[House Hearing, 119 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
FAIRFAX COUNTY, VIRGINIA: THE DANGEROUS
CONSEQUENCES OF SANCTUARY POLICIES
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON IMMIGRATION INTEGRITY,
SECURITY, AND ENFORCEMENT
COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
THURSDAY, MAY 14, 2026
__________
Serial No. 119-68
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on the Judiciary
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available via: http://judiciary.house.gov
______
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
63-756 WASHINGTON : 2026
COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
JIM JORDAN, Ohio, Chair
DARRELL ISSA, California JAMIE RASKIN, Maryland, Ranking
ANDY BIGGS, Arizona Member
TOM McCLINTOCK, California JERROLD NADLER, New York
THOMAS P. TIFFANY, Wisconsin ZOE LOFGREN, California
THOMAS MASSIE, Kentucky STEVE COHEN, Tennessee
CHIP ROY, Texas HENRY C. ``HANK'' JOHNSON, Jr.,
SCOTT FITZGERALD, Wisconsin Georgia
BEN CLINE, Virginia TED LIEU, California
LANCE GOODEN, Texas PRAMILA JAYAPAL, Washington
JEFFERSON VAN DREW, New Jersey J. LUIS CORREA, California
TROY E. NEHLS, Texas MARY GAY SCANLON, Pennsylvania
BARRY MOORE, Alabama JOE NEGUSE, Colorado
HARRIET M. HAGEMAN, Wyoming LUCY McBATH, Georgia
LAUREL M. LEE, Florida DEBORAH K. ROSS, North Carolina
WESLEY HUNT, Texas BECCA BALINT, Vermont
RUSSELL FRY, South Carolina JESUS G. ``CHUY'' GARCIA, Illinois
KEVIN KILEY, California SYDNEY KAMLAGER-DOVE, California
GLENN GROTHMAN, Wisconsin JARED MOSKOWITZ, Florida
BRAD KNOTT, North Carolina DANIEL S. GOLDMAN, New York
MARK HARRIS, North Carolina JASMINE CROCKETT, Texas
ROBERT F. ONDER, Jr., Missouri Vacancy
DEREK SCHMIDT, Kansas
BRANDON GILL, Texas
MICHAEL BAUMGARTNER, Washington
------
SUBCOMMITTEE ON IMMIGRATION INTEGRITY, SECURITY,
AND ENFORCEMENT
TOM McCLINTOCK, California, Chair
ANDY BIGGS, Arizona PRAMILA JAYAPAL, Washington,
TOM TIFFANY, Wisconsin Ranking Member
CHIP ROY, Texas JERROLD NADLER, New York
JEFF VAN DREW, New Jersey J. LUIS CORREA, California
TROY NEHLS, Texas MARY GAY SCANLON, Pennsylvania
BARRY MOORE, Alabama DEBORAH K. ROSS, North Carolina
WESLEY HUNT, Texas JESUS G. ``CHUY'' GARCIA, Illinois
RUSSELL FRY, South Carolina JASMINE CROCKETT, Texas
GLENN GROTHMAN, Wisconsin ZOE LOFGREN, California
BRAD KNOTT, North Carolina STEVE COHEN, Tennessee
ROBERT F. ONDER, Missouri Vacant
DEREK SCHMIDT, Kansas Vacant
BRANDON GILL, Texas Vacant
CHRISTOPHER HIXON, Majority Staff Director
ARTHUR EWENCZYK, Minority Staff Director
C O N T E N T S
----------
Thursday, May 14, 2026
OPENING STATEMENTS
Page
The Honorable Tom McClintock, Chair of the Subcommittee on
Immigration Integrity, Security, and Enforcement from the State
of California.................................................. 1
The Honorable Pramila Jayapal, Ranking Member of the Subcommittee
on Immigration Integrity, Security, and Enforcement from the
State of Washington............................................ 3
The Honorable Jim Jordan, Chair of the Committee on the Judiciary
from the State of Ohio......................................... 5
The Honorable Jamie Raskin, Ranking Member of the Committee on
the Judiciary from the State of Maryland....................... 7
WITNESSES
Sheriff Stacey A. Kincaid, Fairfax County Sheriff's Office
Oral Testimony................................................. 9
Prepared Testimony............................................. 12
The Hon. Stephen Descano, Commonwealth's Attorney, Office of
Fairfax County Commonwealth's Attorney
Oral Testimony................................................. 15
Prepared Testimony............................................. 17
The Hon. Jason Miyares, Partner, Torridon Law PLLC
Oral Testimony................................................. 19
Prepared Testimony............................................. 21
Jane Stoever, Professor, University of California, Irvine School
of Law
Oral Testimony................................................. 24
Prepared Testimony............................................. 26
David Bier, Director, Immigration Studies, Cato Institute
Oral Testimony................................................. 41
Prepared Testimony............................................. 43
Sean Kennedy, President, Virginians for Safe Communities, Member
of the Fairfax County Criminal Justice Advisory Board
Oral Testimony................................................. 64
Prepared Testimony............................................. 66
Cheryl Minter, Mother of victim Stephanie Minter
Oral Testimony................................................. 124
Prepared Testimony............................................. 126
LETTERS, STATEMENTS, ETC. SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING
All materials submitted for the record by the Subcommittee on
Immigration Integrity, Security, and Enforcement are listed
below.......................................................... 160
Materials submitted by the Honorable Andy Biggs, a Member of
Subcommittee on Immigration Integrity, Security, and
Enforcement Arizona, for the record
An article entitled, ``Virginia murder suspect in bus stop
stabbing had lengthy criminal history, multiple dropped
charges,'' Feb. 27, 2026, Fox News
An article entitled, `` `Completely failed Stephanie:' Family
of woman killed in Fairfax County speaks out,'' Mar. 9,
2026, 7News
An article entitled, ``Illegal Alien With Lengthy Arrest
Record Allegedly Butchers Woman At Virginia Bus Stop,''
Feb. 27, 2026, Daily Caller
An article entitled, ``The pathetic reason illegal migrant
who `hacked mom to death' in lefty DC suburb was free--
despite 30 arrests,'' Mar. 3, 2026, New York Post
An article entitled, ``Grieving Virginia mother tells far-
left prosecutor `do your job' after daughter stabbed to
death,'' Mar. 12, 2026, Fox News
Materials submitted by the Honorable Pramila Jayapal, Ranking
Member of the Subcommittee on Immigration Integrity, Security,
and Enforcement from the State of Washington, for the record
An article entitled, ``Seattle Welcoming City Policies Keep
Immigrants Safe,'' May 14, 2026, South Seattle Emerald
A political analysis entitled, ``Immigrants Cut Victimization
Rates, Boost Crime Reporting,'' Aug. 26, 2025, Cato
Institute
An article entitled, ``Family says Virginia domestic violence
victim didn't seek help due to immigration fears,'' Sept.
10, 2025, NBC
An article entitled, ``She Testified About Being Raped. Then
ICE Showed Up,'' Apr. 6, 2026, The Atlantic
APPENDIX
Materials submitted by the Honorable Pramila Jayapal, Ranking
Member of the Subcommittee on Immigration Integrity, Security,
and Enforcement from the State of Washington, for the record
A statement entitled, ``Data Matters: Fairfax County and
National Data Support Local Policies Against Voluntary
Cooperation with Ice,'' May 13, 2026, American Civil
Liberties Union (ACLU)
A statement from the UN Working Group on discrimination
against women and girls, May 14, 2026
A statement from the Virginia Sexual and Domestic Violence
Action Alliance, May 14, 2026
A joint statement from several universities, May 14, 2026
A statement from Americans for Immigrant Justice, May 14,
2026
FAIRFAX COUNTY, VIRGINIA:
THE DANGEROUS CONSEQUENCES OF SANCTUARY POLICIES
----------
Thursday, May 14, 2026
House of Representatives
Subcommittee on Immigration Integrity, Security,
and Enforcement
Committee on the Judiciary
Washington, DC
The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10 a.m., in Room
2141, Rayburn House Office Building, the Hon. Tom McClintock
[Chair of the Subcommittee] presiding.
Present: Representatives McClintock, Jordan, Biggs,
Tiffany, Van Drew, Nehls, Fry, Grothman, Knott, Onder, Schmidt,
Gill, Jordan, Jayapal, Raskin, Nadler, Scanlon, and Ross.
Also present: Representative Cline.
Mr. McClintock. [Presiding.] The Subcommittee will come to
order. Without objection, the Chair is authorized to declare a
recess at any time.
I want to welcome all of you here today, and particularly
members of the public who have come to watch this hearing, but
please know the public is not allowed to disrupt the Committee
proceedings. If you disrupt today's proceedings, the Capitol
Police will have to remove you from the room, and you may be
subject to prosecution.
