE and border patrol contracted for more than 30 million in ammunition and 25 million in what they [1:14:41] call less lethal. But guess what less lethal is, Ms. Gibbs. It's pepper ball guns. That's still lethal. [1:14:48] And pepper sprays, including tasers and other things. I say this because I feel like there's also [1:14:54] these companies pushing and militarizing our neighborhoods and communities. They're making [1:14:59] money off of it. Thank you so much for your help. I do want to enter the record. I know this is a shadow [1:15:06] hearing, but it's important. This is an amazing report. It's on record reports talking about private [1:15:13] prison investors want ICE to escalate. I want American people to know this. There are people behind the [1:15:19] scenes saying, go, go, buy more, you know, cage up more people because we make more money off of it. [1:15:26] Do you know what this says, Ms. Gibson, uh, Brown? In this report, it describes how even through ICE is [1:15:32] locking up more neighbors than it ever has before. A record number, 70,000 people that we know of. [1:15:37] Investors in these private prisons, companies, core civic and GEO group are frustrated that, quote, [1:15:44] ICE's record immigration detention numbers aren't high enough. They're not high enough. No, no, [1:15:49] information leaked out. The violent kidnappings, the murders, incarceration for our loved one is [1:15:55] fueling record profits for these companies, and it's still not enough to satisfy their greed. What [1:16:01] is scary is that core civics alone's profit spiked up 116.5 million in 2025. 70% increase, y'all, [1:16:11] from the previous year. 70% increase. GEO group, which has one of the largest [1:16:18] poor profit. I call it ICE warehouse center in Baldwin, three hours outside of Detroit. George [1:16:26] Zoli, who called, uh, called the first year of Trump's second term the most successful year for them [1:16:31] in the companies here. See, both of them, that company, for instance, GEO group, made 20, 254 [1:16:36] million dollars in profit last year in 2025. Both companies are projecting even larger profits this [1:16:42] year in 2026 already, and we're not even in March yet. An ICE CPP plan to cage tens and thousands [1:16:49] of our loved ones in unsafe warehouses. They want to build a warehouse in Romulus, which is right [1:16:54] outside, a suburb right outside of Detroit. The companies in the administration do not view us as [1:16:59] human beings. They view us as potential profit and shared shareholder value. That's exactly how they [1:17:05] talk about it. They don't even care about what process is being followed. All they care is about selling [1:17:10] more military gear and how many beds or what they call, you know, people they can have in there. I [1:17:17] have personally three, three residents of mine who are begging, Rashida, I said, support me, send me, [1:17:24] send me, you know, since July because they can't stand it. There's already been attempted suicide [1:17:29] at North Lake in Baldwin, Michigan. Since July, let me go back. I have family in my native homeland. [1:17:38] Let me go back. They will not let them go back because the longer they have them in there, [1:17:42] the more money they make. You know what's so disgusting? ICE director Todd Lyons made this [1:17:46] clear when he said we needed to start treating ICE detention and deportation, quote, like Amazon Prime, [1:17:52] but with human beings. I'm not done. It's not a coincidence that these two prison companies and [1:17:57] their executives have donated millions of dollars to city members of Congress to ensure that record [1:18:01] profits keep coming at the expense of lives and safety of our loved ones. The drive for profit will cause, [1:18:07] of course, ICE to continue to fuel. Ms. Gibson, I just can't thank you enough for being here. [1:18:14] And, you know, I wanted to ask you questions, but I actually get tearful hearing your story. I don't [1:18:18] know if you know. You didn't know who I was. But just seeing this on your porch, I want to know your [1:18:23] story. And I just can't believe that you were trying to do everything right. And they still took your [1:18:27] husband and they traumatized your whole family. You were trying to do everything right. And I'm sorry that [1:18:35] they think that you are some sort of cha-ching money. Let's just put it out in the community, [1:18:40] that you are not a mother and a spouse. And I'm just I'm really incredibly sorry that that is what's [1:18:47] happening all really for money. I can't believe how much they've already donated Trump and they've [1:18:52] donated to U.S. members of