Lindsey Graham leads Senate hearing on sanctuary city policies Tuesday

[0:00] secret police. I can't believe that we now have secret police in America, but we do. [0:07] I well recall studying secret police back when I was in college, and the basic mark of them was [0:14] they'd show up in unmarked vans, unmarked uniforms, no judicial warrant, knock down doors without a [0:23] judicial warrant, grab people, detain them, and often prevent them from having access [0:30] in communication with families or lawyers. All of that's happening right now in America. [0:38] We now have a secret police called ICE, and it's a tremendous black spot on our nation [0:46] that this has happened under this administration. Freedom and privacy, laws, norms, and our [0:53] Constitution all shredded. Heartbreakingly, three American citizens have been killed by ICE. [1:04] Renee Good. [1:06] Alex Preddy in Minnesota, and Ruben Ray Martinez in Texas. Now, when ICE killed Ruben Ray Martinez, [1:18] they hid the fact, so most Americans aren't aware that a third individual was killed. But recent [1:25] reporting by CBS News obtained the body cam footage showing him being killed by an ICE officer [1:31] in March of 2025. Now, ICE's budget has been increased by a factor of seven. The way that it [1:42] operates has been... [1:43] been dramatically changed from the norms of law and justice in a democratic republic [1:48] to the strategy of secret police in an authoritarian regime. That would be a very good topic for [1:56] a hearing, given how much ICE's budget has increased, and we should be holding and examining [2:02] that question. [2:05] Wars come with enormous costs. We know that the wars in the Middle East and Afghanistan [2:13] and Iraq were staggering. In terms of... [2:14] In terms of... In terms of... In terms of... In terms of... In terms of... In terms of... In terms [2:15] of... In terms of... [2:16] In terms of blood. More than 7,000 Americans killed. More than 50,000 Americans injured, [2:25] often life-altering injuries. More than $6 trillion dollars of national treasure expended. [2:33] So, here we are. America is at war, that would be a good topic for a... [2:37] A budget hearing. 7 U.S. service members already killed. The Pentagon estimating $1 billion a day. [2:46] In fact, some of my... [2:50] Colleagues have said it's $2 billion a day, a big change in expenditures and revenues. [2:58] But none of those are the topics of today's hearing, the first we've had in a year. [3:01] But we do have this topic that my colleague has pointed out, sanctuary cities. [3:11] Well, sanctuary is a bit of a misnomer. [3:15] Sanctuary states and cities are not places that are a safe haven where immigrants cannot be detained or deported. [3:22] It refers to the decision that local police will serve as local police and not be commandeered to be assistant ICE agents. [3:35] These policies are rooted in the 10th Amendment of the Constitution. [3:39] And my colleagues across the aisle like to lean on states' rights. [3:44] It's certainly a state's right to refuse to have its local police commandeered to be assistant ICE agents. [3:51] Assistance now to ICE operating as a secret police in the United States. [3:56] And the idea that local police do local police work and ICE agents do ICE work is protected by our Constitution. [4:05] But there's also a public safety rationale behind it. [4:10] We know that when local police serve as local police, they build relationships with the community and decrease crime. [4:19] Research shows that jurisdictions that choose for local police to be local police and not assistants to a secret police, [4:29] refusing to be commandeered as a federal agent, they have a higher median household income, [4:37] they have less poverty, they have less reliance on public assistance, they have lower unemployment. [4:45] Those all sound like pretty good things to me. [4:48] And they have lower crime rates. [4:51] A 2022 study found that allowing local police to be local police, not commandeered to be assistant ICE agents, [4:59] results in a decrease in crime rates. [5:03] And that's why local police do local police work and ICE agents do ICE work. [5:06] And why? [5:08] Well, because in places where they do get commandeered to be assistant ICE agents, [5:12] they get less information, less trust, less ability to prosecute, and crime goes up. [5:19] So if my colleagues are all for crime, then persist in trying to violate the 10th Amendment and the wise wisdom of those states that see the wise separation with different roles. [5:32] And there's nothing about local police being local police. [5:34] And there's nothing about local police being local police. [5:36] That hampers federal immigration enforcement. [5:41] In fact, when people are arrested, fingerprints, data, crime, are all put into a national database. [5:49] So the federal government has all it needs. [5:51] And if it wants to make sure that a person is handed over at the time that a person is completing their sentence in a local or state institution, [6:03] all they have to do is get a judicial warrant. [6:05] A judicial warrant. [6:06] That's all that's required. [6:07] We've already seen the harm that happens. [6:09] When the executive branch tells the executive branch that it's okay to override Americans' civil rights. [6:17] The reason we have separation of powers in our Constitution, something being seriously eroded under this administration. [6:25] So as a reminder, each of these issues, slashing nutrition assistance, gutting health care, increasing the wealth of billionaires, [6:34] exploding deficits and debts, transforming ICE into a secret police, launching a war, [6:41] are all appropriate issues this budget committee should be focused on. [6:46] But the decision by cities and states to enhance public safety by having local police focus on local police issues is not a new change. [6:57] And so it's puzzling to me why that's the decision for this first hearing in a year. [7:03] What we know is that states and cities that let local police be local police do pretty damn well. [7:08] With that in mind, I've invited two expert witnesses to join us today. [7:13] Mr. David Beer from the Cato Institute, an expert on sanctuary policies, [7:18] and the broader concerns about the Homeland, Department of Homeland Security, [7:23] and its $170 billion for immigration enforcement with little accountability or oversight. [7:29] Joining him is Mr. Brendan Duke from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, [7:35] which focuses on critical budgetary concerns, including how the big ugly betrayal law [7:42] exploded our debt and raised the cost. [7:44] for working families. [7:45] So I appreciate both of you joining us today. [7:48] And while he's not able to join us for today's hearing, [7:52] Oregon Attorney General Dan Rayfield has written a statement, [7:56] and it explains how the home states, my home state, Oregon, [8:01] how their policies to let police be police has assisted and helped him and the law enforcement officers keep Oregon communities safe. [8:13] As he notes in his statement, Oregon's [8:17] police policies have peacefully coexisted with seven presidential administrations. [8:22] Mr. Chair, I ask you now's consent to enter his statement into the record. [8:26] And I also ask you now's consent to submit a statement for the record from the Law Enforcement Action Partnership, [8:35] which states, quote, [8:36] When local departments are pressured to prioritize federal immigration objectives, [8:41] officer time and resources are diverted from serious threats such as violent crime, [8:46] domestic violence and community safety concerns. [8:49] The result is a policing environment that is less effective and less trusted. [8:54] Creating a less effective and less trusted local public safety environment should not be the objective of the federal legislature. [9:03] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [9:05] Thank you very much. [9:06] So the novel approach, the Tenth Amendment protects sanctuary cities. [9:10] I hadn't heard that one, but we'll we'll talk about that later. [9:13] So our witnesses are Secretary, former Secretary Chad Wolf, [9:19] Acting Secretary of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security from 2019 to 2020, [9:25] and the current Homeland Security Immigration Chair of the American First Policy Institute. [9:31] Sheriff Michael Chapman has been the sheriff of Loudoun County, Virginia since 2012. [9:36] I think you're next door to Fairfax County and tell us about that. [9:39] Miss Jessica Vaughn is Director of Policy Studies at the Center for Immigration Studies, [9:46] where she has worked since 1992. [9:49] Welcome to you all. [9:50] If you'd rise and raise your right hand, please. [9:52] Do solemnly swear the testimony about to give this committee is the truth, [9:57] the whole truth and nothing but the truth. [9:59] Say up you got. [10:00] Welcome to you all. [10:05] Mr. Wolf. [10:06] Well, thank you, Chairman Graham and Ranking Member Merkley for the opportunity to testify before the committee today. [10:12] What we now commonly call sanctuary cities was born nearly 50 years ago in California and since then has exploded nationwide. [10:20] According to the Department of Justice, 12 states, District of Columbia, [10:24] as well as 22 other jurisdictions, [10:27] for now are officially considered sanctuary jurisdictions. [10:31] But as the chairman said, there are likely hundreds more. [10:34] According to a 2024 report, nearly 8 million illegal aliens resided in those jurisdictions, [10:40] and one in every three Americans or 120 million Americans live in sanctuary jurisdictions. [10:47] To be clear, this is not a localized phenomenon. [10:50] Ultimately, sanctuary policies affect every American. [10:54] And so while not all sanctuary jurisdictions have the exact same policies, [10:59] they all share a core belief that it is acceptable and even justified to ignore illegal immigration and violations of our immigration law. [11:10] But our law is clear. [11:11] Title 8, Section 1227 clearly states that aliens who enter the U.S. illegally or otherwise in the U.S. without lawful authorization are, in fact, removable. [11:23] That is the mission of ICE. [11:24] The law goes on to address those who harbor illegal aliens. [11:28] Title 8, Section 1324 states, [11:31] that any person who encourages or induces an alien to come, enter, or reside in the U.S., [11:37] knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact of such coming to, entry, or residence, [11:42] will be a violation of law. [11:44] Now, due to the Supremacy Clause and a long list of judicial opinions interpreting that, [11:50] states do not have the authority to pick and choose which federal laws are recognized and enforced. [11:57] And they do not have the authority to nullify federal laws by ignoring them [12:00] or proactively creating obstacles to their effectiveness. [12:03] Tragically, sanctuary policies are unleashing devastating consequences for the American people, [12:09] particularly those that live in those jurisdictions. [12:11] In California, again the birthplace of the sanctuary movement, [12:15] local politicians released 4,641 criminal aliens from local jails in 2025, [12:24] rather than handing them over to ICE for removal. [12:27] Those criminals included aliens that had committed homicide, assault, sexual predatory offenses, and burglary. [12:33] And just weeks ago, as the chairman indicated, in Fairfax County, [12:39] just miles from where we are today, [12:41] a criminal illegal alien with more than 30 arrests fatally stabbed a woman in the neck. [12:46] And that county, Fairfax County, has been a sanctuary for almost a decade, [12:51] and this is the tragic result. [12:53] Despite the dangerous nature of sanctuary jurisdictions, [12:56] there are some that will not stop until we become a sanctuary nation, [13:00] largely free from all border enforcement and immigration enforcement. [13:06] Calls for ICE-free zones, detention bans, and even an outright abolishment of ICE [13:11] are becoming increasingly common. [13:14] The evidence is clear. [13:15] To restore the rule of law, common sense, and public safety, [13:18] the era of sanctuary jurisdictions need to come to an end permanently. [13:23] Thankfully, President Trump and numerous states are taking action, [13:26] but legal challenges persist, [13:28] and sanctuary jurisdictions are still largely able to exist under current law. [13:34] Congress should take action. [13:36] In my written testimony, [13:37] I've outlined several recommendations to address this issue, [13:40] including the need to hold local officials accountable for knowingly violating the law. [13:46] Let us heed the lessons that we've learned from tragedies unfolding in cities like New York, [13:50] Los Angeles, Chicago, Seattle, San Francisco, and others. [13:55] The American people are safer when state and local governments cooperate with federal immigration agencies. [14:00] State and local governments should give our agents access to their jails and prisons [14:05] so that federal agents can screen prisoners, determine their immigration status, [14:09] process removable aliens, [14:11] and transfer custody to federal authorities once an alien is released. [14:15] This requires little effort from local governments, [14:18] yet under sanctuary policy, [14:19] state and local officials often slam the door shut on immigration officers. [14:26] I'd like to close with a simple question for those who continue to support sanctuary policies. [14:31] How many more Americans need to die at the hands of illegal aliens released by sanctuary jurisdictions? [14:38] Sanctuary cities must become an artifact of American history. [14:42] Rather than the ongoing safe haven for drug dealers, [14:45] narco terrorists, [14:46] murderers, [14:47] and dangerous people who threaten the safety and the security of the American people. [14:51] And let me just end on a comment made by the ranking member talking about secret police. [14:56] I think that's an outrageous comment. [14:58] I think the men and women of ICE are sworn law enforcement officers. [15:02] They do their job. [15:03] They're trained to do their job. [15:04] They have a very dangerous job in what they do. [15:07] And to continue to denigrate their job and how they go about it, [15:12] in such a dangerous environment, [15:14] I think is a disservice to them. [15:16] Mr. Chairman, since the testimony involves the comment I made, [15:21] I will just reply that if you don't want to be secret police, [15:26] don't act like secret police. [15:27] And I laid out the factual basis on exactly all the qualities that they are utilizing now [15:32] that are the hallmark of secret police around the world. [15:35] Thank you. [15:40] Chairman Graham, ranking member Senator Merkley, [15:42] and other members of the committee, [15:44] I am Land County Sheriff Mike Chapman, [15:45] and lead Virginia's most complex and largest full-service sheriff's office, [15:48] employing over 900. [15:50] Loudoun County sits just outside of Washington, D.C., [15:53] and is home to Leesburg, Middleburg, and the Dulles International Airport. [15:57] In Loudoun County, we celebrate a diverse community, [16:00] have an extraordinarily diverse workforce, [16:02] welcome everyone that's here legally, [16:05] and within our organization speak over 25 different languages. [16:09] I have served 47 years in this profession as a local police officer, [16:13] a career DEA special agent, [16:15] and for the past 14 years as an elected sheriff. [16:18] I am honored to sit before you today to discuss our mutual concern [16:22] of sanctuary cities and counties. [16:24] I am fortunate that Loudoun County is part of a traditional form of government [16:30] that enables a sheriff to conduct all law enforcement, [16:32] jail, and court operations under one roof, [16:35] essentially making me both a sheriff and a police chief. [16:38] This differs significantly from our surrounding jurisdictions [16:41] where appointed county, city, and town police chiefs are the norm. [16:46] Loudoun's form of government has enabled me to make decisions [16:49] in the best interests of our citizens free of mandated political agendas. [16:53] It has also allowed me to be the only Republican law enforcement leader [16:56] in all of Northern Virginia. [16:58] That responsibility is a double-edged sword. [17:01] While I don't answer to our 7-2 Democratic Board of Supervisors [17:04] for policy decisions, I do receive my budget from them. [17:08] This dichotomy causes significant friction, [17:11] making this a very challenging area. [17:13] Our system of government, however, provides our citizens with a diverse, [17:15] inclusive, and inclusive environment. [17:18] We endured a two-year battle with our Board of Supervisors [17:21] who pursued converting our Sheriff's Office into a police department [17:25] several years ago to exercise complete power and control over our agency. [17:30] We defeated this aggressive action because our citizens ultimately decided [17:34] that they prefer having a direct voice in who leads their public safety [17:37] through the election process. [17:41] This system and our common-sense approach to problems putting citizens first [17:45] is why the Sheriff's Office has been awarded [17:47] Favorite Government Service for two years running in our local newspaper [17:51] and why I've been selected as Favorite Public Servant for the past five years. [17:55] Regarding immigration, it is important to distinguish criminal aliens [17:58] who pose a threat to our community from immigrants here legally. [18:02] Consequently, while our surrounding