Without objection, Mr. Cline will be permitted to
participate in today's hearing for the purpose of questioning
the witnesses, if a Member yields him the time for that
purpose.
We will now begin with opening statements.
This Subcommittee has become increasingly concerned with
so-called sanctuary policies in which local or State law
enforcement simply refuses to transfer illegal aliens who are
already in their custody to Federal authorities for
deportation, or at the very least, notify Federal authorities
about a criminal's release. Instead, these jurisdictions
release these criminals back into our communities, often with
devastating consequences.
The doctrine of nullification, first propounded by John C.
Calhoun, holds that local or State governments may simply
ignore Federal laws that they disagree with. This doctrine,
fatal to a Federal republic, was thought to have died with the
Confederacy. These nullification or sanctuary jurisdictions now
extend to 11 States, coincidentally, the same number as the old
Confederacy.
Fairfax County has become an epicenter of this movement.
Its Commonwealth's Attorney boasted that quote,
He will make charging and plea decisions that limit or avoid
immigration consequences.
He wrote, quote,
If two people commit the same crime, but only one's punishment
includes deportation, that's a perversion of justice.
Thus, an illegal alien would be charged with a lesser crime
than an American citizen to protect that illegal alien from
deportation. That is the true perversion of equal justice under
law and has now prompted an investigation by the Civil Rights
Division of the Department of Justice.
Fairfax County's sheriff takes a similar position, that her
office, quote,
Will not detain an individual based on an informal request or
detainer.
Instead of safely allowing ICE to return that criminal to his
own country, as Federal law requires, she prefers to release
him back onto her community's streets.
Ironically, both claim this is to foster trust between
residents and law enforcement, which begs the obvious question,
can residents trust law enforcement to protect them and their
families?
A long list of violent crimes perpetrated by criminal
illegal aliens that these officials had in their custody and
refused to prosecute and refused to remove from their
communities answers this question with poignancy.
The most recent case is the tragic and entirely preventable
murder of Stephanie Minter, the young lady stabbed to death as
she waited for a bus. Her accused murder is Abdul Jalloh,
illegally present in the United States. Since 2022, Jalloh's
criminal history has included trespass, disorderly conduct,
drug possession, theft, larceny, and repeated arrests for
malicious wounding.
Between January 2023 and February 2026, he had been
arrested at least 18 times. The Commonwealth's Attorney Descano
dismissed almost all these charges. At least once, Sheriff
Kincaid, instead of informing ICE that he was in custody, so
that he could be deported, and despite a detainer request from
DHS to do so, deliberately released him back onto Fairfax
County streets.
Last year, the Fairfax County Police Department became so
alarmed at these decisions that they took the extraordinary
step of warning Descano that Jalloh had, quote, ``stabbed
multiple people, sexually assaulted at least one woman, and
committed numerous other criminal offenses.''
The police then issued this grim prophecy, ``It is not a
question of if, but rather, when he will maliciously wound, or
worse, again.''
Well, the ``when'' came on February 23rd. That is the day
this monster is accused of hacking Stephanie Minter to death.
She was 41 years old. She leaves behind a grieving family.
Now, Sheriff Kincaid says she doesn't have the budget to
call ICE to pick up such criminals before she releases them
back onto the streets. Well, that begs the question, how much
does a phone call to ICE cost, and what was the cost to the
Minter family of not making that call?
Nor is this an isolated incident. There's a growing list of
other criminal illegal aliens who these authorities had in
custody and released back onto the streets, instead of making a
simple phone call to ICE to pick this person up. It includes
illegal aliens who had their charges reduced, or even dropped
altogether, despite crimes ranging from child sex offenses to
murder.
Of the seven homicides in Fairfax County last year, three
were committed by illegal aliens who could have been deported
before they committed these crimes. Mr. Descano's empty claim
to be the safest city of its size in the country rings hollow
against this reality.
Just as Stephanie Minter's murder wasn't an isolated event
in Fairfax County, neither is Fairfax County an isolated
example in our country. This utter dereliction of duty is
rampant across jurisdictions that Democrats control, including
my State of California, where the Tulare sheriff recently
testified that fully half of the crimes he is dealing with
involve illegal aliens. Yet, State law forbids him from
cooperating with ICE because the Democrats don't want to
enforce our immigration laws even against criminals in custody.
To most Americans, these policies seem reckless, dangerous,
crazy, wanton, and cruel. Today, this Subcommittee seeks to
understand how elected officials entrusted with the sacred
responsibility to protect innocent and law-abiding residents
would deliberately act in this manner.
We will soon hear their rationale. We will hear from
witnesses the Democrats have chosen in support of these
policies, and we will also hear from the former Attorney
General of Virginia and the President of Virginians for Safe
Communities who take a very different view.
Finally, we will hear from Stephanie's mother, who has
bravely come here today to provide a victim's statement of the
toll these policies have taken on her family and who offers a
grim warning to all Americans of what could happen to them at
any time where these dangerous policies are practiced.
I look forward to hearing from our witnesses, and I now
yield to the Ranking Member for her opening statement.
Ms. Jayapal. Thank you so much, Mr. Chair. Thank you to all
our witnesses for being here today.
I want to start by offering my deepest condolences to you,
Ms. Minter. As a mother myself, I just cannot imagine the pain
that you are experiencing in losing your daughter far, far, far
too soon. I'm sorry for your loss.
I also understand that we are joined by people from the
Fairfax community today, and I want to welcome you. If you are
willing, would you please stand up if you are from Fairfax
County? Wow, a lot of you.
Please remain standing if you support immigrants and
support policies that make sure that everyone feels safe in
calling 911.
I want to note for the record that everyone has remained
standing, and it looks to be a crowd of over 50 people. Thank
you so much for being here. You may be seated.
This hearing is, unfortunately, another in a series of
hearings that the Majority has held that consistently attack
trust policies that have upheld the necessary and important
division between the enforcement of Federal civil immigration
law and the enforcement of local criminal laws. This division
has proven over and over again in documented research to be
essential in keeping all communities safe and ensuring that
people come forward to report crimes.
Immigration enforcement is a Federal responsibility, and
last year, Republicans gave the Department of Homeland Security
over $170 billion in their Big Bad Betrayal Bill to meet the
arbitrary immigrant arrest quotas of Stephen Miller and to
carry out Donald Trump's cruel mass deportation agenda.
Using this funding, ICE doubled in size; DHS officers
killed two U.S. citizens in cold blood in Minnesota; beat and
detained countless U.S. citizens for exercising their First
Amendment rights and broke down doors of U.S. citizens without
a warrant, in violation of the Fourth Amendment.
We know of at least one U.S. citizen who has been arrested
by ICE three times, despite repeatedly informing agents that he
is a U.S. citizen. Another 18-year-old U.S. citizen with
terminal cancer spent the last weeks of his life begging ICE to
release his parents, so that he could see them before he died.
They reunited one day before he died. That is just what they
have done to Americans.
ICE is also subjecting hundreds of parents and children to
months in immigration prisons, conducted senseless deportations
of military veterans, separated families, massively increased
immigration detention, resulting in a record 48 deaths in ICE
detention just since President Trump took office.
A recent political analysis revealed that judges have ruled
in at least 10,000 cases that detention was illegal with no due
process, no opportunity for detainees to plead their cases. The
10,000 people, including a nursing mother who was separated
from her one-year-old child, despite active legal refugee
status, and a five-year-old boy detained by ICE on his way home
from school.
More than 425 judges have heard cases and reached the same
conclusions about the illegality of Donald Trump's mass
detention policies, including, by the way, a majority of Trump-
appointed judges. Three Circuit Courts have also now ruled the
policy illegal.
The impact of these illegal policies is not just being felt
by immigrants; it is ripping apart entire communities across
the country, creating fear and terror, and also, negatively
impacting opportunities for all Americans.
A new study by the National Bureau of Economic Research
just concluded that Trump's immigration raids are now even
weighing on the labor market, leading to fewer jobs for U.S.-
born men without a college degree.
Despite all this, Republicans have refused to stop these
illegal, unconstitutional, and cruel policies. They have
refused to address the fact that, while their anti-immigrant
strategies may have worked before, they don't work anymore.
Today, more than 60 percent of Americans disapprove of Trump's
immigration policies.
Americans want Trump and Republicans to focus on lowering
their gas prices, lowering their grocery costs. They want
Republicans to stop giving tax breaks to billionaires, while
stripping healthcare from tens of millions of Americans.
Donald Trump said it himself just a few days ago. In his
own words, Trump said, quote, ``I don't think about the
financial situation of Americans.'' Really? That is exactly why
Republicans are now planning to give ICE and Border Patrol an
additional $70 billion with no oversight or accountability, and
yet, having a hearing this morning to complain that Fairfax
County will not do ICE's job for them. Give me a break.