Congress, both Republican and Democrats. And I really am scared for our country [1:18:58] that that's what's driving for many to be silent and to do nothing about what's happening. Thank you. [1:19:05] Thank you, Representative Tilley. We are probably not going to have any more [1:19:14] colleagues from either side, but I have some more questions. So [1:19:18] I'm going to go into them not at huge length, but you've been very, very helpful and cooperative. [1:19:25] And I want to thank you in advance. You know, the truth is that as we speak, literally, as you are here, [1:19:37] the Trump administration is arming a paramilitary force, a new class of recruits, sending them [1:19:48] out on the streets to repeat this kind of violence and brutality. It isn't an isolated or aberrant [1:19:59] instance. It's the result of intentional institutional decisions. And we've documented here [1:20:07] through the memo that acting director Lyons prepared and then concealed. It was used to instruct [1:20:19] trainers like Mr. Schwenk beginning when he started in May or rather in September, the memo dates from May. [1:20:32] And it was used for hundreds of agents who now are on the streets and in our neighborhoods. These agents [1:20:42] now have less training than most of the police officers in our police departments throughout Connecticut [1:20:53] and throughout the country. They have less training than the state police of Connecticut and other state [1:21:00] police forces throughout the country. And maybe even more shockingly, they have training to break the law, [1:21:10] which would never be tolerated in our communities. Police chiefs who wrote this kind of memo would be fired. [1:21:21] They would be discharged and they would never find another job in policing, advising and training members [1:21:30] of their police force to break down doors, barge into people's homes, arrest or detain them without a warrant. [1:21:40] A systematic purposeful policy to break the law would result in firing that police chief. [1:21:51] And yet what we have is brutal and violent tactics being used by ICE and CBP tactics with the [1:22:00] approval, in fact, encouragement of the very head of ICE, who said to me that this memo was distributed [1:22:11] through an email throughout the department. Mr. Schwenk, to your knowledge, was this memo ever distributed? [1:22:26] Thank you, Senator. To my knowledge, this memo was never distributed to staff in general. In fact, when I came [1:22:33] to the academy in September, I had never seen it despite being a counsel for the agency. [1:22:37] I never saw it again after it was shown to me the first time and maybe one other time when it was [1:22:44] shown to me. Other than someone physically handing me the document, I never saw it again. And right [1:22:50] before I left, I checked the repository where the agency keeps a copy of every official memo and policy [1:22:56] guidance that is in effect. And there is no copy of it there. And Senator, I will point out to you, if we [1:23:03] look at this document, if we look at it, every memo issued by ICE has a control number. It has something [1:23:12] on it that indicates that it is an official policy document and where it falls in the agency's [1:23:18] archives. And that's not on this document anywhere. Also, anytime we issue a memo, there is something in [1:23:25] the document to control its release, something that says law enforcement only or for official use only, [1:23:29] classified secret, something. And there is nothing on this memo that says that. Nowhere on this memo is [1:23:35] there anything that would let you know that this is an official policy of the agency. And to my knowledge, [1:23:41] it's never been disseminated as one. It's been handed out piecemeal to people to use when the agency [1:23:46] thinks they need to. Which directly undercuts the veracity of Acting Director Lyon's testimony [1:23:53] under oath before Congressional Committee. I want to go into some of the details here because I think [1:23:59] they are so revealing. Mr. Schwenk, you started your job at ICE in September of last year. This memo dates [1:24:14] from May. How did you first see this memo? Thank you, Senator. So I've been with ICE for about four and a [1:24:23] half years. But I was an instructor at Glencoe from September. The memo was shown to me by my [1:24:29] supervisor at Glencoe. It was given to me in person with instructions that I could read it but not [1:24:36] take any notes on it. That I could read it in their presence. And that was it. And that I was going to [1:24:42] teach from it. But I couldn't keep a copy of it to reference. And I couldn't document that