jurisdictions choose to be sanctuaries [18:06] and not make this distinction and not honor ICE detainers, [18:10] we do just the opposite. [18:12] We have always cooperated with all of our state, local, and federal [18:15] counterparts, including ICE, and have routinely notified ICE [18:18] of those in our custody for criminal offenses who also had active detainers [18:22] issued by ICE regardless of the presidential administration. [18:26] We honor all detainers and warrants from other law enforcement jurisdictions [18:30] just as I would expect them to honor ours. [18:33] These practices likely contribute to why our agency has the lowest crime rate [18:37] in the entire Washington, D.C., Northern Virginia area [18:40] and is one of the safest counties in the entire United States. [18:44] That doesn't mean we're exempt from problems related to illegal immigration. [18:48] In 2024, we experienced five homicides, [18:52] three of which were committed by people here illegally. [18:55] Two of the three were committed by an MS-13 gang member. [18:58] In a neighboring county, one that refuses to contact ICE regarding criminals they arrest, [19:04] two homicides were committed in just over the past two months. [19:08] One occurred within 24 hours after the criminal who had an outstanding ICE detainer [19:12] on him was released from jail without any notification [19:15] to ICE. [19:16] The other police questioned why the subject had been released [19:19] and warned the prosecutor of danger, stating not if but when he would assault again, [19:24] resulting in a grandmother being stabbed to death at a bus stop. [19:28] This exemplifies what happens with sanctuary counties. [19:31] Law enforcement's hands are tied by politicians and political agendas. [19:35] Last year, I signed a 287 warrant service officer program agreement [19:40] which enabled us to hold a person arrested for a criminal violation [19:45] and an additional 48 hours for ICE in the event ICE couldn't pick them up immediately. [19:50] This enabled us to safely turn over criminal illegal aliens to ICE [19:54] who otherwise would have been released into our community [19:57] and could pose an additional threat to our residents. [20:00] This simple process has kept ICE from having to conduct street operations in our area. [20:05] I have told my community that not turning over criminal aliens to ICE [20:09] who could endanger our residents would be irresponsible and dangerous [20:13] to the very people I've sworn an oath against. [20:15] This process, which has worked well for us, [20:18] is likely to become far more challenging [20:20] considering the legislation currently in motion in Richmond. [20:23] Our governor rescinded the previous administration's executive order [20:26] which enabled jurisdictions to cooperate with ICE. [20:29] This was followed by legislation proposed by both houses of our General Assembly [20:33] which, if passed and signed by the governor, [20:35] will likely require judicial warrants from ICE for local law enforcement to act on anything. [20:40] Considering immigration is a civil offense, [20:43] this action will no doubt [20:44] force us to release detainees incarcerated by us [20:47] for criminal offenses unrelated to immigration [20:50] back into our communities where they could pose an additional threat to our citizens. [20:54] If this committee can exercise any leverage to influence a different outcome, [20:58] I am confident that law enforcement officials throughout Virginia [21:01] and other locations who are familiar with these challenges would be grateful. [21:06] We take our jobs seriously and want to keep all of our citizens safe. [21:10] Thank you for your attention and I look forward to answering any questions. [21:14] Good morning and thank you. [21:20] More than half of removable aliens [21:25] live in those jurisdictions that have sanctuary policies [21:29] intended to hinder immigration enforcement [21:32] and prohibit cooperation between state and local law enforcement [21:35] and federal immigration enforcement, [21:37] which is almost always a violation of federal law [21:41] and imposes enormous costs on taxpayers. [21:45] My organization has been tracking these policies since 2015, [21:48] and we maintain a list and map of jurisdictions [21:51] and policies on our website. [21:53] Those who promote sanctuary policies often claim [21:56] that they're needed to build trust with immigrants [21:59] so that they'll report crimes [22:01] or to avoid distracting local law enforcement agencies [22:04] with immigration enforcement. [22:06] These claims are disproven and disingenuous. [22:10] In fact, sanctuary policies are an irrational political response [22:14] based on disagreement with federal immigration policy [22:18] and opposition to enforcement of immigration laws. [22:21] The motivations for sanctuary policies are ideological and political, [22:26] but the cost of sanctuary policies is unfortunately very tangible. [22:31] First, the public safety costs. [22:34] And these are the most significant and problematic. [22:38] Between October of 2022 and February of 2025, [22:43] sanctuary jurisdictions refused more than 26,000 detainers [22:47] for criminal aliens. [22:49] Half of these were in California, [22:51] and large numbers also were released [22:53] in Illinois, Virginia, Massachusetts, and Connecticut. [22:57] The individual jails that released the most [23:00] were Santa Clara County, California, [23:02] Cook County, Illinois, [23:04] and Fairfax County, Virginia. [23:07] In 2024 alone, the Fairfax County Sheriff [23:10] declined to honor 744 detainers [23:14] for criminals that she had in custody. [23:17] That's more than two a day. [23:19] Some of these are gang members with long rap sheets [23:22] who get arrested over and over, [23:24] costing county taxpayers untold sums [23:26] in repeated crimes, prosecution, and incarceration. [23:30] Others are child predators and sex offenders. [23:33] Oregon is another place that protects criminal aliens [23:37] with strict sanctuary policies. [23:39] Last fall, ICE actually had to issue subpoenas [23:43] just to try to get four Oregon sheriffs [23:45] to share information on violent felons [23:48] who had been released [23:49] despite ICE detainers. [23:51] They had convictions for rape, assault, [23:54] child exploitation, and kidnapping, [23:56] among other crimes. [23:58] What possible reason can there be [24:00] for not cooperating with ICE for their removal? [24:03] It's certainly not a public safety reason. [24:05] And it seems as if they actually want to make [24:08] immigration enforcement as costly [24:10] and labor-intensive as possible. [24:13] Besides blocking law enforcement agencies [24:15] from cooperating with ICE, [24:17] sanctuary states typically have other policies [24:19] that attract illegal settlement [24:21] and thus burden taxpayers [24:23] with support of illegal immigrants. [24:25] Besides funding emergency health care [24:27] and schooling for all, [24:29] a number of sanctuary states go farther [24:31] and choose to provide Medicaid, [24:33] subsidized health insurance, nutrition assistance, [24:35] housing, and much more. [24:37] Illegal immigrants use these welfare programs [24:39] in large numbers. [24:41] My organization has found that over 60% [24:43] of illegal alien-headed households [24:45] are using at least one form [24:47] of welfare programs. [24:49] And usually more than one, [24:51] at a cost of tens of billions of dollars [24:53] to taxpayers. [24:55] This is why any resources spent [24:59] on immigration enforcement [25:01] actually save taxpayer money [25:03] in the long run. [25:05] It is my repeated observation [25:08] that the politicians who support sanctuary policies [25:11] are not moved by the costs [25:13] or the pain their policies [25:15] have caused American families. [25:17] Victims like Stephanie Minter, [25:20] Denny McCann, Drew Rosenberg, [25:23] Matthew Denise, Dominic Durden, [25:26] Laken Riley, and Kate Steinle, [25:28] and so many others. [25:30] These are priceless lives [25:32] lost to sanctuary policies. [25:34] And it's wrong to trivialize [25:36] their loss as a statistical blip. [25:38] Some states like South Carolina, [25:41] Florida, and Texas [25:43] have banned sanctuary policies. [25:45] The Trump administration is making progress [25:47] through outreach and litigation. [25:49] But while the federal government [25:52] likely cannot force sanctuary jurisdictions [25:54] to do the right thing, [25:56] it can create consequences [25:58] for sanctuaries. [26:00] Congress needs to create [26:02] additional consequences [26:04] like disqualification from certain federal funding [26:06] so that taxpayers [26:08] are not subsidizing sanctuaries. [26:10] Congress should also clarify [26:12] that state and local police [26:14] have the authority to cooperate [26:16] with immigration enforcement [26:18] so that they can't be blocked from doing it [26:20] by state or local laws. [26:21] In addition, those who are seriously harmed [26:23] as a result of sanctuary policies [26:25] should have some resource in the courts. [26:27] Thank you. [26:32] Chairman Graham, Ranking Member Merkley, [26:34] and distinguished members of the committee, [26:36] thank you for the opportunity to testify. [26:38] For half a century, [26:40] the Cato Institute's research has shown [26:42] that people, whatever their ancestry, [26:44] background, or birthplace, [26:46] can thrive in a free society. [26:48] Immigrants come to work [26:51] for us and with us [26:53] to make our lives better. [26:55] They work at higher rates [26:57] and are nearly twice as likely to start businesses here. [26:59] Immigrants have reduced [27:01] government deficits [27:03] by $14.5 trillion [27:05] over the last 30 years. [27:07] And yet, [27:10] Congress has not updated [27:12] the legal immigration system [27:14] during that entire time. [27:16] So just 3% [27:18] of all [27:20] legal immigrant applicants [27:22] were approved in 2024. [27:25] Rather than fix this broken system [27:27] the new administration [27:29] banned half [27:31] half of all [27:33] the legal immigrants who had made it [27:35] to the end of that process [27:37] including spouses and children [27:39] of U.S. citizens. [27:43] The fallout from this [27:45] flawed system [27:47] is left to our cities to manage. [27:49] In many areas, [27:51] 1 in 5 residents lives with someone [27:53] here illegally. [27:56] Mass deportation is not an option [27:58] for these places. [28:00] It is an attack on them. [28:02] It is taking Americans [28:04] Americans [28:06] away from their spouses, [28:08] parents, pastors, parishioners, employees, [28:10] employers, customers, [28:12] and friends. [28:15] It's not us Americans [28:17] versus them immigrants. [28:19] Cities know [28:22] immigrants are part of us. [28:24] They also know [28:27] that immigrants are here [28:29] to build, not destroy, [28:31] a mountain, literally [28:33] a mountain of research [28:35] proves that immigrants [28:37] and reasonable limits [28:39] on participation with ICE [28:41] do not increase crime rates. [28:43] Immigrants, even illegal immigrants [28:45] are half as likely [28:47] to be incarcerated for crimes in the United States. [28:49] According to DHS [28:51] only about 3% [28:53] of illegal immigrants [28:55] have any criminal convictions. [28:57] Immigrants reduce crime rates [28:59] which means [29:01] you're less likely [29:03] to be a victim of a crime. [29:06] Let me be clear. [29:09] When a non-citizen does victimize someone [29:11] they should be convicted, [29:13] imprisoned, [29:15] and deported. [29:17] But it is DHS [29:19] that has ignored this formula. [29:21] Just 28% [29:23] of the people detained by ICE [29:25] right now were convicted [29:27] of any crime at all. [29:30] This is no surprise. [29:32] DHS has abandoned [29:34] its public safety mission. [29:36] Immigrants, [29:38] immigrants of their legal status [29:40] just so that it could deport them. [29:42] Instead of protecting us, [29:44] DHS violates the Constitution. [29:46] Its masked agents invade our homes [29:48] without warrants. [29:50] They detain without evidence [29:52] and they deport without due process. [29:54] They intimidate, beat, [29:56] and even kill Americans [29:58] who protest. [30:00] They arrest legal immigrants [30:02] for writing opinion articles. [30:05] They lie to the courts [30:07] and ignore them. [30:10] With all this unconstitutional mayhem [30:12] Congress should not itself [30:14] violate the Constitution [30:16] by threatening local law enforcement [30:18] not for interfering [30:20] with ICE [30:22] but rather for following [30:24] their own local laws [30:26] that they swore an oath to uphold. [30:29] Under our system of federalism [30:31] and the Constitution [30:33] Congress can't force cities [30:35] to do its bidding [30:37] whether on immigration, guns, or the environment. [30:41] If Congress wants cities [30:43] to help DHS [30:45] it'll need those cities [30:47] to trust DHS. [30:49] But to get trust [30:51] you need to be trustworthy [30:53] and this DHS is not. [30:56] Consider this. [30:58] Before this administration [31:00] non-citizens were more likely [31:02] to report serious crimes [31:04] to the police [31:06] than the US-born population. [31:08] Now DHS is arresting [31:10] immigrant crime victims. [31:12] For example in Iowa [31:14] a shooting victim [31:16] who helped bring to justice [31:18] violent robbers [31:20] was arrested by ICE [31:22] before he had even healed [31:25] but since he had a pending charge [31:27] for an unpaid traffic ticket [31:29] ICE considers him a criminal. [31:31] This has caused [31:33] filings for U visas [31:35] for crime victims [31:37] working with police [31:39] to drop by 63%. [31:42] This is not making Americans [31:44] safer. [31:47] Congress must require [31:49] DHS to focus on real threats [31:51] and it must empower Americans [31:53] to sue federal agents [31:55] for violating the Constitution. [31:58] We need accountability [32:00] and constitutionality [32:02] to restore trust. [32:09] Thank you. [32:11] Thank you Chair Graham, [32:13] Ranking Member Merkley, [32:15] and members of the Budget Committee. [32:17] My name is Brendan Duke [32:19] and I'm Senior Director for Federal Budget Policy at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. [32:21] I'm a member of the [32:23] Federal Research and Policy Institute [32:25] that advances federal and state policies [32:27] to help build a country [32:29] where everyone has the resources they need to thrive [32:32] and share the nation's prosperity. [32:34] Let me first begin with an overview of our fiscal situation [32:36] for the Budget Committee. [32:38] Analysis typically focus on government spending [32:40] and revenue as shares of the economy. [32:42] In 2025 revenue was 17% [32:44] which is around the same level as in 1985. [32:47] Programmatic spending on the other hand [32:49] grew 7 tenths of a percentage point [32:51] since 1985. [32:53] That's a lot for more than 100% [32:55] of the increase in spending [32:57] because the country has gotten older. [33:00] That is nobody's fault. [33:02] I'm sure everyone on this committee wishes [33:04] they had the same knees or back they did 40 years ago. [33:06] Similarly, we all wish we had the demographics [33:08] and ratio of working age Americans [33:11] to retirees that we had 40 years ago. [33:13] The combination of population aging [33:15] and basic arithmetic means [33:17] we will face a choice [33:19] between raising revenue past the 17% of GDP level set [33:21] when the country's demographics [33:23] were more favorable [33:26] and reducing the rate of growth. [33:28] We all know that the 2020 boom [33:30] was a predictable and predicted development. [33:32] But at the beginning of the 21st century [33:34] we had a fiscal system that would deliver [33:36] adequate projected revenue to meet our needs. [33:39] Rounds of unpaid for tax cuts ruined that. [33:41] Take a look at projections for 2025 [33:43] that were made right before most of the Bush tax cuts [33:45] were made permanent [33:47] and before anyone even thought of the Trump tax cuts [33:49] and compare them to the actual 2025 numbers. [33:51] The 2025 deficit is much higher than projected in 2012 [33:53] despite programmatic spending being lower than projected. [33:55] The reason the deficit rose is revenue has come in [33:57] far lower than projected [33:59] as a result of those unpaid for tax cuts. [34:02] Importantly, Social Security, Medicare, [34:04] and other health programs such as Medicaid [34:06] and premium tax credits [34:08] also came in below CBS 2012 projections. [34:10] What all of this ultimately shows [34:12] is that it's entirely possible [34:14] to meet our commitments to seniors [34:16] while ensuring millions of low and moderate income Americans [34:18] have health care and food [34:20] if we are willing to raise the revenue to do so. [34:23] Instead, Congress made a different choice last summer. [34:25] The giant reconciliation bill [34:27] adds $3.4 trillion to the deficit [34:29] tilted to the wealthy [34:31] despite cutting SNAP and Medicaid [34:33] by about 20% by 2034. [34:35] CBO Moore recently estimated this figure [34:37] at $4.7 trillion over the new budget window [34:39] and including interest. [34:42] Notably, this $3.4 trillion cost [34:44] is higher than the cost of extending [34:46] all of the expiring tax cuts for all families [34:48] including for millionaires [34:50] but without the cuts to SNAP and Medicaid. [34:52] And it would have cost far less [34:54] than to extend the tax cuts [34:56] for the 98% of families making under $400,000 [34:58] without