DHS has plenty of money to hire all the new immigration
enforcement agents they want. They don't need to commandeer the
local police officers who are hard at work maintaining
Fairfax's status as the safest county of its size in the United
States.
In one of the great ironies, here we are in the Immigration
Subcommittee having a hearing about the prosecutorial decisions
of a county attorney and the jail policies of a county sheriff.
Whatever happened to the Republican Party that believed in
local government?
There are many reasons that you will hear that States and
localities choose not to or are unable to conduct immigration
enforcement on behalf of the Federal Government. Numerous court
orders have declared immigration detainers unlawful violations
of the Fourth Amendment, and State and local officials don't
want to spend huge amounts of money on court cases. State
constitutions often contain prohibitions, and local police
departments want to prioritize their already scarce resources
to encourage the trust of people to come forward and report
crimes without worrying about their own immigration status.
The Major Cities Chiefs Association has repeatedly
reaffirmed that cooperation with the immigrant community is
essential to solve crime and prevent further criminal activity
within the entire community, including ensuring protections for
victims of domestic violence and sexual assault.
In 2019, my home State of Washington passed the bipartisan
Keep Washington Working Act for all these reasons, as have many
States across the country. Courts have ruled multiple times
that States have the right to enact laws like the Keep
Washington Working Act. These laws do allow information sharing
with the Federal Government, when necessary for an ongoing
criminal investigation or pursuant to a court order or judicial
warrant.
This Committee should be holding hearings on the
unconstitutionality of this administration's policies, on the
killing of American citizens by ICE and CBP, but instead, we
are doing yet another hearing designed to further this
Administration's anti-immigrant agenda and distract people from
the real issues at hand. The American people deserve better.
I look forward to hearing from all our witnesses today, and
I yield back.
Mr. McClintock. Thank you. I now recognize the Chair of the
Full Judiciary Committee, Mr. Jordan, for his opening
statement.
Chair Jordan. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
First, they let in 10 million illegal migrants during the
Biden Administration.
Second, create sanctuary jurisdictions, which makes it
tough to remove those illegal migrants, even when they commit
another crime.
Third, the Democrats say, ``We're not going to fund the
guys who do the removing. We're not going to fund ICE.'' They
shut down the government for 70-some days.
Understand this: Sanctuary jurisdiction policy in simple
terms is politicians tell local law enforcement, ``Don't work
with Federal law enforcement when it comes to enforcing Federal
law.''
That is the situation in 18 States, 11 cities--actually,
the other way around 18 cities, 11 States, three counties, and
the District of Columbia. Because those are big cities, big
States, that is almost a third of the population lives in a
jurisdiction where, again, local law enforcement is not allowed
to work with Federal law enforcement to enforce Federal law.
Let in 10 million; create sanctuary jurisdictions, so it is
tough to remove them, even when they commit a crime; defund
ICE. Mr. Descano takes it even a step further. He takes it a
step further and says, ``I'm not even going to prosecute the
guys who do terrible things. I'm not going to prosecute them.
We're not going to honor detainers. We're going to let them out
on the street.''
Of course, what happens when you do that? Ms. Minter is
going to talk about that in a few minutes. That's what happens.
Take the example and take another example. Marvin Morales-
Ortez had this long rap sheet, but on September 12, 2025, he is
arrested for malicious assault and brandishing a gun. Mr.
Descano says, ``We're not going to prosecute this guy.''
Sheriff Kincaid says, ``We're not going to honor the
detainer.'' They release him on December 16, 2025.
What happens on December 17, 2025? He kills someone. That's
the consequences of this dumb, stupid, and crazy policy.
Again, Ms. Minter is going to talk about Stephanie Minter.
The Chair talked about Abdul Jalloh, who had these 40 past
charges, had all kinds of things. This guy had been arrested
and charged with multiple crimes, malicious wounding, stealing
property, larceny, trespass, disorderly conduct, malicious
wounding, and a hundred involvements with the local police. As
the Chair pointed out, the local law enforcement told Mr.
Descano's office, ``If you let this guy out, he's going to do
something bad. It's going to be bad.'' Sure enough, they were
right, and he stabbed and killed someone. That's the
consequences.
Now, here's the craziest part of all. Here's the craziest
part of all, and the Chair mentioned this. Mr. Descano told us
he was going to do it. He told us he was going to do this, the
statement I think the Chair read: ``Mr. Descano's office will
take immigration consequences into account when making charging
and plea decisions.'' This is unbelievable.
I want to thank the Chair. The Democrats can say all they
want, ``Well, why are we having another hearing?'' We are
having a hearing on this because this is the dumbest thing we
have ever heard.
I want to thank the Chair for this hearing, and I want to
thank him for the legislation that he sponsored, that this
Committee has already passed, the Sanctuary Jurisdiction
Shutdown Act of 2026. Hopefully, that is going to be passed in
the Full House soon. Love to get that into law, so we can stop
what is going on in Fairfax County.
With that, I yield back.
Mr. McClintock. Thank you. I now recognize the Ranking
Member of the Full Committee, Mr. Raskin, for his opening
statement.
Mr. Raskin. Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
Welcome to all our witnesses. I would especially like to
thank Ms. Minter for coming today. There's no greater pain than
the pain of losing your child. I thank you for having the
strength and the courage to speak publicly and to appear before
us about all these matters today.
I also want to thank the busy public officials from
Virginia, Sheriff Kincaid and Commonwealth's Attorney Descano.
We know how busy your schedules are, and we thank you for
coming to be part of this process.
I have family in Virginia. Not everybody in my family is in
Maryland. I once spent a summer in Richmond, Virginia, and I
feel somehow like I'm back in Virginia with all these great
Virginians here.
We are on a mission of analyzing Virginia law and public
policy today. This hearing would probably be better taking
place in Richmond before the General Assembly, because we are
doing a deep dive into the prosecutorial and jail policy
decisions of one county, Fairfax County, which was recently
ranked, I noted, by the Major Cities Chiefs Association as the
safest county of its size in the entire United States of
America. Its people, its elected officials, certainly do not
deserve the contempt and the derision of this Committee.
If we were going to superintend and scrutinize the actions
taking place within the government of Virginia, perhaps we
should be looking at the recent decision by the Virginia State
Supreme Court to overturn the expressed will of the people of
Virginia in redistricting their congressional districts. That
investigation into an episode of extreme judicial activism
might not suit the ideological purposes of the Majority quite
so much.
The Ranking Member has done an excellent job of providing
an overview of the problems and limitations with the particular
conception of this hearing. What we have on one side is a
massively funded Federal bureaucracy, which just got $175
billion last year, accomplished by slashing funds for Medicaid,
children's health insurance, rural hospitals, and so on. DHS
now has a quarter of a million employees and a budget larger
than that of 150 countries on Earth. It has over 80,000 sworn
officers, more than the number of police officers, check this
out in New York City, Chicago, Los Angeles, Houston,
Washington, DC, Las Vegas, and Dallas combined.
Yet, despite this massive bureaucracy and this awesome
budget, the Administration is trying to blame the problems in
immigration law and policy, over which the people of Fairfax
County have no control, other than as citizens voting for
Representatives in Congress, trying to blame these local
jurisdictions, like the sheriff's office, whose annual budget
is not $175 billion, but if the internet is correct I just
looked it up is $85 million, which is much less than 1,000th of
the Homeland Security budget.
Yet, the Federal Government or Congress, rather than
actually engaging in the process of studying and passing
comprehensive immigration reform, prefers to bully and
scapegoat local jurisdictions which are trying to deal with the
failures of Federal policy.
Look, ICE and the Department of Homeland Security have a
job to do and they should do it, and they should do it without
violating the law. They should do it without violating the
Constitution. They should do it without killing U.S. citizens,
like Renee Good and Alex Pretti. They have a job to do, and the
government of Fairfax County has a job to do. These public
officials have the job of enforcing the criminal laws of
Virginia, as chosen by the people of Virginia within all the
constraints of State and Federal law.
Now, as I understand it and this is what I'm interested in,
because I'm not familiar with what is taking place in Fairfax
County, or in Virginia. As I understand it, ICE can come and
pick up undocumented prisoners for a period of days or weeks
before they are discharged.
This has happened before, and the local and State
Government, contrary to what we just heard, cooperates fully
with the Federal Government in these cases. The idea that they
don't cooperate is just wrong.
ICE can come and pick them up before their point of
discharge. As I understand it and I want to hear more about
this they can pick them up at the point of discharge.
Fairfax County, as I understand it, takes the position it
cannot hold prisoners beyond the length and duration of their
lawful sentence. I want to hear about that.