I taught [1:24:49] it to anyone. Just that I could read it. You were to train on it, but your supervisor didn't want you [1:24:56] to have a copy of it for fear that it might be revealed. And in fact, it was revealed only when [1:25:06] whistleblowers came to me, brave and strong as they were, came to me, put their professional careers [1:25:15] and personal lives on the line and said they would reveal it. When you were told to train it on it, [1:25:27] I believe that there was some conversation about instructing them to instructing agents who were [1:25:36] your students to follow this memo's policies, not the other written guidance that they might be [1:25:45] provided. Is that correct? Thank you, Senator. Yes, that is correct. So what the cadets were told to do [1:25:52] was that they had the authority to make an arrest under this memo in someone's home that they should [1:25:58] knock on the door. And if the person did not open, as Ms. Gibson Brown's family did, [1:26:04] that they could use force to enter that home, reasonable force to execute the I-205 administrative [1:26:11] removal order. That's what we were teaching cadets at the academy. That's what we were told to teach [1:26:17] them. And I will tell you, when I taught my classes, I would tell the cadets that this policy existed. [1:26:22] And I would tell them that they needed to check with their local office before they did anything, [1:26:26] because there was no legal basis for this. But I did tell them this was the agency [1:26:30] policy. Were you apprehensive that a failure to follow this illegal policy might result in [1:26:40] demotion or discharge? Yes, Senator. I was. In fact, [1:26:44] it was made very clear to me when it was shown to me that if I did not follow it, [1:26:48] I would probably lose my job. Two other attorneys for the agency had just been removed from teaching [1:26:55] positions at the academy. One forcibly resigned. And the way it was shown to me or told to me was that [1:27:00] it was because they disagreed with management over this policy. So this illegal policy was not just a [1:27:10] suggestion. It was an order and people were disciplined as a result of failing to implement [1:27:17] this illegal policy. Is that correct? That is my understanding, Senator. As I said, [1:27:22] it's my understanding that an attorney before me, in fact, the reason I was at Glencoe is because I was the [1:27:28] alternate for the person who was forcibly resigned over their refusal to teach the memo. [1:27:33] And just so everyone understands, this memorandum was written by the acting director of this agency, [1:27:46] ICE, with instructions about breaking a longstanding practice and policy of ICE itself, [1:27:56] a well-established policy and practice of police forces going back hundreds of years, a practice [1:28:07] and policy that embodies the core Fourth Amendment values and provisions that no person, no person, [1:28:19] not just citizen, can have his home violated without a court saying that there's probable cause to do so. [1:28:31] You taught ICE agents candidates for graduation that then went on to Minneapolis. They went all around [1:28:42] the country. We've talked about DHS contention that the standards are the same, which is belied by the [1:28:54] documents as well as your testimony. The numbers of courses have been drastically cut. The hours have been [1:29:01] reduced. The physical or practical exams have been truncated. DHS may contend, well, we give tests to [1:29:17] these cadets before they graduate. But my understanding is that many of the tests are paper tests, multiple choice [1:29:25] exams, rather than the practical tests on use of force and pistols and other kinds of skills that are really [1:29:35] necessary to fairly and effectively enforce the law. Is that correct? Yes, Senator, that's correct. [1:29:45] So what the academy does is we have two types of tests. We have multiple choice exams and we have [1:29:50] practical exams. With the multiple choice tests, the cadets went from having to do them in a closed book [1:29:56] format where they had to depend on what they had learned and memorized to doing them open book and open [1:30:02] note, where essentially the only thing we're really testing them on is their ability to search a document [1:30:07] to find the answers. But more important than that, we took away the practical testing. Under the old [1:30:16] rules, we took everything they learned in the academy, all that they learned, and we made them apply it. [1:30:23] We put them through a range of scenarios where we could test, do they understand when they can enter a [1:30:29] home or not? Do they understand when