those cuts to SNAP and Medicaid. [35:00] In other words, the cuts to health care and food assistance [35:02] in the reconciliation bill [35:04] were entirely the result of Congress' choice [35:06] to load the bill with tax cuts [35:08] beyond the 2017 tax cuts [35:10] along with large increases for defense and immigration enforcement. [35:13] The result is millions of low-income families [35:15] will lose the ability to afford the high cost of groceries [35:17] or go to the doctor when they're sick. [35:19] Cuts that a vast majority of the public [35:21] staunchly oppose. [35:23] Moreover, the entire cost of the tax cut [35:25] was essentially offset by the Trump administration's [35:27] decision to raise taxes on imported goods. [35:29] Cutting income taxes [35:31] financed by taxes on imported goods [35:33] is a poor trade. [35:35] It is both economically inefficient [35:37] and further pushes the burden of financing the government [35:39] from high-income to low- and middle-income families. [35:42] In fact, the combo of the Trump administration's [35:44] tariff regime and the spending cuts [35:46] on the reconciliation bill [35:48] will leave households in the bottom 70% worse off. [35:50] The Supreme Court last month [35:52] handed the Trump administration an opportunity [35:54] to save face by ruling [35:56] that many of these sweeping tariffs were illegal. [35:58] Instead of using the court decision to back down [36:00] on a failed policy, Trump has instead replaced [36:02] the bill with a sweeping 10 to 15% [36:04] across-the-board tariff. [36:07] I think we can all agree that the steps required [36:09] to significantly improve the outlook, [36:11] whether through revenue increases, program cuts, [36:13] or both, can be politically challenging. [36:15] Immigration can reduce the need for those difficult measures. [36:17] Immigrants contribute to our communities [36:19] and the US economy in many ways. [36:21] In particular, they improve our fiscal outlook [36:23] by boosting our national birth rate [36:25] and they boost our workforce. [36:27] Last month, CBO evaluated the economic and fiscal effects [36:29] of the administration's anti-immigrant policies. [36:31] CBO cut in half the projection of the annual growth rate [36:33] to 10 years. [36:36] CBO now estimates that the 2035 working-age population [36:38] will be 2.4 million people smaller [36:40] than in its previous projection. [36:42] This has important fiscal costs, too. [36:44] CBO projects that the administration's actions [36:46] for reduced immigration will increase deficits [36:48] by $500 billion over 10 years, [36:50] principally by reducing the number of taxpayers. [36:52] Those higher deficits will make [36:54] deficit reduction that much harder, [36:56] adding to the damage from H.R.1. [36:58] Financing income tax tilted to the wealthy [37:00] by cutting programs and raising import taxes [37:02] while discouraging and disparaging immigrants [37:04] from the United States. [37:06] CBO is now looking at how the administration [37:09] can improve the economic and fiscal effects [37:11] of our country's fiscal imbalances. [37:13] Thank you. [37:17] Thank you all for your testimony. [37:19] We'll do five-minute rounds. [37:21] Mr. Beer, is it accurate that Barack Obama [37:23] deported 3 million people when he was president? [37:25] Those are total removals, [37:28] not people deported from the interior. [37:30] What does that mean? [37:32] Well, there are people deported from the borders [37:34] who never lived in the United States. [37:36] Were there people deported [37:38] at the border versus people in the interior? [37:40] I think Jessica would agree with this. [37:42] Listen, listen. [37:45] You don't want to answer a question, that's fine, [37:47] but don't tell me what's fair and unfair. [37:49] Bottom line, did he use judicial warrants [37:51] to deport anybody? [37:54] When he deported somebody in the interior, [37:56] did he have a judicial warrant? [37:58] No. [38:00] No. Why? Because it's stupid. [38:03] Mr. Wolf, tell me what would happen [38:06] if we adopted his approach, [38:08] you can't deport anybody unless [38:10] you have a judicial warrant. [38:12] Would that be effectively the end of deportation? [38:14] I think it would. [38:16] Don't you think that's what they want to do? [38:18] In part, absolutely. [38:20] I think these people over here want to stop deportation. [38:22] If you just look at the 1.5 [38:24] or 1.6 million individuals [38:26] here with a final order of removal, [38:28] they've been through the judicial process. [38:30] They've been to an immigration judge, [38:32] probably an immigration board of appeals, [38:34] and every time the judge says you don't have a legal [38:36] right to be here, if you had to get a judicial warrant [38:38] for each one of those, you'd be here for the next [38:40] 20 years trying to remove the individual [38:42] from the country. [38:44] But when a Democrat says you need [38:46] a judicial warrant to deport somebody, [38:48] they're turning... [38:51] Obama didn't do it, did he? [38:53] Not that I'm aware of, no. [38:55] No, he didn't because it's impossible. [38:57] You just stopped the whole system. [38:59] You're not trying to reform ICE. [39:01] You're trying to stop deportations. [39:03] If it were up to you, we'd have more illegal immigrants. [39:05] I hope people are paying attention [39:07] to what the hell's going on in this country. [39:10] Sheriff, tell me about what it's like [39:12] to live next to a sanctuary county. [39:14] We're the only ones that actually work with ICE [39:16] and are able to get people out [39:18] based on our 287G. [39:20] Turn them over to ICE. [39:22] We arrest them for criminal violations [39:24] outside of their immigration status. [39:26] They come and they pick them up and they're gone. [39:28] And I'll tell you, it's made a big difference. [39:30] Well, those laws that you're enforcing, [39:32] were they on the books before Trump became president? [39:34] Yes. [39:36] So all these laws were there before Trump became president [39:38] and Obama used them. [39:42] Now when we use them, all of a sudden we're Nazis. [39:44] I think people see through this. [39:46] Do you believe sanctuary city policy [39:48] is bad for crime, Mr. Chapman? [39:51] I do. [39:54] I think, you know, the ability, if you look at us [39:56] and compare it to our next door neighbor there, [39:58] they, I think, maybe have notified ICE [40:00] maybe about seven times. [40:02] Last year it was 184 times for us. [40:04] Those are people that could have been released back [40:06] to our community that could have committed other crimes [40:08] and we don't need that here. [40:10] It's irresponsible of me to [40:12] allow that to happen and let these people back [40:14] in our community. [40:16] Ms. Vaughn, what's your take [40:18] away about sanctuary city policy? [40:20] What damage has it done to our [40:22] country, if any? [40:25] Well, there's the cost of the lives [40:27] lost [40:29] to illegal aliens who were released [40:32] by sanctuary. That's priceless. [40:34] This case behind me, [40:36] Jelani, is that his name? [40:40] He should have been deported. Do you agree, Ms. Vaughn? [40:42] Absolutely, yes. [40:44] You know, you're talking about suing somebody who's been abused [40:46] by the government? Why don't we sue [40:48] local prosecutors who put this in motion? [40:50] I'd love to do that. [40:52] So I'm going to try to find a way to give victims [40:54] a chance to go to court when a local [40:56] prosecutor puts back [40:58] on the streets somebody with 30 [41:00] priors. [41:03] Do you support that idea, [41:05] empowering people? I do. I think [41:07] that that would be an effective deterrent to sanctuary [41:09] policies because they're adopted. [41:11] Make these counties and cities pay. [41:13] Right. They're adopted for political reasons, [41:15] not public safety reasons. [41:17] What's the upside of ignoring [41:19] federal law and keeping [41:21] people like this out of federal law? [41:23] Well, I think that's [41:25] a political choice. [41:27] Let me ask you this question. [41:29] There was a clerk of court, [41:31] Mr. Wolf, in Kentucky [41:33] that did not want to issue [41:35] a marriage license to a gay couple [41:37] in spite of the fact that the Supreme Court [41:39] said that gay marriage was legal. [41:41] And she went to jail. [41:43] Do you think that's a good outcome? [41:45] Should she have gone to jail for refusing to obey [41:47] the law? I think it's important to obey the law. [41:50] Yeah, I do too. And when I suggested [41:52] that the clerk of court, who had a [41:54] religious view, that she could not [41:56] in good conscience issue a marriage license [41:58] to a gay couple, even though [42:00] the law required, she needed to get [42:02] out of her job. I was, boy, what a great guy [42:04] I was then. Now the shoe's on the other [42:07] foot. All of a sudden, that's [42:10] not a good idea. [42:12] What you want to do is just [42:14] ignore the laws you don't like. [42:16] Is that where we're headed, Mr. Wolf? [42:18] I believe it is. Well, let's stop it now. [42:20] Let's end this madness. There is [42:22] no upside to sanctuary cities. [42:24] It's all downside. [42:26] Senator Merkley. Well, no upside [42:30] other than higher median household [42:32] income, less poverty, less reliance [42:34] on public assistance, lower unemployment, [42:36] and safer communities, all of [42:38] which seem pretty much on the upside [42:40] from my point of view. Mr. Duke, [42:42] what effect did the [42:44] big, beautiful bill, as [42:47] Trump called it, have on [42:49] debt over the 10-year budget window? [42:51] CBO shows that it adds [42:53] $4.7 trillion to the deficit. [42:55] That's a pretty whopping sum [42:57] for one piece of legislation. [42:59] And over 30 years? [43:01] It comes to $30 trillion. [43:03] Wow. What's our national [43:05] debt right now? [43:07] As a share of GDP, it's around 100%. [43:09] And that's about $30 trillion. [43:11] So another $30 trillion. [43:13] But if interest rates are [43:15] 1% higher, how much more does that add to the debt? [43:17] I can't believe I'm saying these numbers [43:19] because they sound like they're from Star Trek, but $50 trillion. [43:21] Yeah, $50 trillion. [43:23] Well, thanks a lot, folks, for passing [43:25] a bill that's going to add $30 to $50 [43:27] trillion to our national debt. [43:29] Suppressing our investments in healthcare, [43:31] housing, education, public safety, [43:33] transportation, [43:35] all important things for the [43:37] welfare of America. [43:39] And, Mr. [43:42] Duke, how did that bill affect [43:44] the size of the working age population? [43:46] Yeah, so [43:48] basically the combination of [43:50] that, so first that bill [43:52] funded ICE a lot, [43:54] as you showed. And [43:56] CBO says that it is going to [43:58] shrink the number of people [44:00] who are in the workforce because [44:02] they are going to leave the country [44:04] or be in detention camps. That [44:06] directly shrinks our tax base. [44:10] Okay, so that has an [44:12] overall effect on the GDP of [44:14] our nation? [44:16] Fewer working people means a smaller GDP. [44:18] Okay. Mr. Beer, [44:21] in states or cities that have [44:23] policies, referred to as sanctuary [44:25] policies, but more [44:27] accurately that dedicate local [44:29] police to doing local police work, [44:31] does those [44:35] locations fully cooperate [44:37] in detaining somebody when there is a [44:39] judicial warrant for them? Yes, absolutely. [44:41] They turn over anyone subject to [44:43] a criminal matter [44:45] upon notice by the federal government [44:47] that they have a warrant. So those jurisdictions [44:49] have entered into the FBI federal [44:51] database fingerprints, [44:53] arrest record, what that [44:55] person is being detained for, how long [44:57] they are being sentenced. The federal government has all that information. [44:59] Exactly, yes. [45:01] So they could go and get those individuals [45:03] anytime they want. And in this case, [45:05] in Virginia, for example, the Lake and [45:07] Riley Act, which they all supported, [45:09] directed the Department of Homeland Security [45:11] to get those people, and instead of getting [45:13] those people, they're out on the streets profiling [45:15] random Hispanic workers going to [45:17] their jobs. So it's a total [45:19] misdirection to blame [45:21] the county when the Department of Homeland [45:23] Security isn't even following the law that they [45:25] passed. Why not? [45:27] Since they could get that warrant and [45:29] pick up those individuals who have created violent [45:31] crimes. Because the White [45:34] House has created an arrest [45:36] quota that's the only [45:38] metric for success for them. How many [45:40] arrests can you make today? And [45:42] the fastest way to make arrests is [45:44] indiscriminate raids, indiscriminate [45:46] profiling of people on the street. [45:48] That's what's led to this huge jump in [45:50] the number of people and the, frankly, [45:52] chaos that we're seeing [45:54] in cities across the country. [45:56] So there was a chart in your longer [45:58] written testimony [46:00] showing that only 5% of the individuals [46:02] booked by ICE have ever [46:04] had a violent criminal conviction. [46:07] Yeah, and not only that, if you look at my [46:09] written testimony as well, I talk [46:11] about how the Department of Homeland Security [46:13] has its own internal [46:15] threat assessment [46:17] that they assign to each individual who comes [46:19] into their custody. And those [46:21] people have to prioritize. They [46:23] actually have a mandate. They can't be all political. [46:25] They have to figure out who is actually [46:27] a threat. And of those people, [46:29] only 10% received the highest [46:31] threat level, and 70% [46:33] were deemed by the Department [46:35] of Homeland Security [46:37] to not be a threat at all. [46:39] So how does that [46:42] match the campaign [46:44] rhetoric about we're going to go after the worst [46:46] of the worst, which I think 100% [46:48] of Americans supported [46:50] the idea that anyone who had created a violent crime [46:52] should be [46:54] investigated, should be prosecuted, [46:56] should be convicted and incarcerated, [46:58] should be deported. [47:00] But those numbers don't match that. [47:02] Great campaign messaging, [47:04] great messaging for [47:06] a $200 million ad campaign [47:08] by the DHS secretary, [47:10] not based in reality at all. [47:12] On day one of this administration, [47:14] they rescinded all policies [47:16] that forced ICE to focus [47:18] on violent offenders [47:20] and people with criminal convictions. [47:22] So the exact opposite [47:24] of what they told [47:26] the citizens they were going to do during the campaign. [47:28] It was a lie, just like it was a lie [47:30] about all the things they said about Renee Good [47:32] and Alex Preti and all the other people [47:34] that they've killed over the last year. [47:36] And you recommend [47:39] in your testimony [47:41] that there be a private right of action [47:43] when individuals' civil rights [47:45] are violated. [47:47] Now, my understanding is that [47:50] if local police or state police [47:52] violate your civil rights, [47:54] you have a cause of action against that. [47:56] Is that correct? [47:58] Yeah, under Title 42, Section 1983, [48:00] there's a private right of action [48:02] against state and local, [48:04] but not against the feds. [48:06] And this is a critically important issue [48:08] because right now, [48:10] they're recruiting all these [48:12] state and local officers [48:14] into essentially the ICE framework, [48:16] which gives them immunity [48:18] against all constitutional violations [48:20] that they carry out while working [48:22] in conjunction with the federal government. [48:24] So we need to expand that to cover [48:26] federal officers as well [48:28] to make sure we don't have this immunity [48:30] creep into every police department [48:32] in America, which is their goal, [48:34] including through this bill that we're talking about today. [48:36] So when the Vice President said [48:38] ICE agents have [48:40] absolute immunity [48:42] in violating people's civil rights, [48:44] he was right. [48:46] Effectively, yes. Right now, as the law stands. [48:48] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [48:51] Just one point of clarification. [48:53] Is it your position that a non-violent [48:55] illegal immigrant shouldn't be deported? [48:57] My position is that [49:00] we should give people who are peaceful people [49:02] a path to citizenship. [49:04] You endorsed that principle for many years, Senator. [49:06] So no matter how many people come? [49:09] No, it should be based on [49:11] whether people have [49:13] a neutral basis to remain in the United States, [49:15] which is whether they contribute [49:17] to this country or whether they're a threat to it. [49:19] I guess we should have all law enforcement [49:21] I guess what you don't understand [49:23] and I don't want to [49:25] I'm familiar with the Gang Evade Bill [49:27] shut down illegal immigration. We did away with the magnets. [49:29] We're going to give people [49:31] a chance who've been here for a long time. [49:33] Your bill had the exact opposite [49:35] approach of what this Department of Homeland Security [49:37] is carrying out. Listen, listen. [49:39] For four years, Biden [49:41] obliterated the border [49:44] 11 million people came in [49:46] and the bill I was working on [49:49] would have prevented that. [49:51] He took everything we were trying to do [49:53] to stop illegal immigration [49:55] be fair to the ones here [49:57] and blew a hole in it [49:59] and now we got 11 million more [50:01] and you want to give them amnesty? [50:03] They'll never stop. [50:05] Senator Grassley. [50:08] The United States is a country based on the rule of law [50:10] and it's against the law [50:12] to enter a country without our permission [50:14] and I compliment the [50:17] Chairman for having this hearing [50:19] and his strong statements [50:21] and his strong questioning. [50:23] We all know that our country [50:25] benefits from legal immigration [50:27] and [50:29] entering our country. [50:32] This is a budget committee and my [50:34] questions will basically be [50:36] based upon [50:38] budget impact and cost to our [50:40] government. Mr. Wolf [50:43] there are some legal [50:45] limitations that prevent states [50:47] from completely excluding [50:49] illegal immigrants from access [50:51] to some of their government [50:53] programs. What are [50:55] those limitations and what [50:57] immediate steps considering those [50:59] limitations can the federal [51:01] government take to minimize [51:03] the fiscal burden [51:05] of sanctuary jurisdiction? [51:07] Yeah I think when we talk about [51:09] public benefits whether they're federal or state [51:11] benefits I think and the Chairman [51:13] I believe mentioned this earlier these are strong [51:15] magnets of why folks [51:17] decide to come to the United States [51:19] legally. Now there's a variety of [51:21] different reasons on for them to do [51:23] so but if they're able to stay [51:25] in a jurisdiction that shields them [51:27] from law enforcement that provides [51:29] public benefits particularly at the state level [51:31] but also at the federal level both need [51:33] to be looked at that continues to [51:35] incentivize those individuals to come [51:37] and to stay and so when you look [51:39] at how to secure the country [51:41] it's not only border security it's a [51:43] big part of it but it's also getting [51:45] at these pool factors and those public [51:47] benefits are a big part of that. I think the [51:49] American people are generous I think [51:51] they want to help people that need [51:53] true help but to have [51:55] folks that come here to the country [51:57] illegally choose to stay illegally [51:59] have no protections under [52:01] U.S. law and continue to get public benefits [52:03] I think that's where the American people draw the line. [52:05] Ms. Vaughn sanctuary [52:08] jurisdiction frame their policy [52:10] as squarely a matter [52:12] of local policy but [52:14] we know these policies have both [52:16] broader public safety [52:18] and fiscal effects on areas [52:20] beyond their border so [52:22] what are some examples of the [52:24] cost to both the federal government and the [52:26] state government caused by [52:28] sanctuary policies that are [52:30] often forgotten or [52:32] overlooked with emphasis [52:34] upon forgotten or [52:36] overlooked. Well I [52:39] think too many of the victims of these policies [52:41] have been forgotten [52:43] I named a few of them but [52:45] they these [52:47] these families are still [52:49] suffering silently [52:51] another [52:53] forgotten cost is the cost of [52:55] providing benefits [52:57] taxpayer funded social services [52:59] to illegal alien households [53:01] and federal law [53:03] currently allows states to [53:05] choose to do that if their legislature [53:07] approves it [53:09] at enormous cost and some of those [53:11] dollars are federal dollars so all [53:13] of us as Americans share the cost [53:15] burden of that arrangement [53:17] and congress can do something about that [53:19] there's also the cost of [53:21] the erosion of the integrity [53:23] of our immigration system [53:25] when individual [53:27] states and jurisdictions [53:29] local jurisdictions [53:31] can obstruct the enforcement [53:33] of federal laws that [53:35] are passed by congress without [53:37] consequence even [53:39] though they are many of these sanctuary policies [53:41] are clearly in violation of [53:43] section 1373 [53:45] and 1644 of the immigration [53:47] act and so [53:49] it's a slap in the [53:51] face to legal immigrants to [53:53] have say allow these policies [53:55] that shield [53:57] individuals from immigration [54:00] enforcement most of whom are criminal aliens [54:02] immigrants don't want to live with [54:04] these policies either [54:06] something like 70% of the American [54:08] public is opposed to sanctuary [54:10] policies for all of these reasons [54:12] Mr. Wolf if you can answer [54:14] this question [54:16] it's in regard to the [54:19] 11 million people that came here under [54:21] Biden and Harris [54:23] over that period [54:25] of time did [54:27] illegal immigrants seek [54:29] out sanctuary jurisdictions [54:31] for safe harbor and is there [54:33] any evidence to back up [54:36] your statement well I think if you look [54:38] historically where illegal aliens [54:40] reside now they reside [54:42] all across the United States but if you were to [54:44] do a heat map you would see them [54:46] the majority of them in places [54:48] like New York City Chicago [54:50] Los Angeles and others that have [54:52] these sanctuary jurisdictions [54:54] so yes I do believe over time [54:56] that illegal aliens [54:58] do tend to [55:00] go to these types of jurisdictions [55:02] I got six seconds [55:04] left [55:06] Sheriff Chapman what are some [55:08] examples of state and local [55:10] cost increases [55:12] those jurisdictions [55:14] incur well I look at the funding that [55:16] goes to our state and local the [55:18] folks that surround us [55:20] and folks that do not support [55:22] you know the immigration [55:24] policies here and [55:26] the funding that they get and I think [55:28] if that was [55:30] curtailed maybe they might [55:32] look at this a lot more [55:34] seriously but it is a [55:36] cost to us it's a cost to putting people out there [55:38] you're talking about more homicides what you're [55:40] talking about we've had our share [55:42] locally here and certainly as the chairman [55:44] brought up and [55:46] we've had them in Loudoun County and [55:48] it's a human factor that is really [55:50] important here we want to keep our people safe [55:52] and keep them alive [55:55] thank you chairman [55:57] I apologize [55:59] thank you thank you [56:01] Mr. Chairman [56:03] Mr. Wolf if I could start with you [56:05] you would agree that in America [56:07] people have the right to [56:10] peacefully protest under the first amendment [56:12] right correct you would agree that [56:14] people have the constitutional right to due process [56:16] right correct would you [56:19] agree with Kristi Noem [56:21] who characterized Renee Good [56:23] as a domestic terrorist is [56:25] Renee Good a domestic terrorist in your view [56:27] I've been very clear on this point [56:29] when that incident occurred as well as [56:31] the pretty incident as well as to [56:33] let that investigation play out before [56:35] any comments are made about the motives [56:37] of any of the individuals involved including [56:39] the law enforcement officers so clearly [56:41] it was wrong to label them [56:43] domestic terrorists right again I don't [56:45] I'm not at the department I don't know [56:47] what the information she had if you're asking [56:49] me my opinion I would have waited till the [56:51] investigation play out before I rendered any decision [56:53] so you think it's still an open question [56:55] as to whether or not they're domestic terrorists [56:57] again I'm going to let the investigation play out [56:59] it sounds like you do which I think you know [57:01] the country has seen the videos [57:03] okay so [57:05] I find it outrageous that you would sit [57:07] here today and hold [57:09] open the idea that they were [57:11] domestic terrorists their parents [57:13] and their loved ones deserve [57:15] an apology from the U.S. [57:17] government and I find it outrageous [57:19] that you're taking the position that you [57:21] are here today I'm not taking that position yes you are [57:23] by taking no position and leaving [57:25] on the table the notion that they're domestic [57:27] terrorists you are taking a position [57:29] Mr. Beer thank you [57:31] for emphasizing the big lie [57:33] that what the Trump administration [57:36] is doing is going after the worst of the worst [57:38] as Senator [57:40] Merkley pointed out and as you've [57:42] shown that's just [57:44] not true I mean nobody [57:46] wants people who are here illegally [57:48] committing violent crimes but [57:50] the overwhelming majority [57:52] of people who are [57:54] in detention right now by [57:56] ICE's own admission posed [57:58] no risk to public safety is that right [58:00] that's right over 70% were given no [58:02] threat level at all they could be released [58:04] right now without a threat to the public [58:06] so this is just such a big lie [58:08] I mean that's what we're seeing playing out [58:11] in this forum and out of the White [58:13] House from people like Stephen Miller and the President [58:15] of the United States could you talk about another [58:17] big lie we do know that [58:19] the so-called big beautiful bill [58:21] as Republicans called it increased [58:23] the debt massively like over [58:25] four trillion bucks right [58:27] they gave tax cuts to [58:29] billionaires permanently they cut [58:31] health programs they cut [58:33] food safety food [58:35] programs they had a walloping [58:38] increase for ICE like seven [58:40] times its regular budget [58:42] and at the same time [58:45] we hear people like Stephen Miller and others [58:47] claiming that [58:49] it's actually immigrants [58:51] who are the cause of increasing [58:53] our deficits and [58:55] debt in fact they've said [58:57] that immigration is [58:59] the cause of the growing national debt [59:01] and immigrants take more from the country [59:03] than they contribute now Mr. Beer [59:05] you've looked at this question very closely [59:07] could you just respond to what I think [59:09] is the second big lie [59:11] over the last 30 years we looked at all the [59:13] government budgets federal state and local combined [59:15] immigrants reduced deficits [59:17] by 14 and a half trillion [59:19] dollars which is about a third of all [59:21] the total deficits during that [59:23] period of time and it's easy to understand [59:25] why because they work at 12 percentage [59:27] points higher than the national [59:29] average they use less benefits [59:31] because they're subject to [59:33] constraints unique barriers to [59:35] applying for those benefits in particular [59:37] social security and [59:39] Medicare where they're sub those are by [59:41] far our largest programs and they're not [59:43] eligible for those at all if they're [59:45] here in the country illegally [59:47] or if they came legally and they don't have a sufficient [59:49] work history to qualify [59:51] so you have clear [59:53] reasons for believing that [59:55] they are reducing the deficits and debt [59:57] they are a benefit to this country and we need [59:59] more people who are going to contribute [1:00:01] in the future as our population [1:00:03] ages could you amplify a little [1:00:05] more on the issue of Medicare [1:00:07] and Social Security because [1:00:09] those you know trust funds [1:00:11] in just a couple years there [1:00:13] won't you know be enough to pay out [1:00:15] full on the dollar for Social Security Medicare [1:00:17] as you pointed out there are many [1:00:19] immigrants that are paying in to that but [1:00:21] not paying out so could you just [1:00:23] elaborate on that according to the [1:00:25] Social Security Administration we need about [1:00:27] 35 million more workers [1:00:29] in order to keep revenues equal [1:00:31] to expenses by the middle of the [1:00:33] 2030s so we are [1:00:35] at a position right now where immigration [1:00:37] is not going to solve it obviously it's [1:00:39] not going to solve it but it is moving [1:00:41] us in the right direction these are people who [1:00:43] are showing up they're ready to work they're [1:00:45] often prime age individuals who are ready [1:00:47] to enter the labor force so it's a huge [1:00:49] benefit fiscally to the United [1:00:51] States to have these people who want to contribute [1:00:53] to our country thank you and thank [1:00:55] you for exposing two [1:00:57] of the big lies coming out of the [1:00:59] Trump administration thank you thank you [1:01:02] the information we have is that [1:01:04] 64% of the people [1:01:07] encountered by [1:01:09] either convicted or pending criminal [1:01:11] charges so if somebody's wrong we'll [1:01:13] find out who's lying [1:01:16] yeah let's let's talk about [1:01:18] some realities here [1:01:20] the ranking member talked about [1:01:22] the funding for ICE rose dramatically [1:01:24] this first year the [1:01:27] Trump administration well this is why [1:01:29] because for the previous four years [1:01:31] President Biden and the Democrats [1:01:33] opened up the border now [1:01:36] I like this chart first of all save the [1:01:39] president's life but the other [1:01:41] reason I like this chart is it shows cause and [1:01:43] effect and [1:01:46] the catalyst [1:01:48] for this explosion in [1:01:50] illegal immigration really [1:01:53] was deferred action on childhood arrival [1:01:55] that's what sparked this that created the first [1:01:57] incentive for people to come to this [1:02:00] country illegally that started the first wave [1:02:02] now back in 2014 [1:02:04] these were these were massive numbers I remember [1:02:06] President Obama calling 2000 a day [1:02:08] was you know a humanitarian crisis [1:02:10] I think under Biden we had [1:02:12] over 14,000 in a day [1:02:14] average so [1:02:18] Mr. Wolf you were [1:02:20] acting secretary trying to clean up the Obama [1:02:22] mess you know I remember leading [1:02:25] a delegation down to McAllen Texas [1:02:27] during the Obama administration [1:02:29] where we looked at the facility they set up [1:02:31] and everybody Democrat Republican [1:02:33] were singing the praises of DHS [1:02:35] for kind of skirting the rules and [1:02:37] establishing a facility that would [1:02:39] keep the children safe as they were [1:02:41] being encountered and detained [1:02:43] across the border because of the incentive of DACA [1:02:45] couple years later on the Trump administration [1:02:48] that exact same facility [1:02:50] all of a sudden now the Democrats are [1:02:52] calling that kids in cages [1:02:55] first of all will you just confirm the fact that [1:02:57] that was the exact same facility that we [1:02:59] praised in 2014 and all of a [1:03:01] sudden 2017 those are kids [1:03:03] in cages that's correct those were border [1:03:05] patrol facilities I think out of your [1:03:12] department last year we [1:03:14] got a memo that said of the [1:03:16] millions and nobody knows exactly [1:03:18] how many millions came in here [1:03:20] I mean this is a wide open border [1:03:22] I mean this is so out of whack [1:03:24] 650,000 people [1:03:26] that are at large in America [1:03:28] have committed crimes [1:03:30] 15,000 [1:03:33] murderers [1:03:36] 20,000 rapists [1:03:38] Mr. Speer you're shaking your head [1:03:42] they're not at large the murderers [1:03:44] are in prison [1:03:46] they're not detained [1:03:48] yes they're detained by the [1:03:50] state they're not detained by ICE [1:03:52] they're in prisons right now [1:03:54] they're ready to be deported [1:03:56] Ms. Vaughn have you kept track [1:03:58] of how many people have been murdered [1:04:00] raped victims of [1:04:03] vehicular homicide at the [1:04:05] hands of somebody that the Biden administration [1:04:07] led in this country I wish there were [1:04:09] a way to do that but so many law enforcement [1:04:11] agencies do not keep track of [1:04:13] the immigration status of people in their custody [1:04:15] they don't want to know would you say [1:04:17] it's in the hundreds yes [1:04:19] thousands yes [1:04:22] tens of thousands [1:04:24] it's one [1:04:26] data point that I do know is that at a [1:04:28] certain point a few years ago ICE [1:04:30] determined that there were [1:04:32] 10,000 [1:04:34] deportable criminal aliens [1:04:36] who were released by [1:04:38] sanctuary policies who subsequently [1:04:40] reoffended within 18 [1:04:42] months so where is the outrage [1:04:44] on the other side of the aisle to [1:04:46] those victims and their families [1:04:49] we had a hearing [1:04:51] and in [1:04:53] Homeland Security and they're talking about [1:04:55] the trained activists [1:04:58] the number was very large but I couldn't [1:05:00] believe it trained activists that [1:05:03] are trained to basically [1:05:05] interfere and obstruct with [1:05:07] the legal law enforcement [1:05:10] actions and I made the comment [1:05:12] I can't imagine encouraging [1:05:15] my supporters first of all to get trained [1:05:17] to obstruct justice much less [1:05:19] then go ahead and do it put yourself in harm's [1:05:21] way knowing [1:05:23] people are going to potentially get hurt well people [1:05:26] did get hurt three people [1:05:29] lost their lives and now [1:05:32] the other side exploits those martyrs [1:05:34] while they completely ignore [1:05:36] the thousands let's face it [1:05:38] it's thousands of the [1:05:40] Lake and Riley's and those individuals [1:05:43] where's the outrage [1:05:45] to the crimes committed by [1:05:47] that massive wave and of course [1:05:50] I didn't want to have to spend money [1:05:52] on