I'm curious, why can ICE not pick up with its massive
resources why can they not pick up the prisoners while they are
still being held, or right before they are about to be
released, or at the point of discharge? I don't really
understand that.
Then, again, I understand everybody is eager to beat up on
Fairfax County for some reason, but in terms of the specific
terrible case we are going to talk about today, we are going to
hear about this Abdul Jalloh, the Sierra Leone national who is
accused of brutally murdering Ms. Minter's daughter Stephanie.
He was actually in ICE custody from 2018-2019, during the
first Trump Administration, before they released him back into
the public, as I understand it. I want to get to the bottom of
that report. Why was he not removed back to Sierra Leone when
the Trump Administration held him in 2018 and 2019? That is a
critical question that I have in terms of trying to define
responsibility, if all this is just a blame game that we are
engaged in.
It would be far more meaningful for us to be talking about
comprehensive immigration reform. That is what Americans and
Virginians are looking to Congress for not to be scrutinizing
and demonizing particular cities or counties around the
country, which does not strike me as a very productive
exercise.
Nonetheless, I'm delighted to hear from all our witnesses
here, and I yield back to you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. McClintock. Thank you. Without objection, all other
opening statements will be included in the record. We will now
hear from today's witnesses.
We have with us today Ms. Cheryl Minter. She is a lifelong
Virginia resident. She is the mother of Stephanie Minter, the
young woman who was victimized by these sanctuary policies.
We have with us the Hon. Stacey Kincaid, who serves as
Sheriff for Fairfax County, Virginia. She has 35 years of
experience working for the Fairfax County Sheriff's Office. A
graduate of Langley High School in McLean, Virginia, Sheriff
Kincaid received her bachelor's degree in political science and
criminal justice from the Frostburg State University in 1987.
We have Hon. Stephen Descano, who serves as the
Commonwealth's Attorney for Fairfax County, Virginia. He has
served in this role since January 2020. Mr. Descano earned his
undergraduate degree from West Point and his JD from Temple
University.
Mr. Sean Kennedy is President of Virginians for Safe
Communities, a public safety and victims' right advocacy
nonprofit, and sits on the Fairfax County Criminal Justice
Advisory Board as an appointee of the Fairfax County Board of
Supervisors. He is a graduate of the University of California
at Berkeley and earned a master's degree in history from the
University of Cambridge.
Professor Jane Stoever is a Professor at the University of
California, Irvine School of Law, where she directs the
Domestic Violence Clinic and the UCI Initiative to End Family
Violence. Professor Stoever earned a bachelor's degree in
English from the University of Kansas in 2000. She completed
her JD at Harvard in 2003 and earned an LLM from Georgetown
University in 2008.
Mr. David Bier is the Director of Immigration Studies at
the Cato Institute. He has a BA in political science from Grove
City College in Pennsylvania.
We have with us Hon. Jason Miyares, who served as Virginia
Attorney General from 2021-2025. He previously served in the
House of Delegates. He earned a bachelor's degree in business
administration from James Madison University in 1998 and earned
his JD from the College of William and Mary in 2005.
I want to welcome all of today's witnesses, thank them for
appearing, and we'll begin by swearing you in. Would you please
rise and raise your hand?
Do you swear or affirm under penalty of perjury that the
testimony you're about to give is true and correct to the best
of your knowledge and information and belief, so help you God?
Let the record reflect the witnesses have answered in the
affirmative.
Thank you, and you may be seated.
We note that your written testimony will be entered into
the record in its entirety. Accordingly, we will ask that you
to summarize your testimony in five minutes.
We will begin with Sheriff Kincaid.
STATEMENT OF SHERIFF STACEY A. KINCAID
Sheriff Kincaid. Good morning. Chair McClintock, Ranking
Member Jayapal, and the distinguished Members of the
Subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to appear before
you today.
My name is Stacey Ann Kincaid, and I am the Sheriff of
Fairfax County, Virginia. I was sworn in as a Deputy Sheriff in
1987 and I worked my way through the ranks of my agency,
serving in every division with distinction.
After achieving the rank of captain, I ran for sheriff in
2013 and have since been reelected three times with
overwhelming majorities. As sheriff, it's been an honor to
serve Fairfax County.
The safety and security of Fairfax County have been my
absolute priority for the past 38 years. I entered law
enforcement to save to serve my community and to help protect
the vulnerable. I believe all those that commit crimes should
be held accountable, and I sympathize with all victims of
crimes.
I am proud of the role my agency plays in the Fairfax
County criminal justice system by ensuring the safe and orderly
administration of justice. Simply put, the justice system comes
to a halt without the Fairfax County's Sheriff's Office.
We are tasked with serving every document issued by our
court system, including protective orders and subpoenas. We are
responsible for providing security to our courthouse and
ensuring the safety of hundreds of thousands of courthouse
visitors every year, including judges, victims, and witnesses.
We operate a secure and humane adult detention center, and
we hold certifications from the American Correctional
Association, the Virginia Law Enforcement Professional
Standards Commission, the Virginia Department of Corrections,
and the National Commission on Correctional Health Care
(NCCHC).
In addition to our accreditation, I am proud of the
groundbreak-
ing, nationally recognized programs that run daily in my jail.
These efforts are critical to reducing recidivism and making
our community safer.
The functions of my agency are carried out daily to ensure
the safe and orderly administration of justice in Fairfax
County. My agency is not staffed for, budgeted for, or mandated
to perform the duties of the Federal Government. My operating
budget is approved by State and local government and is
allotted specifically to carry out State and local mandated
functions maintaining a safe and secure detention center,
serving civil process, and ensuring the safety of the
courthouse. It is simply not the job of the Fairfax County
Sheriff's Office to engage in Federal immigration enforcement.
Despite this, we work with ICE in significant ways. We
treat them like every other law enforcement agency we interact
with. They are allowed into our facility at any time. They are
notified of every undocumented immigrant booked into our jail
and they know their location. If there is an individual they
want to take custody of, they can do so by obtaining a judicial
warrant, calling to ask when the individual will be released,
tracking the individual's court date, or taking custody of the
individual up to five days prior to their release.
When ICE does call, we even coordinate high-risk transfers
with ICE to ensure their safety. We have no problem with ICE
conducting its lawful business, but it is their business to
conduct, not ours.
Fairfax County is one of the top 50 most diverse counties
in the entire Nation. Over 30 percent of Fairfax County's
population is foreign-born, and over 40 percent speaks a
language other than English at home. I am the sheriff for each
one of these residents of Fairfax County, no matter their
national origin, native language, and citizenship status.
Ensuring trust between the community and my agency is a key
component of effective law enforcement. To encourage all
victims to put their faith in law enforcement and report
crimes, a clear separation between local law enforcement and
Federal immigration authorities is of vital importance. Local
law enforcement must offer a safe place for victims and
witnesses to cooperate without fear of consequences. This is
the only way to hold violators accountable of the law.
Any violent crime or crime against children is a tragedy.
Unfortunately, we live in a time when such tragedies are used
for political gain. It is easy to point fingers at a time of
sadness and crisis, and to look for blame for a terrible
outcome.
Even when everyone in the criminal justice system does
their job, terrible people will do terrible things. We are
doing our job by following the law and will continue to do so.
Hopefully, the other agencies involved will do their jobs as
well.
I look forward to continuing this conversation with anyone
who wishes to find real solution devoid of politics.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Sheriff Kincaid follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. McClintock. Thank you for your testimony. Mr. Descano?
STATEMENT OF THE HON. STEPHEN DESCANO
Mr. Descano. Chair McClintock, Ranking Member Jayapal,
Chair Jordan, Ranking Member Raskin, and the distinguished
Members of this Subcommittee, as a West Point graduate, Federal
prosecutor, and now the Commonwealth's Attorney for Fairfax
County, Virginia, I have devoted my life to public service and
public safety.
I was the first in my family to graduate from college, and
I was inspired by West Point's credo of providing a lifetime of
selfless service to the Nation.
I was first elected as Commonwealth's Attorney in 2019 on a
promise to adopt smart-on-crime policies that prioritized the
prosecution of violent crime. I'm proud of what we have
accomplished. Fairfax County is one of the safety large
communities anywhere in the country.
The public safety of Fairfax County motivates all my work.
Our office has successfully prosecuted thousands of cases,
including high-profile murders, sexual assaults, and other
serious offenses. We've worked with our law enforcement
partners to more effectively prosecute gun crimes; we expanded
a diversion program for struggling veterans; and we spearheaded
bipartisan, statewide reforms to better protect child victims
and witnesses, in partnership with the Republican Governor.
Even in safe communities, though, crime does happen, like
the tragic murder of Stephanie Minter, whose mother Cheryl is
here today.