they can make an arrest or not? And if they showed that they did not [1:30:35] know that, we could fail them and send them back and make them try again and demonstrate their knowledge. [1:30:41] And if they failed twice, out of the academy. And maybe six months later, 90 days later, they could [1:30:47] come back after they demonstrated their home office that they were ready. But today, no matter how badly [1:30:53] a cadet does at those practical exams, no matter how many mistakes they make, no matter how egregiously [1:30:59] they violate the law during a practical, we graduate them. [1:31:05] I think people should understand, and Representative Garcia alluded to this fact, that a poorly trained [1:31:16] officer of the law carrying a firearm or other instruments of force actually makes our neighborhoods [1:31:25] and communities less safe. If there were ever a demonstration of it, it has happened in Minneapolis, [1:31:34] in California, in Chicago. We've had graphic, dramatic evidence of it. At that very panel table, [1:31:46] individuals who've been shot, almost killed. Relatives of Renee Good, who was killed. Others who were [1:31:55] treated with brutality that is unspeakable, dragged out of cars, denied medical treatment. An untrained or [1:32:07] poorly taught agent of the government makes our nation less safe. I'm going to ask you, have you [1:32:16] seen cadets graduate despite using disproportionate force in practical exercises? And can you provide an [1:32:26] example? Yes, Senator, I have. I have seen multiple examples of that in the training program. I have seen [1:32:36] examples of cadets who have drawn their firearms on each other by accident. I have seen cadets, and this [1:32:44] is in the last day or two of training, so this is at the end of the program. I have seen cadets make arrests [1:32:50] of individuals that had committed no crime and for which there was no cause to make the arrest, despite [1:32:55] the cadet allegedly having been taught the law related to the crimes involved. I have seen officers apply [1:33:02] excessive force in these training scenarios where they have made arrest attempts that involved [1:33:09] drawing their firearm, using pepper spray, various events that they were not authorized to do and which [1:33:15] were not justified by the circumstances in which no objectively reasonable police officer would have [1:33:21] done what they did. And they still graduated. I have seen cadets, and this was a moment that stuck out [1:33:29] to me at the academy. I saw a cadet in a scenario where we had bystanders who were allegedly filming [1:33:36] or recording what was happening, pull out pepper spray and pepper spray a bystander. And when we [1:33:42] asked the cadet afterwards why they did it, their answer was, it's because I've seen what we're doing [1:33:46] in Minneapolis. It doesn't matter what we teach them about the law if what they watch on television and [1:33:53] on Reddit and on the internet tells them that they can get away with things. The academies, the academy [1:33:58] can teach them until they're blue in the face. But if they see that in practice the real rules are [1:34:03] different than what we're teaching them, they follow the rules that they see. Thank you. I'm [1:34:08] going to yield to Representative Tlaib, who I understand has a few more questions. I may have [1:34:12] just a couple afterwards. Thank you so much again. Ms. Gibson Brown, after your husband was violently [1:34:23] taken from your home, he was taken to the Whipple, is that Whipple Federal Building? Is that correct? [1:34:30] Did ICE agents take any photos of him while he was there? He said they took trophy photos. [1:34:37] They were selfies on their personal cell phones with thumbs up. Yes. Is that correct? Yes. [1:34:44] The day after your husband was illegally taken from your home, a federal judge ordered that he not be [1:34:48] removed from Minnesota. Is that correct? Correct. Is that what happened? He went to Texas. They took him to Texas. [1:34:55] They took him, kidnapped him, and took him to Texas. Yes. Did ICE quickly realize their error on their own? [1:35:03] No. No. Your attorney had to confront Homeland Security. Is that correct? Absolutely. [1:35:08] On January 15th, a federal judge found that ICE had violated your husband's rights by illegally breaking [1:35:16] into your home and detaining him. And the judge ordered his release from the detention. Is that correct? [1:35:21] Yes. But after your husband was released, he was re-detained for a few hours at the Whipple [1:35:27] Federal Building. Is that correct? Yes. [1:35:30] Who's responsible for ordering that your husband be