ICE but what are you going to do [1:05:54] and trying to clean up this [1:05:59] mess I mean it's difficult [1:06:01] enough for you to clean up Obama's mess [1:06:03] try and clean up Biden's mess [1:06:05] and rather than getting help from the other side [1:06:07] no they trained activists [1:06:09] to obstruct trying to clean up [1:06:12] that mess that's the reality of the situation [1:06:14] that's why I agree and I appreciate this [1:06:16] hearing we have to end sanctuary cities [1:06:18] because it's just another incentive [1:06:20] a massive incentive for more illegal [1:06:22] immigration and the next time Democrats get in power [1:06:24] they'll open it up again thank you Mr. Chairman [1:06:26] Senator Whitehouse [1:06:28] thank you Chairman [1:06:30] let me first observe for my [1:06:32] colleagues here that [1:06:34] sanctuary city is a political term [1:06:36] it's not a technical term [1:06:39] as [1:06:41] my own witness has acknowledged [1:06:43] and it's [1:06:45] important to get things right [1:06:47] so I want to just describe [1:06:49] what's happening in Rhode Island in Rhode Island [1:06:51] our [1:06:53] federal district court has [1:06:56] decided that local [1:06:58] and state police officers [1:07:00] can be held liable if they hold [1:07:04] a person [1:07:07] under an ICE detainer without [1:07:10] a proper warrant [1:07:12] that the warrant requirement actually [1:07:14] applies and [1:07:17] particularly when you're dealing with [1:07:19] someone's freedom detention [1:07:22] and that decision is not a [1:07:24] fluke it has been upheld by the [1:07:26] United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit [1:07:28] so in my state [1:07:31] the District of Rhode Island from a federal point of view [1:07:33] and in my circuit [1:07:35] the United States Circuit Court of Appeals [1:07:37] for the First Circuit it is [1:07:39] binding law that state [1:07:42] and local officials [1:07:44] who hold somebody under an ICE detainer [1:07:46] where ICE hasn't bothered to get a warrant [1:07:48] can be held civilly liable [1:07:51] so we need to face [1:07:54] that fact because that's actually [1:07:56] binding federal law [1:07:58] the second comment I want to make is about [1:08:00] the behavior of ICE agents [1:08:03] when they operate in Rhode Island [1:08:05] those of you on the Judiciary Committee [1:08:07] will remember me describing the set of [1:08:09] affairs to then Secretary [1:08:11] Noem so masked agents [1:08:14] appear in the Rhode Island [1:08:16] Superior Court [1:08:18] courthouse they are [1:08:21] operating in violation of an [1:08:23] agreement that they have with the [1:08:25] court not to operate [1:08:27] in that courthouse they are [1:08:31] operating with cameras [1:08:33] in violation of a [1:08:36] courthouse rule that [1:08:38] forbids taking photographs [1:08:41] they are pursuing [1:08:45] a 30 plus year old individual [1:08:47] whom they have mixed up with a [1:08:50] high school intern [1:08:53] who is interning for one of our [1:08:55] state court judges [1:08:58] the state court judge is going to [1:09:01] take the intern back to high school [1:09:03] so they walk out to the [1:09:06] judge's car if the ICE [1:09:09] agents hadn't bothered to figure [1:09:11] out who the judges were in the courthouse [1:09:13] when they got to the car [1:09:16] parked in a judge's [1:09:18] only spot they had [1:09:21] the information necessary to deduce [1:09:23] that this might be a judge [1:09:25] but rather than accept the [1:09:30] judge's representations that he was returning [1:09:32] an intern to the high school [1:09:34] I'll take out the full F-bomb [1:09:36] because they used the actual full word [1:09:38] they told the judge [1:09:40] we're going to smash your F-bomb [1:09:43] into your effing windows [1:09:46] and we're going to drag you out of your [1:09:48] effing car if you don't turn over [1:09:51] this intern to us [1:09:58] and then they grabbed the intern [1:10:00] and they took him into another car for half an hour [1:10:02] and figured out that the high school intern [1:10:04] was not the 30 plus year old person [1:10:06] they purported to be looking for [1:10:12] why would regular law enforcement [1:10:14] why would those sheriffs [1:10:16] in the courthouse [1:10:18] want to cooperate with an agency [1:10:21] whose legal [1:10:24] whose law enforcement behavior [1:10:26] is so wildly irresponsible [1:10:28] and unprofessional [1:10:31] it's hard to imagine [1:10:34] and when I asked Secretary Noem [1:10:37] about the problem of de-confliction [1:10:39] I think pretty much everybody in law enforcement [1:10:41] understands what de-confliction is [1:10:43] even if the state police aren't cooperating [1:10:45] with the Bristol police [1:10:47] when they run in to do a raid in Bristol [1:10:49] they will let the Bristol police know [1:10:51] that they're going to do a raid [1:10:53] so that when calls come in about cars in the street [1:10:55] or people with guns or whatever [1:10:57] the local police department know what's going on [1:10:59] and it's elementary stuff [1:11:02] that is taught to law enforcement [1:11:04] and yet ICE refuses to de-conflict [1:11:06] and the secretary [1:11:10] didn't know the difference [1:11:12] between de-confliction and cooperation [1:11:14] so clearly there's a massive hole [1:11:16] in the way in which DHS [1:11:18] thinks about this stuff [1:11:20] and it is in that environment [1:11:22] that I think a lot of [1:11:24] sensible decisions are being made [1:11:26] by local police chiefs [1:11:28] about whether they want to cooperate [1:11:30] with an organization that behaves [1:11:33] in unreasonable [1:11:35] and unprofessional ways [1:11:37] that threatens judges with violence [1:11:39] and that refuses to even [1:11:43] give them the courtesy [1:11:45] of de-conflicting when they're operating [1:11:47] in their jurisdiction [1:11:49] thank you chairman [1:11:53] thank you, Senator Cornett [1:11:56] Mr. Chairman I think President Trump [1:11:58] has done it again [1:12:01] exercising almost magical powers [1:12:03] turning Democrats into budget hawks [1:12:06] it's an amazing thing to behold [1:12:09] and of course they reflexively oppose [1:12:11] everything that he proposes [1:12:13] whether it's standing to honor law enforcement [1:12:15] and public safety and not illegal immigrants [1:12:17] whether it's eliminating [1:12:19] the threat of nuclear weapons [1:12:22] and the number one state sponsor of terrorism [1:12:24] they take the side of the [1:12:26] state sponsor of terrorism [1:12:28] it's just amazing to me [1:12:30] to behold [1:12:38] Sheriff, I was struck by the ranking member's [1:12:41] introduction to his comments [1:12:43] he said let the police [1:12:45] be the police [1:12:47] and I assume that would extend to other law enforcement [1:12:49] officers like you and the sheriffs [1:12:51] and other folks who maintain public safety [1:12:53] but is the collective role [1:12:56] and job of law enforcement officers [1:12:58] like yourself to protect public safety [1:13:00] it is [1:13:03] and I think we all need to work together [1:13:05] one of the things that was just left out of the testimony [1:13:07] just provided is the fact that [1:13:09] communication is important to this [1:13:11] and we work very well [1:13:13] with our counterparts and a lot of times [1:13:15] it's because the [1:13:17] chiefs are driven by the politicians [1:13:19] above them that don't allow [1:13:21] them to actually work properly [1:13:23] and cooperatively with our [1:13:25] federal and other local counterparts [1:13:27] when you have that level of communication [1:13:29] you can work these issues out in advance [1:13:31] before you have a problem like [1:13:33] what the Senator was just saying [1:13:35] well a lot of it boils down to [1:13:37] information sharing, correct? [1:13:39] that's correct [1:13:42] and even where in the [1:13:44] Senator Whitehouse's circuit [1:13:46] the judge has said that [1:13:48] maybe local law enforcement can't [1:13:50] keep people beyond their jail sentence [1:13:52] without some other additional [1:13:54] warrant [1:13:56] let me ask you to go out [1:14:00] on a limb here a little bit [1:14:02] if the two individuals who tragically died [1:14:04] in Minneapolis [1:14:06] who interfered with law enforcement [1:14:08] operation by ICE [1:14:10] if there had been the kind of cooperation that you demonstrate [1:14:12] in Loudoun County [1:14:14] and the sort of cooperation that you [1:14:16] advocated for here [1:14:18] do you think it's more likely than not [1:14:20] that those two individuals will still be alive [1:14:22] well I can't really speak directly to [1:14:25] that what I can tell you is that the cooperation [1:14:27] that we've had actually works well [1:14:29] and I do believe that that would have had an impact there [1:14:31] when you're talking about [1:14:33] 287GN against Senator Whitehouse's [1:14:35] information we have an agreement [1:14:37] with ICE and our people are trained in order [1:14:39] to hold on to people for a little bit [1:14:41] up to 48 hours after they're incarcerated [1:14:43] for a completely separate offense with us [1:14:45] that's a memorandum of [1:14:47] understanding between the feds and [1:14:49] the local law enforcement [1:14:51] and that way they're already in custody all we got to do is turn them over [1:14:53] they don't have to come to the community to do [1:14:55] very often to do any enforcement operations [1:14:57] so it actually works out well [1:14:59] and to get on the front side of this [1:15:01] and to have that level of communication [1:15:03] prevents that kind of thing but if you have politicians [1:15:05] that are directing you to act in a particular [1:15:07] way it really [1:15:09] you know really messes up the system here [1:15:11] and I think that's largely the [1:15:13] problem we all want to work together [1:15:15] we work with everybody all of our federal [1:15:17] counterparts all of our state and local counterparts [1:15:19] which I believe is one of the reasons we got [1:15:21] the lowest crime rates in the entire country [1:15:23] and you have an [1:15:25] as a result of that cooperation you haven't experienced [1:15:27] any of the tragic consequences [1:15:29] that we saw in Minneapolis [1:15:32] that we've actually had [1:15:34] before that we actually had people [1:15:36] that were had not been arrested by us [1:15:38] that committed crimes but [1:15:40] anybody that's been arrested by us and turned [1:15:42] over to ICE is not a problem [1:15:44] they're out of our hands [1:15:46] and Mr. Wolf you were of course [1:15:48] former secretary of homeland security [1:15:50] and our democratic colleagues [1:15:52] say that they won't fund [1:15:54] the department of homeland security [1:15:56] and alleviate these long waiting periods [1:15:58] that citizens are [1:16:00] experiencing at airports all around the country [1:16:02] they won't [1:16:04] fund FEMA [1:16:06] the federal emergency management agency [1:16:08] until federal warrants [1:16:11] are required [1:16:13] now will you explain [1:16:15] how a final order of [1:16:17] deportation is a civil [1:16:19] matter and that [1:16:21] requiring after that due process has already [1:16:23] been exhausted [1:16:25] why requiring a criminal [1:16:27] warrant would be [1:16:29] not only unnecessary [1:16:32] but also destructive [1:16:34] of ICE's ability to actually [1:16:36] enforce immigration law [1:16:38] absolutely an alien will go before [1:16:40] an immigration judge [1:16:42] towards the end of their [1:16:44] dependency of their hearing [1:16:46] they will go before an immigration judge [1:16:48] and they will rule on [1:16:50] their case if they want to appeal that [1:16:52] they'll go to the immigration board of appeals [1:16:54] and they could perhaps even appeal that [1:16:56] outside of that [1:16:58] but in this case [1:17:00] a judge through the due process [1:17:03] they'll have an attorney with them [1:17:05] through the due process says you don't have a legal right [1:17:07] to remain in the United States [1:17:09] and it's time for you to self deport [1:17:11] it's time for you to leave [1:17:13] and we know as I indicated earlier [1:17:15] about 1.6 million of those individuals [1:17:17] have said no I'm going to defy that order [1:17:19] I'm going to stay here in the United States [1:17:21] I don't want to go back to my home country [1:17:23] and then ICE is coming in at the very end of this process [1:17:25] enforcement removal officers [1:17:27] to effectuate that judge's order [1:17:29] and that individual from the country [1:17:31] and in some cases they are in their house [1:17:33] and so they have a final order of removal [1:17:35] they have reasonable suspicion [1:17:37] that that individual is in that house [1:17:39] they have likely observed that individual [1:17:41] go in and out of that house [1:17:43] and they are there to remove that individual [1:17:45] it's very different than a judicial warrant [1:17:47] where you're just going in to arrest someone [1:17:49] who's then going into the due process system [1:17:51] has to go before a judge [1:17:53] have their case heard all the facts [1:17:55] that is not what is occurring [1:17:57] when you have a final order of removal [1:18:00] thank you Mr. Chairman [1:18:03] everyone thank you all for being here today [1:18:05] and I just want to begin [1:18:07] by reminding everyone this is the first hearing [1:18:09] of the budget committee [1:18:11] in this congress [1:18:14] this is the first one [1:18:17] 13 months into this congress [1:18:19] you're saying second sir [1:18:22] I appreciate that chairman [1:18:24] second look [1:18:28] when we talk about what's happening to [1:18:30] constituents across the country right now [1:18:32] you'd think there'd be some hearings [1:18:34] about the high cost of everything [1:18:39] there are detainers 287 [1:18:42] I certainly hope we get to that place [1:18:47] but since we're here today [1:18:49] and we're not talking about [1:18:52] the high cost of groceries [1:18:54] or how expensive it is to get a birthday cake for your kids [1:18:56] gas prices through the roof [1:18:58] housing unaffordable [1:19:00] my republican colleagues [1:19:03] want to have a conversation about [1:19:05] the one big beautiful bill that they passed [1:19:07] which by the way [1:19:09] we've now learned from the congressional budget office [1:19:11] that the legislation increased the federal deficit [1:19:13] by 3.4 trillion dollars [1:19:15] trillion that's a lot of money [1:19:21] while failing to provide real relief [1:19:26] to middle and low income families [1:19:28] so look the proposals tied to the package [1:19:31] and its broader agenda [1:19:33] included cuts to programs like food [1:19:35] like SNAP [1:19:37] providing support to millions of working families [1:19:39] just to put food on the table [1:19:42] so as we sit here in the senate budget committee [1:19:44] yes or no [1:19:46] and my question is to Mr. Duke [1:19:49] does focusing federal attention on [1:19:51] punishing so called sanctuary cities [1:19:53] meaningfully address the affordability crisis [1:19:55] that americans are facing [1:19:57] no [1:19:59] does it lower health costs [1:20:01] for child with diabetes [1:20:04] no [1:20:06] does it make the gas that people put at a gas station [1:20:08] into their vehicles [1:20:10] more affordable [1:20:13] to get to work [1:20:15] or does it make it more expensive [1:20:17] it has nothing to do with gas [1:20:20] does it help a single mom afford to put food on the table [1:20:22] no [1:20:24] does it address the medical solvency issues [1:20:26] to make sure seniors can count on their benefits [1:20:28] does it help a young couple who wants to buy a home [1:20:30] and start a family [1:20:32] maybe afford that house [1:20:34] it does not help [1:20:37] what the hearing discusses [1:20:39] does not include anything that I just asked about [1:20:41] and the constituents I've been [1:20:43] talking to at home are saying [1:20:45] when's congress going to get off their rears [1:20:48] and do something about the prices that we're hitting [1:20:50] every day as opposed to [1:20:52] just protecting the Epstein class [1:20:54] and not demanding that these documents and everything else [1:20:56] get released [1:20:59] so Mr. Wolf you [1:21:01] you had responsibilities [1:21:03] in a few of these places [1:21:05] and I appreciate the responses you were providing [1:21:07] to one of my colleagues now [1:21:09] about the process that you believe is fair [1:21:12] that allows ICE agents to go into someone's house [1:21:14] without a judicial warrant [1:21:18] I just [1:21:20] it's hard for me to continue to listen [1:21:22] to justification on how [1:21:24] American citizens can have their homes broken into [1:21:27] without a judicial warrant [1:21:29] I don't understand this [1:21:31] that American citizens [1:21:33] it's okay for an American citizen to have [1:21:35] their windows on their car bashed in [1:21:37] that's not okay [1:21:41] and with all these conversations about AI [1:21:43] and some of these companies now that are working [1:21:45] with ICE for facial recognition [1:21:47] which I have concerns about [1:21:49] what I don't understand now [1:21:52] is how the Department of Homeland Security [1:21:54] has access to the [1:21:56] best facial recognition AI [1:21:58] DHS says they know [1:22:00] who the violent criminals are [1:22:02] their words they say they know who they are [1:22:04] and if they only had access to facial recognition [1:22:06] they could go find all the violent criminals [1:22:08] why aren't they doing it [1:22:10] it's one unanswered question after another [1:22:14] it's one American right after another [1:22:16] that is being torn apart [1:22:18] and there's justification now to say [1:22:20] we can pound in your door [1:22:22] we can go in your house [1:22:24] if you're an American citizen [1:22:27] or we can bust out your windows [1:22:29] and drag your butt out of a car [1:22:31] as an American citizen [1:22:33] I just don't get it Mr. Chairman [1:22:35] I hope we have some hearings about getting answers to that [1:22:37] because I think there's agreement between [1:22:39] Democrats and Republicans on this issue [1:22:41] and Republicans and Republicans [1:22:43] are not the only citizens being treated this way [1:22:45] none of us [1:22:47] we want to go after the violent criminals [1:22:51] we both agree with this [1:22:53] I certainly hope that we can have a thorough [1:22:56] and thoughtful hearing [1:22:58] and get some answers to that as well [1:23:00] and that everyone agrees stop doing that [1:23:02] Mr. President [1:23:04] tell your folks to stop doing that [1:23:06] I hope now that Senator Mullins [1:23:08] who's going to be Secretary of Health or Homeland Security [1:23:11] maybe he'll get these people to stop all the bad shit [1:23:14] and to go after the bad people [1:23:16] but yeah we'll have a hearing on [1:23:18] affordability [1:23:20] Ms. Vaughn what percentage [1:23:22] of illegal immigrants [1:23:25] in sanctuary cities [1:23:27] or just in general receive federal benefits [1:23:29] I don't have [1:23:31] numbers for specific [1:23:33] sanctuary jurisdictions [1:23:35] nationally it's more than 60% [1:23:37] so more than 60% [1:23:39] of illegal immigrants receive [1:23:41] federal benefits and it has absolutely [1:23:43] no budget impact [1:23:45] well that's interesting Senator Lee [1:23:48] thank you Mr. Chairman for holding this hearing [1:23:50] thanks to each of you for being here [1:23:52] I want to say at the outset a couple of things [1:23:54] first I'm not familiar with many countries [1:23:56] that are asked to simply [1:23:58] ignore their own immigration laws [1:24:00] separate and apart from their criminal laws [1:24:02] just their own immigration laws [1:24:04] those countries that do exist [1:24:06] or may have existed over time [1:24:08] don't remain countries very long [1:24:10] because things happen when you don't enforce [1:24:12] your own immigration laws [1:24:14] we don't have to travel very far in our own continent [1:24:16] or throughout Europe or Asia or Africa [1:24:18] to see what would happen if one of us entered one of those countries [1:24:20] took up residence there [1:24:22] unlawfully it likely wouldn't end well for us [1:24:24] I also want to observe [1:24:26] there's been several mentions here today [1:24:28] about the difference between state authority [1:24:30] and federal authority in reference to states rights [1:24:32] I don't like using the term states rights [1:24:34] not only because it conjures George Wallace's image [1:24:36] also because it's inappropriate [1:24:38] states don't have rights [1:24:40] individuals have rights states have authority [1:24:42] it's the inverse polar opposite [1:24:44] of a right [1:24:47] we have parallel authority with parallel sovereign [1:24:49] jurisdictions in this country [1:24:51] the US government the one headquartered in this city [1:24:53] where we sit today [1:24:56] has authority over our immigration laws [1:24:58] laws governing naturalization [1:25:00] who may enter the country [1:25:02] who may stay under what terms and conditions [1:25:04] or for what period of time [1:25:06] we do need our federal government [1:25:08] to be able to undertake those efforts [1:25:10] to perform those efforts well [1:25:12] we've adopted a number of techniques [1:25:14] to procure and encourage the cooperation [1:25:16] of state and local jurisdictions [1:25:18] sometimes those have been ignored [1:25:20] unfortunately I'll get more to that [1:25:22] in a moment [1:25:25] but look we're exploring something today [1:25:27] that is not without cost [1:25:29] the cost of an unsecured border [1:25:31] and unprecedented illegal immigration [1:25:33] during the four years of the Biden administration [1:25:36] remain both stunning [1:25:38] and debilitating [1:25:40] the Trump administration for its part [1:25:42] quite fortunately has done [1:25:44] a very effective job [1:25:46] at securing the border and beginning the process [1:25:48] of deportations [1:25:50] on a very large scale [1:25:52] there's a lot of work left to be done [1:25:54] to deport the many millions who remain [1:25:56] in this country [1:25:58] for us to be able to restore law and order [1:26:00] people who if they didn't immigrate [1:26:02] to almost any other country on earth [1:26:04] would be in a whole lot of trouble [1:26:06] and would be facing those things [1:26:08] and yet were made to feel [1:26:10] as if we would be doing the wrong thing [1:26:14] by enforcing our immigration laws as such [1:26:16] that important work that's being done [1:26:18] carried out every day [1:26:20] by brave men and women in federal law enforcement [1:26:22] continues to be obstructed across the country [1:26:24] by leftists [1:26:26] who are proudly, aggressively [1:26:28] supporting sanctuary cities [1:26:30] trying to undermine [1:26:32] the enforcement of federal law [1:26:35] these democrat controlled state and local governments [1:26:37] have in many instances [1:26:39] been working actively, aggressively [1:26:41] through these sanctuary city policies [1:26:43] to subvert [1:26:46] not just federal law [1:26:48] but the enforcement of federal law [1:26:50] by duly sworn and authorized [1:26:52] federal law enforcement officials [1:26:54] and to [1:26:57] trying to do one thing by enforcing the law [1:26:59] which is to prioritize the well being [1:27:01] of American citizens and the safety of the American homeland [1:27:03] this terrible reality [1:27:06] that we face is highly offensive [1:27:08] to the citizens of the United States [1:27:10] especially those who have done [1:27:12] the work to immigrate [1:27:14] to this country legally [1:27:17] and to do it the right way [1:27:19] now believe it or not, not that long ago [1:27:21] democrats supported and President Clinton himself [1:27:23] signed into law [1:27:26] the illegal immigration reform and [1:27:28] immigrant responsibility act [1:27:30] commonly known as IRIRA [1:27:32] that act expanded border [1:27:34] enforcement capabilities [1:27:36] and helped bring immigration [1:27:38] under control at a time when [1:27:40] illegal immigration to the United States [1:27:42] was far less frequent [1:27:45] far less of a large problem [1:27:47] than it has been in recent years [1:27:49] in 2016 President Trump ran [1:27:51] for president and was elected [1:27:53] on a promise to stop illegal immigration [1:27:56] democrats intending to oppose [1:27:58] the president at every turn [1:28:00] decided to depart [1:28:02] from their previous [1:28:04] more common sense position [1:28:06] and to go all in [1:28:09] on the belief that our nation should [1:28:11] effectively have no border at all [1:28:13] that borders are sort of aspirational [1:28:15] suggestions that we can look [1:28:17] the other way on [1:28:19] that brings us to the topic of today's hearing [1:28:21] the cost of sanctuary cities [1:28:23] so what is that cost [1:28:25] well the cost is clear [1:28:27] it is waste, fraud and abuse by illegal aliens [1:28:29] who shouldn't be within our borders [1:28:31] we saw this in Minnesota and we've seen it elsewhere [1:28:33] the cost is clear more than anything else [1:28:35] it's the loss of human life [1:28:37] innocent human life [1:28:40] innocent American lives [1:28:42] at the hands of illegal aliens [1:28:44] who perpetrated some of the most [1:28:46] heinous attacks on innocent [1:28:49] American lives in recent memory [1:28:51] and these are entirely preventable [1:28:53] entirely avoidable crimes [1:28:55] crimes that would not have happened [1:28:57] but for our open border policies [1:28:59] facilitated by sanctuary cities [1:29:01] the cost is clear [1:29:04] it's also the increased [1:29:06] additional avoidable tax burden [1:29:08] on state, local and federal taxpayers [1:29:10] who are expected to subsidize [1:29:12] and in fact are forced to subsidize [1:29:14] problematic social welfare programs [1:29:16] that illegal aliens have obtained [1:29:18] eligibility for through [1:29:20] fraudulent means or various loopholes [1:29:22] to say nothing of the education system [1:29:25] which because of a [1:29:27] supreme court ruling in [1:29:29] Plyler v. Doe four and a half decades ago [1:29:31] states are also forced [1:29:33] by no choice of their own [1:29:35] to supply that additional benefit [1:29:37] as well so look the cost is clear [1:29:40] it's all over the place we can't [1:29:42] ignore it and by continuing to ignore it [1:29:44] we create additional problems [1:29:47] let's not dress this up as something [1:29:49] that it is not and never can be [1:29:51] thank you thank you Mr. Chair [1:29:55] I want to echo the sentiment that [1:29:57] several of my colleagues have mentioned [1:29:59] earlier in this hearing in [1:30:01] more than just being surprised that [1:30:03] this is well I guess the second hearing [1:30:05] for this congress but the first [1:30:07] of this calendar year [1:30:09] it is not about the federal budget [1:30:11] it is not about an economic outlook [1:30:13] but I understand why the Republican [1:30:15] majority wouldn't want to talk about that [1:30:17] not while gas prices are spiking [1:30:19] because of an unauthorized [1:30:21] war against [1:30:23] Iran instead [1:30:25] we're here to [1:30:27] discuss how [1:30:30] off base this whole sanctuary conversation [1:30:32] really is [1:30:34] now I know it's [1:30:37] an area of passion for the chairman [1:30:39] we've debated [1:30:41] sanctuary policies on the floor [1:30:43] of the Senate as I've objected [1:30:45] to the legislation he has [1:30:47] presented [1:30:49] that would promote federal overreach [1:30:51] in my opinion [1:30:53] I think part of my frustration comes [1:30:55] from the fact that there's a fundamental [1:30:57] misunderstanding about what sanctuary policies [1:30:59] are and what sanctuary policies [1:31:01] are not [1:31:03] sanctuary policies do not [1:31:05] mean that there are no laws [1:31:07] in sanctuary cities or states [1:31:09] they do not keep [1:31:12] ICE and other federal agencies from [1:31:14] entering a city or a state [1:31:16] to arrest violent criminals [1:31:18] as they're released from prison [1:31:20] sanctuary policies simply [1:31:22] affirm that immigration enforcement [1:31:24] is the job of the federal [1:31:26] government and that the federal government [1:31:29] cannot unilaterally decide [1:31:31] to co-op state and local authorities [1:31:33] or their resources [1:31:35] precious resources in carrying [1:31:37] out these responsibilities true [1:31:39] there's some states and local jurisdictions [1:31:41] who may choose to [1:31:43] coordinate collaborate [1:31:45] but there's many who don't [1:31:47] for their justifiable [1:31:49] reasons it means carrying [1:31:52] out immigration enforcement activities [1:31:54] is ICE's purview [1:31:57] while respecting state and local law [1:31:59] enforcement agencies to [1:32:02] make their own decisions about [1:32:04] how to focus and direct their limited [1:32:06] resources that they [1:32:08] deem best [1:32:10] protects and serves their [1:32:12] constituents it [1:32:14] means prohibiting federal overreach through [1:32:16] policies that have been upheld by the courts [1:32:18] and so i'm glad several of my [1:32:21] republican colleagues are here to listen [1:32:23] to me quote justice [1:32:25] Scalia in the case [1:32:28] Prince versus United States [1:32:30] quote the federal government may [1:32:32] neither issue directives [1:32:34] require the states to address particular [1:32:36] problems nor command [1:32:38] the states officers [1:32:40] or those of their political subdivisions [1:32:42] to administer or enforce [1:32:44] a federal regulatory [1:32:46] program end quote [1:32:48] look folks we can have [1:32:52] disagreements on policy [1:32:54] but the fundamental misunderstanding [1:32:56] about what sanctuary policies [1:32:59] are has led to [1:33:01] the promotion of enforcement actions [1:33:03] across the country that have [1:33:05] become damaging to our communities [1:33:07] and to our local economies [1:33:09] so it seems to me that this debate has not [1:33:14] really been about public safety [1:33:17] because if it were we could also be [1:33:20] talking about how the data shows that sanctuary [1:33:22] policies actually make [1:33:24] communities safer healthier and more prosperous [1:33:26] that's right the evidence [1:33:28] shows the research shows sanctuary [1:33:30] jurisdictions have lower crime [1:33:32] rates higher median [1:33:34] household income less [1:33:36] poverty less [1:33:38] reliance on public assistance [1:33:40] higher labor force [1:33:42] participation and lower [1:33:44] unemployment that's [1:33:48] right seems like sanctuary [1:33:50] cities are helping to make America [1:33:52] great I said it [1:33:57] so let's stop perpetuating [1:33:59] the lies let's ensure [1:34:03] that ICE and CBP [1:34:05] agents are accountable [1:34:07] and conduct their jobs [1:34:09] in accordance with the [1:34:11] law and the constitution [1:34:13] let's allow local [1:34:16] law enforcement leaders to do [1:34:18] what they deem is best [1:34:20] for public safety [1:34:22] and Mr. Chairman just so you [1:34:24] know I'm not exaggerating in my claims [1:34:26] I'd like to submit for the record [1:34:28] articles and reports [1:34:30] from researchers at the University of [1:34:32] Texas Austin from the Center for [1:34:34] American Progress from the University [1:34:36] of Arizona University of North Carolina [1:34:38] and the American Immigration Council [1:34:40] thank you thank you Mr. Chairman [1:34:48] Senator Kennedy [1:34:53] Secretary Wolf thank you for your [1:34:55] service [1:35:00] why in your opinion do [1:35:02] so many not all but [1:35:05] so many of my Democratic colleagues [1:35:07] believe in open borders [1:35:09] well that's a good question I think it's [1:35:13] it's a couple of different fronts [1:35:15] one it would be they don't believe [1:35:17] in immigration law they don't like [1:35:19] enforcement they don't like removing [1:35:21] individuals and they believe that [1:35:23] there are some that believe that [1:35:25] anyone and everyone should be able to [1:35:27] come to the U.S. whether they apply for [1:35:29] protections under U.S. law or not [1:35:31] and then there's some probably that [1:35:34] would like to see more voters in the [1:35:36] U.S. as well [1:35:38] Ms. Vaughn some of my colleagues [1:35:41] for whom I have great respect [1:35:44] believe that the 10th amendments [1:35:46] the 10th amendment allows [1:35:48] local governments to ignore [1:35:51] federal immigration law [1:35:53] and implement [1:35:55] sanctuary policy [1:35:57] the Supreme Court has ruled that [1:35:59] racial quotas [1:36:02] represent a pernicious [1:36:05] form of racial discrimination [1:36:07] can local governments [1:36:10] ignore that ruling under the [1:36:12] 10th amendment well the 10th amendment [1:36:14] is about can they [1:36:16] just answer my question please [1:36:18] the 10th amendment is [1:36:20] about commandeering and so [1:36:22] it's not really appropriate to this because [1:36:24] is the answer yes or no ma'am [1:36:26] could you ask me again because [1:36:29] I don't understand the relevance to [1:36:31] I'm sorry I don't [1:36:33] Secretary Wolf you heard my [1:36:35] question under the guise of [1:36:37] the 10th amendment can [1:36:39] can local governments [1:36:41] ignore Supreme Court ruling [1:36:44] I don't believe they can okay [1:36:46] women have the right to [1:36:48] vote in America by statute [1:36:50] and by constitutional [1:36:53] interpretation under the [1:36:55] guise of the 10th amendment [1:36:57] can local governments just ignore [1:36:59] that and prohibit women from voting [1:37:01] no okay [1:37:04] Mr. Duke you worked for [1:37:06] President Biden and Vice [1:37:09] President Harris didn't you yes [1:37:12] and I listened carefully to your [1:37:14] testimony today you expressed [1:37:16] well you offered the opinion that the [1:37:18] one big beautiful bill is terrible in [1:37:20] part because it will cause deficits [1:37:22] that is that right yes [1:37:24] isn't it a fact that the [1:37:27] profligacy of [1:37:29] President Biden caused [1:37:32] nine percent [1:37:34] inflation in America [1:37:36] no okay isn't it a fact [1:37:39] that if President Biden [1:37:41] had discovered life on Mars [1:37:43] when he was president [1:37:45] he would have immediately sent it [1:37:47] money I don't believe so [1:37:52] oh you don't okay well I appreciate [1:37:54] your newly found [1:37:56] physical conservatism Mr. [1:37:58] Beer you seem to be [1:38:03] a very smart guy and you seem [1:38:06] to be a nice enough guy thank you [1:38:08] Senator you seem smart as well [1:38:10] don't don't [1:38:14] don't [1:38:16] the chairman not me don't you [1:38:18] think your hyperbolic [1:38:22] statements undermine your [1:38:24] credibility what hyperbolic [1:38:26] statement did I make on [1:38:33] February the 11th [1:38:35] 2026 [1:38:38] you posted on blue ski [1:38:40] quote my words are your [1:38:44] words not mine the Democrats [1:38:47] video telling service [1:38:49] members to ignore [1:38:51] illegal orders didn't [1:38:53] go far enough they should [1:38:56] have also urged them to refuse [1:38:58] unethical orders whether it [1:39:00] legal or not there are many [1:39:03] things deemed legal [1:39:05] that are still obviously [1:39:07] unethical and everyone [1:39:09] should hold themselves to this [1:39:11] higher law end quote [1:39:14] did I read that correctly I believe [1:39:16] you did do you disagree with it you [1:39:18] think people should do unethical [1:39:20] things in their capacity on December [1:39:22] the 31st of [1:39:24] 2025 you [1:39:27] posted to in front [1:39:29] but wait wait do you disagree [1:39:31] with what I finished my [1:39:33] question I'm sorry sir [1:39:35] in front of God and country [1:39:37] you said quote they [1:39:40] referring to Republicans [1:39:42] think they can troll their way [1:39:44] into us accepting [1:39:46] ethnic cleansing [1:39:50] in quote your your words not mine [1:39:52] did I read that correctly that [1:39:54] was in regard to a [1:39:56] security post about [1:39:58] advocating 100 million [1:40:00] deportations that is what DHS [1:40:02] has tweeted from their own account [1:40:04] 100 million deportations would be [1:40:06] ethnic cleansing you would be [1:40:08] removing one third [1:40:10] of the country so yes [1:40:12] there are people within the department of [1:40:14] homeland security and you don't think [1:40:16] this is hyperbolic give me 30 more [1:40:18] seconds I think advocating 100 [1:40:20] million deportations is [1:40:22] ethnic cleansing [1:40:24] on February 5th you [1:40:26] quoted you said the [1:40:28] following on blueski your time is up [1:40:30] these are all good [1:40:32] but there's no enforcement [1:40:34] mechanism I'm sorry let me [1:40:36] try a better one on March [1:40:38] 2nd you said quote [1:40:40] if you rule against Trump's [1:40:42] population purge [1:40:44] agenda no hyperbole [1:40:46] there the nativists [1:40:48] will name you threaten you [1:40:50] and come after you these [1:40:52] judges are much braver than the ICE [1:40:54] agents who hide behind [1:40:56] masks while violating [1:40:59] the constitution they are much [1:41:01] braver they put their names on their [1:41:03] rulings and they stand behind their [1:41:05] their constitutional rulings when I [1:41:07] talk about population purge I'm talking [1:41:09] about the fact that they're trying to [1:41:11] deport U.S. born citizens people born [1:41:13] here they are trying to deport them [1:41:15] as well so it's not a [1:41:17] mass deportation agenda it [1:41:19] is also an agenda intended [1:41:21] to reduce the population of the United [1:41:23] States including U.S. [1:41:25] born people so these are not hyperbolic [1:41:27] statements I appreciate you reading my [1:41:29] account I appreciate your research [1:41:31] what planet [1:41:33] wait a minute Mr. Chairman what planet [1:41:35] did you just parachute no no no [1:41:37] hey guys [1:41:39] you trigger my gag [1:41:41] reflex so we [1:41:44] got a process here and [1:41:46] it's good to know you don't have an agenda [1:41:48] Senator King [1:41:51] Mr. Chair thanks for doing this and Sheriff [1:41:53] welcome I've got a Virginian at the table [1:41:55] that's why I wanted to come [1:41:57] my sheriff in his testimony said it is important [1:41:59] to distinguish criminal aliens who pose [1:42:01] a threat to our community from [1:42:03] immigrants here legally all of us [1:42:05] agree with that we should try to find [1:42:07] that balance I don't think we're [1:42:09] balanced right now I've been here 13 [1:42:11] years I wish we'd have a hearing about [1:42:13] the positive impact immigrants make on [1:42:15] the United States we've never had that [1:42:17] hearing in this committee or the help [1:42:19] committee or any others when we have [1:42:21] hearings it's about immigrants doing [1:42:23] bad things rather than about the [1:42:25] positive that immigrants do [1:42:27] well can I take my time [1:42:29] can I take my time because I think what [1:42:31] happens I think what happens [1:42:33] when the only hearings about [1:42:35] immigrants are about crime [1:42:37] and we have a president who calls [1:42:39] people's countries shithole countries I [1:42:41] got a lot of immigrants in the United States [1:42:43] and in Virginia who feel like they're being [1:42:45] targeted and let's talk about positives [1:42:47] I'm going to use Loudon as an example [1:42:49] the sheriff is rightly proud of Loudon County [1:42:51] 420,000 people [1:42:53] in the last census is probably coming up to [1:42:55] 450 now [1:42:57] it is not only one of the safest jurisdictions [1:42:59] in the United States it's also [1:43:01] by recent count the [1:43:03] wealthiest county in the United States [1:43:05] and guess what 25% of the population [1:43:07] and climbing is immigrant [1:43:09] 25% [1:43:11] safe economically successful [1:43:14] immigrant and I also applaud [1:43:16] this sheriff's department I [1:43:18] if you have something to do or if you don't [1:43:20] have something to do on Halloween sometime [1:43:22] go to the Halloween parade in Leesburg [1:43:24] and you'll see the sheriff's deputies [1:43:26] helping order [1:43:28] and they all wear uniforms with their names [1:43:30] on them none of them wear masks [1:43:32] the county's been an innovator in body [1:43:34] camera in body camera use [1:43:36] wow what a novel concept [1:43:38] I like the professionalism [1:43:40] that I see with your sheriff's [1:43:42] department and I think we could use it at the federal [1:43:44] level here's an issue about sanctuary [1:43:46] cities in the Trump administration [1:43:48] DHS [1:43:50] Mr. Chair you might like this one [1:43:52] DHS in May put out a list [1:43:54] of sanctuary cities and they included [1:43:56] 34 Virginia communities [1:43:58] cities and counties on that list [1:44:00] it provoked laughter [1:44:03] in Virginia there were cities [1:44:05] that were not cities but counties [1:44:07] there were counties that were not [1:44:10] counties but cities [1:44:12] there were jurisdictions that have virtually [1:44:14] no immigrants whatsoever listed as [1:44:16] sanctuary communities [1:44:18] here was my favorite the city [1:44:20] of Duffield Virginia [1:44:22] now if you don't know where Duffield is you're not alone [1:44:24] Scott County deep in Appalachia [1:44:26] .6 square miles [1:44:28] 76 people [1:44:30] not a single immigrant [1:44:33] not even a police department sanctuary city [1:44:35] Virginia laughed [1:44:37] the DHS out of [1:44:39] out of the office [1:44:41] and so in October [1:44:43] this was in August I'm sorry this was in [1:44:45] May in August [1:44:47] DOJ came back and did [1:44:49] a new list number of sanctuary cities [1:44:51] in Virginia zero they [1:44:54] redid the list in October number of [1:44:56] sanctuary cities in Virginia [1:44:58] zero Mr. Chair I'd like to [1:45:00] introduce DHS's bogus [1:45:02] sanctuary cities list as [1:45:04] into the record without objection [1:45:06] and then Mr. Chair my last question [1:45:08] is look I'm not on judiciary and [1:45:10] the bill that you have [1:45:12] about imposing liability on local [1:45:14] officials would suggest [1:45:16] that the only fault in this area lies [1:45:18] on local officials [1:45:20] now if you have a markup it'll be in judiciary [1:45:22] and I'm not on it but my question is [1:45:24] sort of for you isn't what's good for [1:45:26] the goose good for the gander what about [1:45:28] all the times when I was governor of [1:45:30] Virginia 2006-2010 [1:45:32] and my DOC department of [1:45:34] corrections or local law [1:45:36] enforcement told ICE [1:45:38] and the federal [1:45:40] immigration agencies three years under [1:45:42] President Bush one year under President Obama [1:45:44] that hey we've got somebody here [1:45:46] who is not lawful here please come pick them up [1:45:48] and ICE didn't show up and ICE [1:45:50] still is not showing up so often [1:45:52] the bad examples [1:45:54] including one of the ones in Fairfax recently [1:45:56] repeated instances [1:45:58] of ICE having this [1:46:00] person in their purview [1:46:02] in their grasp and then letting them go [1:46:04] so wouldn't it be I mean if you're [1:46:06] gonna do a bill and blame [1:46:08] cities for this and try [1:46:10] to impose liability on their [1:46:12] local taxpayers what about [1:46:14] letting people sue ICE when [1:46:16] hardworking local officials and [1:46:18] sheriffs let folks know hey we got folks here [1:46:20] that you know are here [1:46:22] unlawfully come pick them up and when they [1:46:24] don't come pick them up shouldn't they be liable for that [1:46:26] maybe that's something we could do together [1:46:28] sounds like a pretty good idea to me [1:46:30] be glad to work with you [1:46:33] I think those days are probably over [1:46:35] with this administration but [1:46:37] the idea that the federal government had [1:46:39] notice and the local community [1:46:41] is willing to turn them over and they turn [1:46:43] a blind eye and somebody got hurt [1:46:45] I would be willing definitely to [1:46:47] create liability there and I'll just [1:46:49] conclude Mr. Chair and say you know the [1:46:51] mayor in me the governor [1:46:53] in me gets mad [1:46:55] when things like this get blamed [1:46:57] on mayors and governors [1:46:59] when often it's complete dysfunction at the [1:47:01] federal level under multiple administrations [1:47:03] that's the real culprit I yield back [1:47:05] the lawyer in me wants to hold [1:47:07] people accountable who create problems [1:47:09] Senator [1:47:12] Scott thank you chairman [1:47:14] thanks for holding this important hearing [1:47:16] the United States is a nation of law and order [1:47:19] those two things go hand in hand because [1:47:22] when you have laws that are obeyed you have [1:47:24] order in your communities but for too long [1:47:26] liberal states and cities have decided [1:47:28] to simply ignore the federal laws they don't agree with [1:47:30] when I was the governor of Florida I didn't [1:47:34] have to worry about our sheriffs not enforcing [1:47:36] law because President Trump [1:47:38] and our federal law enforcement [1:47:40] but President Trump and our federal law enforcement [1:47:42] have to worry about that every day the American [1:47:44] people voted very clearly to secure the border [1:47:46] that's what the election was about and stop [1:47:48] illegal immigration [1:47:50] we're a country of legal [1:47:52] immigration not illegal immigration [1:47:55] without a single new law being enacted [1:47:57] President Trump has delivered and secured the border [1:47:59] when President Biden said he couldn't do it [1:48:01] President Trump and the heroic men and women [1:48:04] of our ice and border patrol are enforcing [1:48:06] our laws and they're securing our nation [1:48:08] and the crime rate is down [1:48:11] but some mayors can say no [1:48:13] we won't follow federal law we want to be a sanctuary [1:48:15] for people who broke the law [1:48:17] to enter our country illegally [1:48:19] it is a violation it's against the law [1:48:21] to come into our country illegally [1:48:23] like most countries it's dangerous [1:48:26] it's costly to the American taxpayer and has [1:48:28] horrific consequences [1:48:30] that's why I and my colleague on this [1:48:32] committee Senator Moreno have introduced two bills [1:48:34] to curb this kind of dangerous disregard [1:48:36] for the law our unifying [1:48:38] American security interest act [1:48:40] and sanctuary jurisdiction events security [1:48:42] enhancement act which stopped DHS [1:48:44] funding grants and financial assistance [1:48:46] from going to cities and jurisdictions [1:48:48] that refuse to support our ice [1:48:50] and DHS agents in their efforts to keep [1:48:52] our streets safe [1:48:54] Americans clearly don't want their tax dollars [1:48:56] used for handouts to illegal aliens [1:48:58] for health care or food stamps [1:49:00] while we have American citizens here at home [1:49:02] who are going without and that's the exact [1:49:04] kind of waste and financial mismanagement that these [1:49:06] bills will stop that's just the financial cost [1:49:09] let's talk about the human cost [1:49:11] Laken Riley a nursing student 22 years old [1:49:14] in Georgia was beaten with a [1:49:16] rock and strangle by a Venezuelan illegal [1:49:18] alien who had been caught at the border [1:49:20] and released under Biden's open borders [1:49:22] rules Rachel Morin [1:49:24] 37 in Maryland mother 5 who was raped [1:49:26] and murdered while hiking by a [1:49:28] Salvadorian criminal alien who [1:49:30] crossed her border illegally not once [1:49:32] not twice but three times [1:49:34] under Biden Kate Sinely [1:49:37] 32 died in her father's arms on [1:49:39] San Francisco Pier after being shot [1:49:41] by a five-time [1:49:43] Mexican deportee who was allowed [1:49:45] to roam freely because the city's sanctuary [1:49:47] policy led local officials to ignore [1:49:49] an ICE detainer these are just a few [1:49:52] of the many lives cut short in the potential [1:49:54] unrealized [1:49:56] lives because of Biden's open borders [1:49:58] that allowed dangerous people to come to this [1:50:00] country and the sanctuary cities that [1:50:02] chose to support and encourage these criminals [1:50:04] I'm from Florida we are an immigration [1:50:07] state legal immigration [1:50:09] we don't support illegal immigration [1:50:11] Sheriff Chapman my question [1:50:13] how can open borders and lax [1:50:16] immigration policies like a sanctuary cities [1:50:18] be considered humane [1:50:20] by Democrats if they fail to protect the [1:50:22] very citizens Democrats [1:50:24] and other elected officials are [1:50:26] meant to serve and they're under an oath of [1:50:28] office to serve well I agree with that I mean [1:50:32] the most important thing is for us to keep [1:50:34] safety keep our people safe and we've got to do [1:50:36] everything in our power and that that includes [1:50:38] working with everybody and I make that [1:50:40] point all the time to my constituents [1:50:42] say look we want to work with all of [1:50:44] our federal counterparts we all have different [1:50:46] missions here different cogs in [1:50:48] the wheel but we all have to work together to keep everybody [1:50:50] safe is it better for you if [1:50:52] you turn somebody a criminal [1:50:54] over to ICE rather than let them back [1:50:56] into the community absolutely [1:50:58] Mr. Wolf in Sanctuary City [1:51:01] local authorities can decline ICE detainers [1:51:03] which means that criminals are released back in the [1:51:05] community rather than transferred safely into ICE [1:51:07] custody this creates opportunities for [1:51:09] illegal fugitives to relocate or [1:51:11] reoffend like in the tragic murder [1:51:13] of Kate Steinle also forces [1:51:15] DHS officers to go into neighborhoods [1:51:17] to root out violent criminals [1:51:19] not only does this cost a taxpayer more [1:51:21] it also increases the risk for everyone [1:51:23] involved including bystanders DHS [1:51:25] officers and potential future victims [1:51:27] how do these policies prioritize [1:51:29] offenders of American victims by [1:51:31] obstructing deportations [1:51:33] well when ICE is required [1:51:36] to go into a community out on the streets [1:51:38] right instead of going into that jail [1:51:40] setting and picking up that criminal [1:51:42] illegal alien it'll take one or two officers [1:51:44] to go into a jail setting [1:51:46] if they have to go into their neighborhood it's going to take [1:51:48] 15 to 20 officers to apprehend that [1:51:50] same individual you're putting [1:51:52] not only officers at risk you're putting that alien [1:51:54] at risk and you're putting others in that community [1:51:56] at risk so the idea [1:51:58] here and it's an ironic kind of [1:52:00] play here is that [1:52:02] individuals and politicians that want [1:52:05] less ICE in their [1:52:07] jurisdictions they will give them [1:52:09] sanctuary policies to say we want ICE out [1:52:11] but in fact it just requires them to be [1:52:13] more in their communities because [1:52:15] they won't go into a jail setting they have to go into [1:52:17] their neighborhoods they have to continue [1:52:19] to enforce immigration law so [1:52:21] if your idea is I want [1:52:23] to see less ICE in my community I don't [1:52:25] like immigration enforcement let them into your [1:52:27] jail let them pick up those criminal [1:52:29] illegal aliens otherwise [1:52:31] they're going to be out on your streets because they have to continue [1:52:33] to enforce immigration law [1:52:35] and of course it's better with local law enforcement [1:52:37] support and cooperation but again [1:52:39] in many jurisdictions sanctuary jurisdictions [1:52:41] we don't see that either [1:52:43] thank you chairman Senator Moran [1:52:46] thank you Mr. Chairman a quick question [1:52:48] for all of you can just do a very simple [1:52:50] if it's okay yes or no I'm going to try to [1:52:52] ask it as a simple yes or no question [1:52:54] are you familiar with USC [1:52:57] 1325 yes [1:52:59] no yes yes [1:53:02] you're not okay so the law [1:53:04] passed in 1952 is immigration [1:53:06] authorization act talked about how the [1:53:08] country controls immigration [1:53:10] Mr. Wolf start with you do you think that we made [1:53:12] a mistake passing that law that prohibits [1:53:14] people from entering this country illegally [1:53:18] sheriff do you believe we made a mistake passing that law [1:53:20] no I don't think so Ms. Vaughn [1:53:24] no it was a mistake to not [1:53:26] let them come legally that's what [1:53:28] we need but that's not what the law said the law said [1:53:30] you