Ms. Minter, I am deeply sorry for your loss. I say that not
only as a prosecutor, but as a parent of a daughter. I am sorry
for what you are having to endure. I promise that my office is
doing everything we can to prosecute the man responsible.
I've been asked to testify today about my office's
policies. I welcome any conversation about how to reduce and
prevent violence. Unfortunately, I expect some will, instead,
promote a false narrative that gets us no closer to real
solutions that Americans deserve.
Let me be absolutely clear. My office does not provide
sanctuary or safe harbor to undocumented immigrants. In fact,
we routinely prosecute immigrants who commit crimes and we will
continue to do so.
Our approach to prosecution of crime has helped make
Fairfax County one of the safest jurisdictions of its size in
the country. Last year, we had far fewer homicides than in
almost any other major jurisdiction in the United States,
including in States that many Members of this Subcommittee
represent.
Serious violent crime in Fairfax County is also lower than
that of most other large jurisdictions, and Fairfax residents
know it's safe. A Washington Post poll found that 94 percent of
Northern Virginia residents reported feeling safe from crime in
their neighborhood. The citizens of Fairfax County have weighed
in by reelecting me with 77 percent of the vote.
My office also works with our Federal partners to prosecute
crimes, and like many State and local prosecutors, my office
has a policy of not assisting ICE with Federal civil
immigration enforcement. We do not have the budget or personnel
to enforce Federal civil immigration law, and it is simply not
our job.
We handle 15,000 criminal cases each year, which are 52
full-time attorneys and a limited budget. Our policy of not
diverting our resources to Federal immigration enforcement also
makes our community safer. Three in 10 residents in Fairfax
County are immigrants. When crimes occur, we need victims and
witnesses, including members of our immigrant communities, to
report those crimes and come to court to testify. If victims
and witnesses believe my office will report them or their
neighbors to ICE, they will not trust us and they will not
provide the testimony we need to obtain convictions and get
justice.
It is justice that my office is now seeking by prosecuting
the defendant Abdul Jalloh in the tragic murder of Stephanie
Minter. The system failed Ms. Minter, and we should all look
for ways we can prevent tragedies like this in the future. That
starts with understanding the facts.
The defendant was well-known by ICE as early as 2018, when
ICE held him in custody for nearly two years during the first
Trump Administration, only to release him into the community.
After that, my office worked closely with law enforcement to
prosecute him and obtain convictions for his crime wherever
possible, and despite challenges in those cases.
We are fully committed to holding the defendant accountable
in this case. As a local prosecutor, I will continue to focus
on my job prosecuting defendants who commit crimes in Fairfax
County. In carrying out that role, my office makes case
decisions based on the law, the evidence in the case, the
interests of the victim, and of service of seeking justice and
keeping our community safe.
Thank you for having me, and I welcome your questions.
[The prepared statement of the Hon. Descano follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. McClintock. Thank you for your testimony. We will next
hear from the former Attorney General of the State of Virginia,
Hon. Jason Miyares.
STATEMENT OF THE HON. JASON MIYARES
Mr. Miyares. Mr. Chair, Ranking Member, and the Members of
the Subcommittee, before I say anything else, I want to
acknowledge the woman seated with us today, Ms. Cheryl Minter,
the mother of Stephanie. She has agreed to share her story with
this Committee, and there is no one braver in this room. I will
let her speak about what she has lost, but I want to give you
is the context, because what happened to Stephanie did not have
to happen in this vacuum.
Now, I come to the immigration issue personally. My mother
fled communist Cuba literally penniless and homeless, and not
knowing where her next meal was going to come from. She came to
this country legally, stood in line, filled out the forms, and
did everything the right way because she believed in the rule
of law and the promise of America. She left behind everything
because she knew she wanted to come here the right way. That's
what legal immigration looks like. I'm the son of a legal
immigrant; I believe in immigration deeply.
What I do not believe in, what I cannot accept, is a system
that extends preferential treatment to those who break our laws
at the direct expense of the American citizens whose laws are
supposed to protect. In Fairfax County, Virginia, that is
precisely what happened not once, not twice, repeatedly.
Cheryl will tell you about Stephanie. The Members of this
Committee, I want you to understand that Stephanie Minter is
not an isolated tragedy. She is the most recent and visible
name in a documented and ongoing pattern of preventable crimes,
a pattern with a single common cause: The sanctuary policies of
Fairfax County.
In December 2025, a man was shot and killed inside his own
home in Reston, one day after Marvin Fernando Morales-Ortez, a
criminal illegal alien from El Salvador, was released from
jail, despite an active ICE detainer. He had prior arrests for
aggravated assault of a police officer. Fairfax refused to hold
him. He killed a man the very next day. A single phone call
from Fairfax to ICE would have saved this man's life.
In November 2024, a woman was raped on a hiking trail in
Herndon, Virginia, just days after her attacker was released
from jail following a felony assault charge reduction made
without ever consulting the police. The ICE detainer was
ignored. She became the next victim.
A four-year-old girl was nearly abducted in the middle of
the night by an illegal alien who broke into her bedroom.
Charges were reduced progressively over 18 months down to a
misdemeanor, then dropped entirely.
In July 2024, two illegal aliens stamped a stabbed a man to
death at a park in Oakton. ICE had lodged multiple detainers on
one of the suspects that Fairfax County had refused to honor.
He was released back to the community. Then, he killed.
In the last several weeks, girls as young as 13 were groped
repeatedly in the hallways of a Fairfax County high school by
an illegal alien enrolled as a student at age 19. ICE asked
that he be held; Fairfax refused. Same county, same prosecutor,
same policy over and over again.
Members, this is not incompetence; this is not coincidence;
this is policy. Commonwealth's Attorney Descano publishes it on
his own website. His office's formal written policy states that
prosecutors shall, whenever possible, make charging and plea
decisions that, quote, ``limit or avoid immigration
consequences.'' That's not prosecutorial discretion; that is
discrimination against American citizens in favor of those here
illegally who commit additional crime.
That is why the Law Enforcement Legal Defense Fund
petitioned the Department of Justice, which earlier this month
opened a civil rights investigation into Mr. Descano's office
arguing that his policies violate the Equal Protection Clause
of the 14th Amendment.
Let me be clear about the law. Immigration is not a shared
power with States. It belonged exclusively to the Federal
Government, and Federal law expressly prohibits State and local
governments from restricting communication with Federal
immigration authorities. Fairfax County's policies do exactly
that. This is not noncooperation; this is a deliberate choice
to put a violent criminal back on the street.
We know what works because Virginia proved it under
Governor Glenn Youngkin. His Executive Order 47 established a
State Immigration Task Force, and within eight weeks, over 130
gang members were picked up, including the East Coast leader of
the MS-13 living freely in Prince William County. He was
captured. Virginia was called the national model.
Our new Governor Spanberger dismantled it. Her first day in
office, she signed Executive Order 1, ending State cooperation
with ICE just 19 days before Stephanie Minter was killed. She
now has a bill on her desk that would prohibit every
jurisdiction in Virginia from cooperating with ICE. I think we
all know what she will do.
Government's first and most fundamental duty is to protect
the people it governs. Sanctuary policies represent a
catastrophic and willful failure of that duty.
My mother came to this country because she believed the law
would protect her. Cheryl Minter believed the same thing.
Stephanie Minter deserved the same thing. Virginians are paying
the price. I'm asking this Committee to make this stop.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I welcome the Committee's questions.
[The prepared statement of the Hon. Miyares follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. McClintock. Thank you for your testimony. We will next
hear from Professor Stoever.
STATEMENT OF JANE STOEVER
Ms. Stoever. Chair, Ranking Member, and the distinguished
Members, thank you for the opportunity to testify.
My name is Jane Stoever, and I'm a law professor at the
University of California, Irvine School of Law, having first
taught at Georgetown and American, directing domestic violence
clinics for over 20 years now.
Today's hearing was prompted by an unthinkable tragedy, and
I extend my deepest condolences to Ms. Cheryl Minter for the
loss of her daughter Stephanie Minter.
All victims deserve safety and justice, and many has been
failed by the systems that purport to help them. I'll be direct
though. Focusing on immigration enforcement as the solution to
violence against women is rooted in false narratives, not
facts.
Contrary to the premise of this hearing, sanctuary policies
aren't obstacles to public safety; they're essential to it.
Study after study, including by criminologist Charis Kubrin,
shows that immigrants commit fewer crimes, and law enforcement
leaders have warned that, when survivors fear the police,
crimes go unreported and communities become less safe.
As Cochair of my county's Domestic Violence Death Review
Team, I can assure you, preventing abuse prevents fatalities.
