Border Protection, Antiterrorism, and Illegal Immigration Control Act of 2005

BORDER PROTECTION, ANTITERRORISM, AND ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION CONTROL ACT OF 2005 -- (House of Representatives - December 15, 2005)

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. McCAUL of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Let me say at first, I have great respect for the gentlewoman from Texas, and I know this is a well intentioned amendment. However, I believe there are numerous problems with this amendment.

It is unnecessary and seeks to create a class of aliens who will are not be detained with the rest of the alien population. However, the mandatory detention provision of H.R. 4377 preserves the already existing parole authority under section 212(d)(5)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act that waives mandatory detention and releases aliens for urgent humanitarian reasons or for significant public benefit. In other words, the Secretary already is empowered and has discretion to release juveniles and aliens who have serious medical conditions in which continued detention would not be appropriate and women who have been medically certified as pregnant, the very classes that the gentlewoman seeks too release.

Also, this amendment creates a whole new bureaucracy that is not necessary. It takes away power from the department and those who are really experienced with these issues and concerns involving the detention of aliens and empowers independent groups, NGOs and academic experts from the immigration and the criminal justice field, with the authority to design this program separate and apart from the Department of Homeland Security. This amendment also requires the Secretary of Homeland Security to enter into contracts with groups including the NGOs and individuals to implement the program.

Simply put, this amendment applies only to illegal aliens who are in expedited removal, which is typically 30 to 90 days. Such individuals will be removed quickly from the United States. Allowing them to be released outside of what the statute already prescribes would only create more incentive for them to enter into and remain in this country.

In addition, this amendment seeks to protect aliens with valid claims of asylum who are already protected under this bill. H.R. 4377 does not change current law regarding those with valid claims of asylum. They currently have and, if this bill passes, will still have that right. Detention of such aliens is still discretionary once placed into asylum proceedings.

And, finally, this amendment seeks to shift the authority for unaccompanied alien children to the Department of Health and Human Services. We have a serious and significant youth alien gang problem in the United States, MS-13, for instance, whose members are primarily from El Salvador and enter illegally into the United States across our land borders. Some of these gangs are dangerous criminals and such members of alien gangs who could potentially be not only criminals but terrorists. This amendment provides for a sweeping shift of power from the Department of Homeland Security to HHS to deal with such aliens. I submit that DHS has the expertise to deal with aliens.

We are in a crisis. That is why we are debating this bill today, and mandating this change in law is not how the government should be responding to these types of serious problems. This provision, simply put, removes all discretion from the Secretary of Homeland Security, where it properly resides, to determine who should be detained and not detained. And, therefore, for those reasons, I respectfully oppose this well-intentioned amendment.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. McCAUL of Texas. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I am sure we can point to extreme examples, but the fact of the matter is that the statute does already provide and gives the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security discretion to release juveniles, aliens with medical conditions and aliens who are medically certified as pregnant. I think this is already addressed by the law. And, therefore, this well-intentioned amendment, I believe, is unneces

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. McCAUL of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

The gentlewoman's, again, well-intentioned amendment says that the Secretary shall, mandatory language, shall design a program in consultation with nongovernmental organizations and academic experts in immigration and criminal justice. Again, this is a very serious matter, and I believe that the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security is in the best position to make these determinations, not outside groups. And, of course, the Secretary can get any advice he wishes, but this is a decision for him to make and not for outside nongovernmental organizations.

http://thomas.loc.gov/