re-detained? [1:35:34] They said it came from the White House. [1:35:37] Now, per federal agent, we know for a fact the order came from Stephen Miller. Did you know that? [1:35:43] Yes. [1:35:45] I also think it's really important because a lot of people have been talking about this. Do you think all this [1:35:50] would have not happened to you if they were unmasked? Do you think if they were unmasked this would not [1:35:58] have happened to you? Would they still show up like this but just no masks on? I think it would have [1:36:02] happened either way. Yeah. Do you think it's about training or a culture? Probably a culture. I mean, [1:36:10] Mr. Schwenk, it's a culture. You could give all these memos because I'm telling you right now, [1:36:14] I've seen it. We had sensitive locations policy and they still violated those. I remember in my own [1:36:20] community in Southwest Detroit over and over again. It's mind boggling that so many of my colleagues [1:36:28] continue to say that it's about recruitment and everything. When I'm showing them over and over again, [1:36:32] look at how they're recruiting using white supremacy music. The posters, I don't know if [1:36:38] you know Ms. Gibson Brown, I showed them a poster where it says, come join us, make home home again. [1:36:44] What does that mean? Ms. Gibson Brown, you know this. What does that mean? [1:36:49] Exactly. It ejects a sense of like some sort of white supremacy, you know, gang that's coming in [1:36:56] and trying to, you know, they even have a poster of Uncle Tom or something and it has an arrow saying [1:37:04] invasion. Who's invading? What are you talking about? I only say this because everything that we went over, [1:37:11] I don't think it was about training. I think it's about Stephen Miller and everyone else that created a [1:37:17] culture within this department, within ICE, Border Patrol and everywhere. These folks didn't just [1:37:23] join Border Patrol or ICE. The people that killed Alex and Nicole, Renee Nicole, I don't understand [1:37:31] how people continue to say this in committee that somehow if we just take the masks off, [1:37:37] we'll be saved. They're going to shoot us anyways. Give them a few more trainings, [1:37:43] give them some memos. But if the culture went from within, [1:37:46] from all the presidential administrations, I've seen it. They just violate their own even their own [1:37:51] policies and there's no sense of accountability. It is created in a culture of violence and fear [1:37:57] and boy oh boy are people making money from it. That's, you know, I don't know if there's anything [1:38:01] else that you wanted to share Ms. Gibson Brown, but I, I think it's important for people to understand [1:38:06] just how cruel they were to you and your family and even after they found out they were violate, [1:38:11] they violated his rights. Still, the White House tried to again vilify him and dehumanize him and [1:38:18] keep him again, even with the orders from judges. They kept the door broken. The door was broken and [1:38:25] nobody paid for it. I had, we had to pay for it. And my house was open for probably almost two weeks. My [1:38:35] door was broken. I had to put weights in front of my door to keep it locked. It's so shameful. [1:38:42] Yeah. But you know what? GEO group and civics group, all of them, they're making money. They [1:38:46] don't care about your door. They just care about taking people, holding them there and billing the [1:38:51] federal government, the American taxpayer, tons and tons of millions of dollars. And guess what? [1:38:56] They're still not satisfied. They want us to do more. But when he went to Texas, they, um, he requested [1:39:03] to call me. Um, I hadn't talked to him for like 24 hours and they told him he's in ICE custody. He couldn't [1:39:10] make any calls. Yeah. I have people that I can't find for days. They don't even put them in the [1:39:17] system. When we say disappeared, that's what we mean. And I mean, I couldn't find somebody, [1:39:22] a resident of mine for 12 days. They're not following their own processes. I don't even [1:39:28] think that's what it's about. I think it's because it was created post 9-11 to do just what it's doing [1:39:34] now. And it's, it's something that I think our country needs to realize. Now it's being turned, [1:39:40] of course, on so many other communities across the country, but as somebody who grew up with 20 [1:39:44] different ethnicities in my neighborhood, they've been doing it checkpoints, racial profiling. [1:39:49] I don't know if you know this chairman, they even took a father from the front seat with his daughter [1:39:55] who had