Policies that allow survivors to seek help without fear, to
call the police without fear, save lives and improve community
safety.
I urge this Committee to focus on the real solutions to
preventing and responding to violence against women, because I
see my clients' safety further jeopardized now. Immigrant women
in the United States face a lifetime risk of domestic
violence--as high as 49.8 percent. That's three times the
national average and 60 percent of immigrant women married to
U.S. citizens experience immigration-related abuse.
Survivors need protection, but face a Catch 22 remains in
danger or risk deportation. Immigration enforcement has
exponentially increased as Congress has allocated $170 billion
and plans to add $70 billion more. ICE agents have daily arrest
targets and are now empowered to stop, arrest, and detain
people on the basis of race, language, location, and
employment, and immigrant survivors are being swept up.
In this context, the Alliance for Immigrant Survivors
surveyed over 170 advocates and attorneys nationwide. Their
findings are alarming. Over three-quarters of immigrant
survivors have concerns about contacting the police. Seventy
percent fear attending any court hearings, and half ultimately
choose not to contact the police or to go to court for abuse.
In Virginia, Fairfax County law enforcement reports rising
numbers of victims withdrawing complaints. Survivors are
avoiding courthouses, food banks, prenatal care, and shelters
due to ICE raids, and are arranging for third parties to take
custody of their children, should they be deported.
At the same time, legal protections are being dismantled.
Over 30 years ago, Congress enshrined protections for
immigrants in the Violence Against Women Act with bipartisan
support, and then, passed the Victims of Trafficking and
Violence Prevention Act Protection Act. Today, survivors with
pending, and even approved, petitions are being detained and
removed.
USCIS backlogs of VAWA self-petitions and lifesaving T and
U visas compound the crisis with U visas taking over a decade
to grant now.
One of my clients married a U.S. citizen, but fled life-
threatening abuse during pregnancy, only to be ordered removed
unless she could prove successful adjudication of her vow of
self-petition in one month's time. USCIS processing times are
over four years currently. We expedited her case and awaited
the decision on appeal. She is not the danger this
administration or this hearing purport to address. Yet, she has
been made a target, and I shudder to think what would happen if
she didn't have an attorney.
To seriously address crime victim safety, I respectfully
urge Congress to:
(1) Reject Section 287(g) agreements which harmfully
entangle local police with Federal immigration enforcement.
(2) To prohibit enforcement actions at courthouses, abuse
shelters, and medical facilities the places we want people to
seek help.
(3) To bar ICE from detaining or removing individuals with
pending survivor-based claims, as was Congress' original
intent.
(4) To restore valid VAWA U and T visa protections and
public benefits, to fund USCIS staffing, and increase the
annual caps.
(5) In contrast to the hundreds of billions of dollars for
immigration enforcement, $200 million in Federal victim
services grants is sitting unspent, which should be immediately
distributed to provide lifesaving services to survivors and
those organizations, including in Virginia.
Please stay focused on survivor's safety and act with
urgency to restore and strengthen vital safeguards. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Stoever follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. McClintock. Thank you. We will next hear from Mr. Bier.
STATEMENT OF DAVID J. BIER
Mr. Bier. Chair McClintock, Ranking Member Jayapal, and the
distinguished Members of the Subcommittee, thank you for the
opportunity to testify.
For half a century, the Cato Institute's research has shown
that people, whatever their ancestry, background, or
birthplace, can thrive in a free society. Our research finds
that immigrants, legal and illegal, work at higher rates,
generate more income and taxes, and have reduced the national
debt by $14.5 trillion over the last 30 years. Immigrants
improve public safety by reducing violent crime rates, meaning
that you are less likely to become a victim.
Fairfax highlights this reality. About half the county's
residents are immigrants or children of immigrants. Its
household income is double the national average. Its murder
rate is less than half the average. If illegal aliens in
Fairfax were their own city, they'd have a lower homicide rate
than 90 percent of America's largest cities and lower than the
country's homicide rate overall. Nationwide, illegal immigrants
are half as likely to commit serious crimes for which they're
serving time as U.S.-born Americans.
Despite all this, Congress refuses to allow most would-be
immigrants to come legally, which leads to illegal immigration.
Just three percent of all the people seeking permanent legal
status in the United States were approved in 2024. That was
before the current administration banned a majority of the
legal immigrants previously allowed to come, including half of
all the spouses of U.S. citizens. It has cut legal immigration
twice as much as it has cut illegal immigration. At the same
time, it terminated legal status for over two million
immigrants who were already here, creating four times as many
illegal immigrants as it has deported.
America's cities must manage the fallout from this
sabotaged system. Many have decided not to volunteer their
cops, jails, and resources to DHS. DHS doesn't like that. Under
our Constitution, cities and States don't take orders from the
feds, and thank James Madison for that. Because we all know we
wouldn't want the feds to dictate environmental policy, gun
policy, or COVID policy to the states. If you want Fairfax to
change its policies, you've got to convince them.
The first step would be to give up on the mass deportation
fantasy. About one in five Fairfax residents is someone who
could be deported or who lives with them. It would destroy
neighborhoods, rip Americans away from their spouses, parents,
friends, families, customers, employees, employers, nurses,
nannies, and teachers.
Let me be clear: Noncitizens who harm Americans should be
arrested, convicted, and deported. I think cities can help with
that, but deportation is DHS's job. Indeed, you all passed the
Laken Riley Act in 2025 to require DHS to immediately take
custody of people charged with violence or a theft.
DHS is ignoring that law. It has deprioritized threats to
focus on easy targets. They aren't tracking down the serious
criminal fugitives like the monster who killed Stephanie
Minter. Instead, DHS agents are racially profiling Americans at
Home Depots, arresting spouses of U.S. citizens at green card
interviews, beating parents of U.S. Marines, and dragging legal
immigrants and U.S. citizens from their homes without warrants.
Only six percent of ICE arrests have a violent criminal
conviction. ICE has arrested 150,000 people who have no
criminal convictions or even charges, and we know it's not
because they got everyone with a serious record. Stephanie's
case and many others prove that.
It's because they care about, as one ICE agent put it,
``quantity over quality.'' How many Stephanies will get
murdered before DHS follows the law and prioritizes serious
criminals? How many?
Most Americans don't want to wait for the answer. They want
to pause the mass deportation fantasy and focus on public
safety. That's the only policy that will defend our safety, our
prosperity, and our freedom.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Bier follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. McClintock. Thank you. Mr. Kennedy?
STATEMENT OF SEAN KENNEDY
Mr. Kennedy. Thank you, Chair, Ranking Member, and the
Members of this Committee. Thank you for inviting me to
testify.
My name is Sean Kennedy, president of Virginians for Safe
Communities, a Fairfax-based public safety and victims' rights
advocacy group, and I am an appointed member of the Fairfax
County Criminal Justice Advisory Board.
I'm going to get straight to the point. Anyone who is in
the United States without legal status, any violent criminal,
should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, and if
they don't have legal status, they should be deported. Full
stop.
Those aren't my words. That was Governor Abigail Spanberger
yesterday. In Fairfax County, neither of those things are
happening.
First, Fairfax chief prosecutor Steve Descano does not
prosecute to the fullest extent of the law. In fact, one of his
former prosecutors told me: Every time I hear Descano say,
``community values,'' I cringe because we should be following
the law, not his values. In fact, he openly flouts the law,
ordering his prosecutors to seek lighter sentences for violent
criminals and sex offenders, including murderers and child
rapists.
Second, Mr. Descano boasts that he chooses which charges to
bring and what sentences to seek, based on who is the offender.
Being illegally present earns an offender preferential
treatment, but that grace is not afforded to those who need it
the most; something that the professor just spoke about
victims. Make no mistake, the vast majority of criminal aliens'
victims are themselves immigrants. They, too, deserve justice.
They, too, deserve safety. They, too, deserve dignity. Mr.
Descano has shown a callous disregard for them and their
rights, our laws and our public safety. That is wrong and that
is illegal, and it has appalling consequences.
At four o'clock in the morning on June 15, 2023, a mother
woke to the screams of her four-year-old girl from the next
room. A man had broken in through the bedroom window and
carried off the toddler, committing burglary with the intent to
rape, according to the police.
He was well-known to the police and Mr. Descano. He was
Hyrum Baquedano-Rodriguez, a Honduran national. In 2021, two
years before, Baquedano-Rodriguez was arrested for multiple
incidents of ``indecent liberties with a child.'' Each of the
three counts carried up to 10 years in prison under Virginia
law, but Mr. Descano, who directs his prosecutors to avoid
immigration consequences, reduced the charges. Despite
committing a break-in while awaiting sentencing, Descano agreed
to a six-month sentence for prior crimes.