can't enter the country illegally was that [1:53:32] there were definitely mistakes in the INA [1:53:34] was that many mistakes don't [1:53:36] be cute was that part of the law [1:53:38] a mistake yes or no the part of the law [1:53:40] that says you can't come legally yes that was [1:53:42] that was a mistake that was a mistake that you [1:53:44] can't come illegally no legally [1:53:46] legally is what I said okay [1:53:48] so you haven't answered my question but that's okay [1:53:50] you're a smug guy and that's part of your [1:53:52] shtick how about you I don't know anything [1:53:55] about this law do you think [1:53:57] it should be a crime to enter the [1:53:59] country illegally I don't [1:54:04] I don't know anything about this [1:54:06] I'm here to talk about the budget you don't have [1:54:08] to look I'm not a lawyer you don't have to be a lawyer it's a simple [1:54:10] question should it be a crime I'll [1:54:12] say it slowly should it be a crime [1:54:14] to enter the United States of [1:54:16] America illegally [1:54:18] I don't know anything about this without permission [1:54:21] do you have a home I [1:54:24] do you have a place that you [1:54:27] sleep in yes correct okay [1:54:29] is should it be a crime for people [1:54:31] to enter your home without permission [1:54:33] yes you're pretty [1:54:35] certain on that one yes okay but you're not [1:54:37] sure if it's okay to enter [1:54:39] America without permission [1:54:42] which is our home by the way you don't know about [1:54:44] America okay gotcha alright [1:54:46] so this is the best [1:54:48] the Democrats can come up with Mr. Chairman [1:54:50] I hope the ranking member can listen [1:54:53] for just a second if you don't mind [1:54:56] this is the best witnesses you've got [1:54:58] a guy who can't distinguish [1:55:00] whether it's okay to have people enter our country [1:55:02] illegally of all the [1:55:04] millions of people that you could have chosen to testify [1:55:06] to my good colleague [1:55:08] let me finish the best [1:55:10] you have is a guy who has no [1:55:12] idea what our immigration law [1:55:14] is and isn't sure [1:55:17] if somebody should enter the country illegally another guy [1:55:19] is a smug guy who [1:55:21] obviously has an agenda and in fact [1:55:23] let me just ask you a question [1:55:25] maybe stick to the facts instead of badgering [1:55:27] the witnesses [1:55:29] not badgering the witnesses [1:55:31] I'm asking simple questions [1:55:33] why don't you do this why don't you speak when it's your turn [1:55:35] oh because we actually take turns [1:55:37] you're addressing me so I'm addressing you back [1:55:39] you're looking right at me you're addressing me [1:55:41] here's what I find ironic is that you follow [1:55:43] rules here about speaking [1:55:45] order people can't speak out of [1:55:47] turn but it's okay with you that people [1:55:49] enter our country and skip the turn [1:55:51] see now you're attributing views [1:55:53] to me I haven't expressed [1:55:55] what I would love to find not only you're attacking [1:55:57] witnesses now you're attacking your colleagues here [1:55:59] on the dais so gentlemen [1:56:01] you make it easy [1:56:03] wait a minute I'm in charge [1:56:05] you ask him a question [1:56:07] he'll get a chance to answer [1:56:10] that question finish your time [1:56:12] thank you alright moving on to [1:56:14] the next question Mr. [1:56:16] Sheriff how important is it for [1:56:18] local law enforcement to cooperate with [1:56:20] federal officials [1:56:22] I would say it's worked for us and it's [1:56:24] kept our crime rate down [1:56:26] extraordinarily low so if somebody is [1:56:28] in your position in Hamilton County [1:56:30] which is the county where Cincinnati is [1:56:32] or the Cincinnati chief of police would you advise [1:56:34] them that you think it's helpful to [1:56:36] cooperate with law enforcement absolutely [1:56:38] okay do you find it interesting [1:56:40] that politicians [1:56:42] who have no idea no background in law [1:56:44] enforcement will pass laws that [1:56:46] prohibit law enforcement to [1:56:48] cooperate with federal officials local law enforcement [1:56:50] do you think that's a good idea no it's not a good idea [1:56:52] it's a terrible idea do you [1:56:54] have death threats against [1:56:56] your sheriff deputies on a regular basis [1:56:58] we get threats not at all [1:57:00] constant death threats or [1:57:02] do you get constant not constant death threats [1:57:04] but we do get threats yes do you have drug cartels [1:57:06] that have bounties out for your deputies [1:57:08] no no we don't [1:57:11] do you get your agents doxxed [1:57:13] where they go to your agents [1:57:15] your deputies homes [1:57:17] and threaten their children and their wives [1:57:19] and their kids no we have not [1:57:21] do you get politicians [1:57:23] that call your deputies [1:57:25] Gestapo and Nazis [1:57:27] we've had certainly not politicians [1:57:31] not locally here but certainly [1:57:33] we've had a lot of people in the community that have said that [1:57:35] do you find any of that helpful [1:57:37] when talking about law enforcement agencies [1:57:39] because see here's the irony [1:57:42] what we're disparaging is the [1:57:44] people whose job it is to enforce [1:57:46] the laws and I find it [1:57:48] extraordinarily interesting [1:57:50] that the people in charge of making these laws [1:57:52] are disparaging the people who are [1:57:55] enforcing those laws and [1:57:57] I wonder and I'll ask [1:57:59] for the record if the minority witnesses [1:58:01] could just sign an affidavit [1:58:03] that they've not received any money [1:58:05] and the organization that they work for [1:58:07] or participate in [1:58:09] from any organizations tied to the Mexican [1:58:11] drug cartels which would have an absolute [1:58:13] incentive to [1:58:15] have illegal migration at the levels [1:58:17] that we saw under Biden [1:58:22] if you have any reason [1:58:24] we haven't accepted any drug cartel money [1:58:26] okay [1:58:28] again if they could just put that in an affidavit or an affiliated organization [1:58:30] you okay Mr. Duke [1:58:32] I'd like to [1:58:37] look at the affidavit [1:58:39] okay fair enough [1:58:41] but do you know if you've accepted any money [1:58:43] I do not know of anything like that [1:58:45] right yeah sure [1:58:47] okay thank you [1:58:49] alright so good hearing [1:58:52] Senator Merkley I'll let you go first [1:58:54] I'll have a few words [1:58:56] and we'll go vote [1:58:59] well let's start with the gang of eight [1:59:01] that my colleague referred to [1:59:03] from 2013 Democrats and Republicans [1:59:05] came together four and four [1:59:07] they crafted a bill on immigration [1:59:27] path to citizenship for dreamers [1:59:29] Democrats and Republicans together [1:59:32] so one of the myths we've heard today [1:59:34] from some of my colleagues [1:59:36] is that Democrats don't support the rule of law [1:59:38] absolutely wrong [1:59:41] what happened to that 2013 bill [1:59:43] that went over to the House of Representatives [1:59:45] controlled by Republicans [1:59:47] they would not even hold a hearing on it [1:59:49] they wanted to keep an open sore [1:59:51] of immigration as a political issue [1:59:53] in 2024 Democrats and Republicans [1:59:55] in the Senate came together again [1:59:57] crafted a deal [1:59:59] and it was President Trump as a candidate [2:00:01] who said don't do it [2:00:03] I want to keep immigration as an election issue [2:00:05] so I just think it would be more productive [2:00:07] if we quit casting aspersions [2:00:09] across the aisle [2:00:11] and go back to the philosophy of 2013 [2:00:13] and work together to actually [2:00:15] get a bill done [2:00:17] or the philosophy of 2024 [2:00:19] and certainly all of us agree [2:00:21] in growing after violent criminals [2:00:23] that's the second myth [2:00:25] that was presented today [2:00:27] that people don't support going after violent criminals [2:00:29] absolutely a myth [2:00:31] and it's just irritating [2:00:33] to continuously hear that [2:00:35] myth number three [2:00:37] from one of my colleagues [2:00:39] was that Democrats won't fund FEMA [2:00:41] in fact last week in the Senate [2:00:43] we asked unanimous consent [2:00:45] to fund FEMA and the Coast Guard [2:00:47] and TSA [2:00:49] and it was the Republicans that objected [2:00:51] so let's clear up that piece [2:00:53] the next myth [2:00:55] that is that undocumented individuals [2:00:57] receive benefits [2:00:59] it is illegal under the law [2:01:01] for undocumented individuals [2:01:03] to receive Medicaid or Medicare [2:01:05] or CHIP or SNAP [2:01:07] or Social Security benefits [2:01:10] another myth that states [2:01:12] that have decided [2:01:14] that local police are more effective [2:01:16] being local police [2:01:19] somehow attract immigrants [2:01:21] because they're not held accountable to the law [2:01:23] they are held accountable to the law [2:01:25] in fact you have lower [2:01:27] crime rates [2:01:29] in those states [2:01:31] so that's kind of interesting [2:01:34] and in fact we see [2:01:36] that some states [2:01:38] like Texas [2:01:40] they have 50% more undocumented immigrants [2:01:42] as a ratio of population [2:01:44] than Oregon does [2:01:46] so clearly it's not Oregon's policies [2:01:48] that say we're more effective and safer [2:01:50] and more prosperous [2:01:52] when ICE does ICE [2:01:55] and local police do local police work [2:01:57] and yet another myth [2:01:59] said states do not have powers [2:02:01] he says they do not have rights [2:02:03] but they do have powers [2:02:05] 10th amendment [2:02:07] the powers not delegated to the US by the constitution [2:02:09] are reserved to the states [2:02:11] and to the people [2:02:13] and that is why the federal government [2:02:15] cannot commandeer individuals [2:02:17] in the states to do federal responsibilities [2:02:19] it's called the constitution [2:02:21] of the United States of America [2:02:23] another myth [2:02:25] was that it's less safe [2:02:27] in states where local police [2:02:29] work there's many statistics [2:02:31] that show the opposite of that [2:02:33] but let's just take for example [2:02:35] where is the highest murder rate in America [2:02:37] is it in a state where local police [2:02:39] are assigned to local police [2:02:41] no it's Mississippi [2:02:43] who's the second highest murder rate [2:02:45] Louisiana how is the murder rate in Oregon [2:02:47] it is one fourth [2:02:49] of what is in those states [2:02:51] so let's be clear again [2:02:53] this myth that you have higher crime rates [2:02:55] in places where the local police [2:02:57] gain the trust of the people [2:02:59] work carefully [2:03:01] between state and local [2:03:03] and with federal officials [2:03:05] but they don't do the work of ICE [2:03:07] and if ICE knows [2:03:09] that someone is in a jail [2:03:11] and they know because it's in the federal database [2:03:13] it's in the FBI database [2:03:15] and they want that person [2:03:17] it only takes a couple days to go get a judicial warrant [2:03:19] and pick that person up [2:03:21] every time there's a judicial warrant [2:03:23] that person is held [2:03:25] so if it's just being lazy or sloppy [2:03:27] or whatever else [2:03:29] there's a lot of misinformation [2:03:31] coming forward here [2:03:34] that needed to be corrected [2:03:36] well thank you very much [2:03:38] I have a different view of things [2:03:40] I really appreciate the hearing [2:03:42] Obama deported 3 million people [2:03:44] I don't think all of them were criminals [2:03:46] they didn't use judicial warrants [2:03:48] what you're trying to do is [2:03:50] make it impossible to deport people [2:03:53] if you have to go to a judge [2:03:55] and get a judicial warrant to deport somebody [2:03:57] you effectively destroy the ability to deport [2:03:59] you're denying Trump the same system [2:04:01] as Obama [2:04:03] this hearing to me is stunning [2:04:05] I'm so glad we had it [2:04:07] you're all in on sanctuary city policy [2:04:09] if you're looking to America [2:04:11] if you're looking for anybody to change this system [2:04:13] our democratic friends have no interest [2:04:15] they think it's good for America [2:04:17] the more illegal immigrants [2:04:19] the better [2:04:21] I don't [2:04:23] I'd like to have a rational immigration system [2:04:25] gang of eight I was involved in it [2:04:27] what we tried to do is stop future flow [2:04:29] and the trade off was to give people [2:04:31] knowing you would stop future flow [2:04:33] you're right the house blocked the bill [2:04:35] during 20 to 2020 [2:04:38] from 2020 to 2024 [2:04:40] Joe Biden [2:04:42] destroyed every concept [2:04:44] of rational immigration [2:04:46] he made it impossible for a republican [2:04:48] to sit down and talk with a democrat [2:04:50] because during his four years [2:04:52] he took every rule and ignored it [2:04:54] there are no taxpayer dollars [2:04:56] associated with illegal immigrants [2:04:58] they were flown into the country [2:05:00] on airplanes [2:05:02] bused in [2:05:04] they were fed [2:05:06] they were given housing [2:05:08] 11 million people are not living in the streets [2:05:10] they're in some apartment or a house somewhere [2:05:12] and if you don't think that affects housing [2:05:14] that's crazy [2:05:16] 11 million people came at least [2:05:18] in a four year period [2:05:20] and to hear you say it [2:05:22] no impact on this country [2:05:24] that's just absurd [2:05:26] so what are we going to do [2:05:28] we're going to try to start with the magnets [2:05:30] if you don't think sanctuary city policy [2:05:32] is illegal immigration [2:05:34] that's just insane [2:05:36] how can you fix it [2:05:38] if you don't take the magnets off the table [2:05:40] the bottom line is [2:05:42] I want a vote on my bill [2:05:45] to hold local and state officials accountable [2:05:47] for violating federal law [2:05:49] when they should enforce it [2:05:51] like they did during Obama [2:05:53] and you won't let me have a vote [2:05:56] you won't let me have the debate [2:05:58] the reason you don't want to vote [2:06:00] is because 70 to 80% of the American public [2:06:02] think the policies you're pushing [2:06:04] there is a budget impact [2:06:06] to being overrun in a country [2:06:08] in a four year period [2:06:10] to think this is not a problem [2:06:12] is insulting to the American people [2:06:15] it is a problem [2:06:17] and you try to rationalize it and make it a good thing [2:06:19] it's not a good thing it's a bad thing [2:06:21] at the end of the day [2:06:24] if you can't answer the question [2:06:26] it should be a crime [2:06:28] to come into the country legally [2:06:30] that says all you really need to know about the people here [2:06:32] of course it should be [2:06:34] it should be a crime as Senator Marino said to go in your house without being evicted [2:06:36] we cannot have a sovereign nation [2:06:38] when people just show up [2:06:40] and come in [2:06:43] and go anywhere they want to go [2:06:46] that's just not rational [2:06:48] we've got more people on the terrorist watch list [2:06:50] than we've ever had [2:06:52] 2700% [2:06:54] the people who have come here are all not well meaning [2:06:56] I understand immigration pretty well [2:06:58] I understand the need to fix it [2:07:00] the American people want to be fair [2:07:02] but Senator Merkley [2:07:04] they're not going to [2:07:07] buy into a system [2:07:09] that constantly allows people to come in [2:07:11] unchecked [2:07:14] once you can prove to them [2:07:16] you've stopped illegal immigration [2:07:18] then we can have a rational discussion [2:07:20] about what to do with people who have been here a long time [2:07:22] but you've doubled or tripled [2:07:24] the number of people [2:07:26] so all I will say [2:07:28] this is a debate worthy of a great nation [2:07:30] our democratic friends are accepting [2:07:32] of a sanctuary policy [2:07:34] they don't think it's a problem [2:07:36] I do [2:07:38] let's have a debate let's have a vote [2:07:40] going into 2026 [2:07:42] as to who should be in charge [2:07:44] of controlling our borders [2:07:46] and enforcing law [2:07:49] this administration is enforcing the law [2:07:51] the prior administration obliterated the law [2:07:53] thank you very much [2:07:56] to all of you for coming [2:07:58] I appreciate your time and attention [2:08:00] Senator Merkley thank you the hearing is adjourned [2:08:02] and oh one second [2:08:04] I want to introduce a statement [2:08:06] yeah you can finish up [2:08:08] Donald Rosenberg was unable to be here [2:08:10] I'd like to put his statement in the record [2:08:12] for the victims of legal alien crime [2:08:14] without objection I'd like to introduce [2:08:17] his statement if that's okay [2:08:20] is that okay yes thank you [2:08:22] I want to thank our witnesses [2:08:24] for preparing for the committee [2:08:26] you want to finish your thought go ahead [2:08:28] Mr. Behr you have a pile of documents [2:08:30] did you want to enter those into the record [2:08:32] what are those documents without objection [2:08:34] these are all the studies that show [2:08:38] that immigrants do not increase crime [2:08:40] and places that place restrictions [2:08:42] on ICE cooperation [2:08:44] are not the only [2:08:46] resulting in increasing crime [2:08:48] without objection thank you [2:08:50] the hearing record will remain open until noon tomorrow [2:08:52] for the submission of questions to the record [2:08:54] to the committee clerk [2:08:56] the hearing is adjourned thank you all very very much