leukemia in the backseat that happened in 2010. So I just want everyone to know this is not [1:40:02] about only who's in the white house, who's enabled it and empowered it and expanded it. It's about the fact [1:40:07] that it was created on this culture. Masks, trainings, body cams is not what's going to stop it. [1:40:14] And that's what scares me the most. Thank you, Representative Talib. I'd like to ask you, Ms. [1:40:23] Gibson Brown, your neighbors know what happened to you, correct? Yes. Have you talked to them about it [1:40:30] all? Yes. We've had a couple of neighbors come over. What do they think about it? My neighbor across the [1:40:37] street from me, she was pepper sprayed. And they're just all in fear. They are very sweet, [1:40:48] sweet people. I do love my neighborhood. Unfortunately, I have to move now because they won't renew the lease [1:40:58] because of this. But it's just, they've been very sweet bringing food, cards, and they've been just [1:41:09] absolutely wonderful. But still, a lot of them are immigrants on my street. So they're in fear too. [1:41:15] So they stay in. They're more fearful now because they've seen what happened to you. Yeah. They're [1:41:23] less likely to cooperate and help law enforcement, correct? So this brutality is really so [1:41:32] self-defeating. Yeah. And I'd like to ask you, Mr. Bunnell, you were a federal prosecutor for 17 years. [1:41:44] I was the U.S. Attorney in Connecticut as you were a federal prosecutor here in the District of Columbia. [1:41:49] I was the Attorney General of my state. Law enforcement really depends on citizen cooperation, [1:41:56] doesn't it? Absolutely. It depends on respect for the law and the credibility of prosecutors and police, [1:42:10] correct? At every stage of the process, yes. What happens when that respect and credibility goes away? [1:42:16] Public safety suffers. So all of these tactics that may be regarded as hard-nosed and tough [1:42:30] actually undermine the credibility and respect for the law and for law enforcement and the efforts to [1:42:38] protect the public, correct? Absolutely. You can't protect and serve people that don't respect and trust [1:42:44] you. A paramilitary force, a national police force, as the Trump administration seems to be intent on [1:42:56] establishing, violates the Constitution. The founders never wanted a national police force. [1:43:03] Its tactics of breaking into people's homes, forcible entry without a judge finding probable cause violates [1:43:13] the Constitution. They are teaching and training purposefully illegal policies and they are making [1:43:23] America less safe. I think that is the unmistakable takeaway from today's hearing. [1:43:31] And I want to thank all of you. And first, just finally, ask any of you whether you want to add anything. [1:43:40] We may have missed stuff in our questions that you meant to bring out. Anyone who has any final thoughts or [1:43:49] comments, I welcome that you do it. You don't have to. No pressure. I would also just like to add that [1:44:00] my husband had stated that when he was arrested, I guess, at the Whipple building, that they had [1:44:06] someone who had scabies and there were 40 people in one room and they wouldn't take the guy who was [1:44:13] infected out. So they put people who probably had health issues at risk for catching something. [1:44:21] Thank you. It was just deplorable. Mr. Schwang. Thank you, Senator. I want to bring up a couple of things [1:44:34] that I think are important to put on the record. One of them is a fairly important issue. There's [1:44:41] this claim being made by the agency that ICE officers are getting essentially the same training [1:44:48] they got before because they compressed the schedule down but kept the hours making it 12 hours a day. [1:44:55] And that's just flat out wrong. Cadets attend a five-day-a-week program that's nine hours, eight hours [1:45:01] of lecture, one hour of lunch, and once a week they have a 10-hour session over the course of their time at the [1:45:07] Academy. There's 42 days. It is not remotely close to the length of the Academy before. And the second [1:45:14] thing I want to bring up is I want to address the Representative Tlaib's comments earlier about a culture. [1:45:20] She's not wrong. She's not wrong that that kind of culture exists in the agency. But if the problem [1:45:28] was that simple, that we just had a bunch of people who don't like foreigners and want to remove them [1:45:33] from our country and it was all white supremacists, it would actually be a very easy problem to solve. [1:45:38] You just fired them all. But that's not the root problem. The