He was quickly arrested again for burglary to commit a
felony, punishable by 20 years, but that was reduced to
property damage. More arrests, probation violations, and
dropped charges followed. He walked free and went fugitive.
In 18 months, Baquedano-Rodriguez racked up five arrests
and 23 charges, requiring him to spend the rest of his life in
the Virginia Department of Corrections, but Mr. Descano's
policies prohibited that. He'd stated that his deputies must
``make plea offers that avoid the legislatively mandated
minimum jail sentence.'' A criminal alien was free to abduct a
sleeping little girl.
Somehow this ``parent's worst nightmare,'' in the words of
Judge Randy Bellows, got worse when Mr. Descano gave the
kidnapper a plea deal for less than two years in prison. An
outraged Judge Bellows rejected the plea agreement, saying the
only way to protect the community is a lengthy period of
incarceration.
When the same deal came before Judge Susan J. Stoney the
next year, she, too, was incredulous:
The court is concerned about the severity of the crime, the
fact the defendant's criminal history indicates a record of
other involvement with minors, and that the potential sentence
here in this case is too lenient . . . the court has grave
concern in the interest of public safety.
In a vindictive and petty move, Mr. Descano then dropped
all the charges. The little girl's family was beside
themselves. He was set to be released within hours. Denied
justice by the same man charged with protecting the innocent,
their little girl and the public, that family had to act.
The little girl's grandmother Natalie called the ICE
hotline and said, ``I gave [them] all the information I had to
the person on the other end.''
When ICE arrested him, as he walked out, she said, ``It was
a sigh of relief.'' According to the girl's mother Christy,
``God protected my little girl, but who is going to protect the
next one?'' Certainly, not Mr. Descano.
Sadly, since he has become Commonwealth's Attorney, this
case is not the exception; it is the rule. Under Mr. Descano,
it is policy. Fairfax's chief prosecutor has chosen to
sacrifice victims on the altar of ideology. Hundreds, if not
thousands, of violent and sex crimes should never have happened
if Mr. Descano followed the law, not his values.
In shielding criminal aliens, Mr. Descano shows a depraved
indifference to human suffering. That is not compassion; it is
cruelty. That is not compassion; it is cruelty.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Kennedy follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. McClintock. Thank you for your testimony. We will
finally hear from Ms. Cheryl Minter.
STATEMENT OF CHERYL MINTER
Ms. Minter. Good morning to the Members of the Committee. I
appreciate you granting me the time and space to speak. Thank
you for your attendance.
My name is Cheryl Minter. I am the mother of Stephanie
Nicole Minter. I would like to open today's subject, Stephanie
Nicole Minter, with a poem.
Every good painting will take a million strokes. To make a good
song, you have to go mining to find the perfect notes. And a
castle is created stone by stone with patience and care,
because great leaps come with small steps and time.
This poem comes from my favorite coffee cup, gifted to me
by Stephanie. We would share a cup of coffee during the early
mornings. We butted heads like every mother and daughter but
wanted to actively take steps together to make our relationship
better. We would share stories, memories, laughter, thoughts of
the future, and more. This is something I will never get to
experience again because of the failures of our justice system.
Stephanie was my daughter, my heart. She was a loving
mother, a daughter, sister, an auntie, a friend, and a mentor.
She believed in God. She cared for people. She showed up for
others, even when was tired. Stephanie was my memory, since
mine isn't that great anymore. She always knew the right Bible
verse for any situation, always smiling, always joyful, always
loved life, even through the bad times.
Stephanie was a woman who faced many battles in life. She
always came out the other side of tough times with that bright
smile on her face. That same smile is something I will never be
able to see again a smile the world will never bear witness to
again.
On February 24, 2026, I woke up to the worst call a parent
can ever receive. My daughter was gone, taken in the most
horrific way, while simply waiting for a bus in Fairfax County
on the night of February 23, 2026.
No mother should have to stand here and say these words. No
family should have to bury their child like this. Stephanie's
life mattered. Her voice mattered. Her future mattered.
Today, I stand here because her life was taken in a way
that should have never happened. The man who took my daughter's
life should not have been free to walk the streets.
He had been picked up many times. He was known. There were
warnings. There were emails sent saying he was a danger. Still,
he was released.
I am not here for politics. I am here for accountability. I
am here because a system failed my daughter.
If not for these failures, I could be sharing a cup of
coffee with Stephanie this morning rather than speaking with
you all today.
When policies protect people who are a known threat,
innocent lives are put at risk. When warnings are ignored,
families like mine pay the price. This is not just about
Stephanie; this is about every mother, every parent, every
child, and every person who waits a bus stop, walks home, or
goes to work trusting they will be safe.
We cannot ignore this. We cannot look away. Compassion
should never come at the cost of public safety. Care for one
group should not mean danger for another. We can be a community
that is both caring and responsible. We can have policies that
protect people and, also, keep our streets safe.
That means we must act. We must listen when there are
warnings. We must take threats seriously. We must make sure
that people who are dangerous are not released back into our
neighborhoods.
I will carry my daughter's name for the rest of my life. I
will carry her memory, but I should not have to carry this pain
because of a preventable failure.
Stephanie deserved to come home that day. She deserved to
watch her child grow. She deserved more time.
I am asking you, please do not let her story be ignored. Do
not let another family stand where I am standing. Make changes.
Take responsibility. Protect your community. Because no mother
should ever have to wake up to this nightmare.
I'd like to read from Psalms 28:
Give them the punishment they so richly deserve! Measure it
out in proportion to their wickedness. Pay them back for all
their evil deeds. Give them a taste of what they have done to
others. They care nothing for what the Lord has done or for
what his hands have made. So, he will tear them down, and they
will never be rebuilt.
Praise the Lord, for he has heard my cry for mercy. The Lord
is my strength and my shield. I trust him with all my heart. He
helps me, and my heart is filled with joy. I burst out in songs
of thanksgiving. The Lord gives his people strength, for he is
a safe fortress for his anointed king. Save your people! Bless
Israel, your special possession. Lead them like a shepherd and
carry them in your arms forever.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Minter follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. McClintock. Thank you. We will now move to five-minute
questions from Committee Members. We will start with Mr. Nehls.
Mr. Nehls. Thank you, sir. I'm sorry, Ms. Minter. What a
story, Stephanie; the numerous pictures we saw, beautiful.
I apologize for the individuals that have held onto these
irresponsible policies, costing the lives of many, many
innocent Americans. I apologize. Mr. Kennedy, I appreciate your
passion. You are right on target. Mr. Descano well, Sheriff
Kincaid, thank you for your service. Mr. Descano, I consider
you a disgrace.
I yield the rest of the balance of time to my colleague,
Mr. Cline.
Mr. Cline. I thank the gentleman, and I thank the Chair for
allowing me to sit on this panel today.
I represent the vast majority of Virginia citizens who
stand with you, Ms. Minter, and who are so sorry for the
tragedy that occurred, and our prayers are with you and with
your daughter, who is in heaven looking down on this right now.
I heard your apology, Mr. Descano. I think the public would
like to hear your resignation. Let me ask you, when Abdul
Jalloh is released, will you honor an ICE detainer?
Mr. Descano. Sir, my office is a prosecuting office. We
don't receive ICE detainers. That's not our business.
Mr. Cline. Will you, Sheriff Kincaid, honor the ICE
detainer?
Sheriff Kincaid. Well, thank you for that question. I would
certainly hope that this case would be prosecuted and that
justice would be served.
Certainly, when it comes to Mr. Jalloh, there haven't been
an ICE detainers, with the exception of one time in 2018, which
we turned him over to ICE, and then, the second time, which we
had to release him to a facility. Each time he's been in my
custody, there's been no detainers.
Mr. Cline. If one comes, will you honor it?
Sheriff Kincaid. As long as I have the authority to do so,
and ICE knows what our policy is.
Mr. Cline. Then, yes?
Sheriff Kincaid. If I'm given a judicial warrant, yes.
Mr. Cline. That's different.
Sheriff Kincaid. Well, it's what gives me the authority to
detain somebody when I'm getting when I receive a court order
from a judge mandating someone's release. I would also hope
that ICE would know when Mr. Jalloh is getting released, so
that they would be able to come and pick him up.
We do plan, should he get convicted, on taking him, driving
him down to the Department of Corrections.
Mr. Cline. All right. Well, Mr. Descano, your policy tells
prosecutors to give lighter treatment to defendants based on
their immigration status. Isn't that just discrimination with a
sympathetic face? Why are you protecting criminal illegal
aliens more than the people of Fairfax County, the citizens?
Mr. Descano. Well, first, sir, I think there's two things
wrong with in the question that you asked me. We're not
protecting undocumented individuals. As a matter of fact, we
prosecute people who commit crimes in Fairfax County,
regardless of their status. We and so the idea that we don't do
that is simply wrong.