root problem, Senator, and I say this [1:45:47] because there are hundreds if not thousands of ICE officers who are immigrants themselves or the [1:45:52] children of immigrants. I am the child of an immigrant. The root problem is that we have trained [1:45:59] a federal law enforcement agency to go out and perform a job they are not equipped or trained to do. [1:46:06] We have sent out officers who are essentially designed and trained to be civil enforcement, [1:46:12] to do criminal enforcement, to be crowd control, to be a tool to be used by the administration [1:46:17] to bring fear into neighborhoods around the country. And the officers that they are recruiting [1:46:23] now are less trained and come from less capable backgrounds than the officers who were already [1:46:29] there. When we look at the Renee Goode or the Alex Preddy shooting, those are not inexperienced officers. [1:46:35] Those are officers who've been there for a while, who have knowledge of how to operate and do what they [1:46:40] need to do. The officers who entered into Ms. Gibson Brown's home from the pictures you showed, [1:46:45] probably experienced officers. Everything we've seen today, everything we've seen through today, [1:46:51] has been done by officers who should know better, who should know at the end of the day that it's [1:46:57] their personal responsibility to uphold the Constitution, that they took an oath to it. [1:47:01] And I'm going to tell you right now, Senator, that at the Academy, we took out the class that tells the [1:47:07] officers they have an oath to the Constitution. We took out the class that tells them they have a duty [1:47:13] to uphold the Constitution. We took out the class that tells them that they have personal responsibility, [1:47:22] that at the end of the day, no matter what orders they get from their supervisors, [1:47:25] it's on them to do the right thing. And that's the root problem. These cadets and these new officers [1:47:32] don't have any firmament, any basis on which to stand. They don't know what they don't know. Thank you. [1:47:42] Thank you. Mr. Burnell. [1:47:45] Well, let me second that very eloquent summary that Mr. Schwenk just provided. [1:47:53] I guess my parting thoughts are that whether you're a good apple or a bad apple in the organization, [1:48:02] you still need checks and balances. You still need objective oversight. Constitutional democracy is [1:48:10] about checks and balances, and they come in various forms. And elections are only one type. [1:48:16] The Constitution is a critical check on government power. States are a critical [1:48:20] check on federal overreach. Courts enforce the rule of law. Congress passes laws and has the power of [1:48:26] the purse. We need transparency. We need oversight. We need a merit-based professional civil service. [1:48:33] The press and, of course, the people themselves, direct protesting, people exercising their First [1:48:39] Amendment rights. These are all part of a mosaic of democratic checks and balances that keep tyranny [1:48:45] at bay and keep good people in line as well. They're foundational elements of our political system [1:48:52] that help make our country free and secure. They are the things that DHS should be working to protect [1:48:59] and defend. They're the things that DHS itself should be modeling for the rest of us. Instead, [1:49:06] it seems too often they're doing the opposite. The policy of breaking into homes without a judicial [1:49:12] warrant is one of many signs that DHS has lost its way. DHS has forgotten its true mission. Thank you. [1:49:21] Thank you. You all have provided really powerful evidence that we need reform in this lawless, [1:49:30] out-of-control agency, and that our insistence on common-sense reforms is absolutely vital and well-grounded [1:49:41] in facts. As Ronald Reagan said, facts are a stubborn thing. We'll hear a lot tomorrow night, I'm sure, [1:49:50] a lot of rhetoric. But the reality is what you have told us today, the truth that you have told us about [1:50:01] this paramilitary force that is following orders and training that has to stop. But right now, [1:50:13] literally, again, as we speak, agents are being trained to do illegal misconduct. Close to 4,000 [1:50:26] during this fiscal year, a total of 12,000, according to ICE's budget, eventually will be the increase in [1:50:34] its workforce. Training, recruitment are the lifeblood of any agency, especially in law enforcement. And [1:50:52] a law enforcement that is reckless and lawless is making America less safe. I want to thank all of [1:51:01] you for being here today and thank everyone who's been watching. Thanks.