Our policies simply maintain that our role is to prosecute
Virginia crime. That's what we do. ICE's role is to do Federal
civil immigration enforcement.
Mr. Cline. Mr. Miyares, do you disagree with that?
Mr. Miyares. Fundamentally. He has a written policy to that
effect. He is conflating two different issues. He's simply
saying, ``Well, I prosecute all crimes,'' at the same time he
has a written policy saying that illegal immigrants are going
to be treated and given preferential treatment differently from
American citizens. On one hand, he sits in front of this
Committee and says: We don't follow sanctuary policies. At the
same time, he openly admits he conducts himself in a manner in
which he does not cooperate with Federal immigration
authorities. That's the very definition of sanctuary policies.
No, I fundamentally disagree with his assessment. There are
95 counties in Virginia, Congressman. Only one county with one
prosecutor has a written policy saying: We're going to treat
illegal immigrants differently than American citizens. It is
Mr. Descano to my left, period, full stop.
Mr. Cline. Well, I know that when ICE does work with
localities, the system can work. I worked in Harrisonburg,
Rockingham Commonwealth's Attorney's Office. They had a 287(g)
agreement with ICE. When individuals who were prosecuted who
were here illegally eventually served their sentences, they
were met by ICE. They were retrieved by ICE and returned to
their countries of
origin.
The people of Rockingham and Harrisonburg benefited from
that policy because the streets were safer, and people who
Committed crimes were not returned to the Communities that they
threatened prior to their arrest.
The people who are here from Fairfax, stand and answer the
Ranking Member's question about well, I've run out of time. I
hope I can get some more time because people who are working
hard in Fairfax County deserve to not just feel safe, as the
Ranking Member indicated, but actually are safe.
Mr. McClintock. The gentleman's time has expired. Ms.
Jayapal?
Ms. Jayapal. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Descano, there's
been a lot said. I just want to ask you a few yes-or-no
questions. Your office works with DHS regularly on criminal
issues, just not civil immigration enforcement, is that
correct?
Mr. Descano. That is correct.
Ms. Jayapal. If DHS came to you with a judicial warrant to
take someone in your custody, would you comply?
Mr. Descano. Well, we don't hold people in custody, but we
have worked with that department for criminal cases before, and
we will continue to do so.
Ms. Jayapal. Do you arrest, prosecute, convict, and
incarcerate individuals accused of crimes, regardless of
immigration status?
Mr. Descano. Absolutely.
Ms. Jayapal. I just want to reiterate a couple of points.
Again, yes or no. Is the crime rate in Fairfax County one of
the lowest in the country?
Mr. Descano. Yes.
Ms. Jayapal. Is Fairfax County rated among the safest
jurisdictions of its size by the Major City Chiefs Association?
Mr. Descano. Yes.
Ms. Jayapal. Given the ramp-up of illegal mass detentions
and the attacks on legal immigration that Mr. Bier and others
have spoken about, how has that played out on the ground for
you? Are people in immigrant communities, communities of color,
feeling safe to come forward and report crimes, testify?
Mr. Descano. No, they're absolutely not, and that, in fact,
makes my job as a local prosecutor much harder. As I'm sure
you're aware, when we do cases, we have to rely on the
evidence. Most of the time, that evidence is through victim and
witness testimony. We want our members of our community to come
to court. When they're scared, as they currently are becoming
more and more scared with what ICE is doing, they are more
reluctant to come to court. When we don't have witnesses, that
means, unfortunately, bad guys hit the streets again. As a
prosecutor, that's what I don't want. That's what my trust
policy is trying to avoid.
Ms. Jayapal. Thank you. Professor Stoever, I want to turn
to you. Immigrant women experience domestic violence at rates
nearly three times the national average and are often among the
most vulnerable, because the fear of deportation can keep them
trapped in these abusive situations. I have done a lot of work
on this issue, as you know.
In your work, you have written about the importance of
trust between immigrant communities and local law enforcement.
When immigrant communities know that calling 911 will not
result in deportation for themselves or a family member, they
are more willing to report and help law enforcement solve
crimes.
Can you discuss how local police working too closely with
ICE can undermine that trust, and whether this Administration's
aggressive immigration policies are making it harder for
domestic violence survivors to come forward and seek help?
Ms. Stoever. Yes, thank you for your work on this area. It
absolutely undermines trust. When you have law enforcement, and
that the line between law enforcement and immigration
enforcement blurred, when you call the police, you don't know,
when they show up at your door, are they there to help or to
deport you. It's absolutely created a chilling effect and
really suppressed people coming forward to get help, which then
causes greater danger for the broader community.
I'll identify just one survivor quote from a survivor
reaching out to a local service provider, who said her abuser
would tell her, quote, ``Look at the TV''--referring to the
coverage of immigration raids and the rhetoric about
immigrants, ``see how no one cared about her.''
This is really creating a very significant chilling effect
for abuse survivors and continuing to escalate abuse.
Ms. Jayapal. I'm hearing a lot about that from survivors in
my own district.
Mr. Bier, I want to thank you for all your research on
Trump's attacks on the legal immigration system. He, of course,
said he was going to go after ``the worst of the worst,'' and
that is, clearly, not what is happening.
Republicans want to force States and localities to comply
with these mass deportation policies, and they want to threaten
to cut billions in law enforcement, public safety, and national
security funding to the jurisdictions that refuse to comply.
(1) Can the Federal Government force States and localities
to do the Federal Government's job?
(2) Why is it not in the interest of the public and public
safety to force local jurisdictions to do this?
Mr. Bier. Well, first, the 10th Amendment puts a firewall
in place. We have a system of federalism. The Supreme Court has
been quite clear on this. You cannot force State and local
governments to do what you want. Congress' powers are limited.
You can order the Federal agencies to do whatever you want; you
cannot, as you know, as long as it comports with the
Constitution, of course, but you cannot tell the States and
local governments what to do.
You also cannot use your Federal grant-making authority as
a backdoor to coerce States into doing what they want. The
Republicans, and certainly myself and the Cato Institute, were
quite happy in the Obamacare decision, where they said you
can't force Medicaid expansion on States by denying all
Medicaid to States that don't cooperate. That was a protection
of federalism, and we should continue and defend the Federalist
system of government from these attacks.
Mr. McClintock. The gentlelady's time has expired.
Ms. Jayapal. Thank you.
Mr. McClintock. Mr. Biggs?
Mr. Biggs. Thank you, Mr. Chair. First, specifically, Ms.
Minter, for being here today. It takes a great deal of courage,
and I appreciate your being here.
I thought it was an interesting thing when we heard that
Americans care about their microeconomy. Do you know what they
really care about? Because if you have money and you are
unsafe, it is like you don't have money. You need to be safe.
That is what Americans really care about. First, you need to be
safe. Americans want to be safe.
I thought it was interesting, too, when the Ranking Member
said, ``hey, stand up here if something to the gallery if you
support immigrants,'' so that they are able to make 911 calls.
I thought that was interesting. Everybody stood up, and then, a
few sat down.
Do you know who can't stand up today? Do you know who is
not here today? The victims of the crimes of those individuals
that were released into the community, knowing that they had a
propensity to commit these types of crimes. They're not here to
answer for themselves.
That is why we have ostensibly, that is why you have the
police agencies.
I thought I would tell you, do you know who is not here?
Ms. Minter's wonderful daughter Stephanie. She's not here,
because Abdul Jalloh was released.
A victim of Maldin Anibal Guzman who was killed is not
here.
The victim of Marvin Fernando Morales-Ortez is not here. He
was killed. He was killed. Released by these individuals.
Wilmer Osmany Ramos Giron, the victim of his strangulation
is not here.
The victim of Jorge Armando Melendez-Gonzalez, charged 19
times for violent and firearm-related incidents, is not here.
The victims cannot be here.
The victim of Hyrum Baquedano-Rodriguez the judge found
what Mr. Descano's office, his plea agreement was so offensive,
they rejected them. Then, a second judge rejected the plea
offer. The victims there, they are not here today.
Denis Humberto Navarette Romero, again, and we could go on
and we could name these victims who are not here because of the
policies of this Fairfax County office.
With that, I'm going to yield two minutes, the last two
minutes to my friend from Virginia, Mr. Cline.
Mr. Cline. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
I want to get back to this idea that Fairfax is somehow a
standout for keeping crime low. In fact, they are ranked No. 3
nationally by release volume out of sanctuary strongholds
across the country that routinely disregard detention requests
from ICE. Behind Santa Clara County's main pretrial holding
facility in California and Chicago's Cook County jail in
Illinois. The number of releases is third nationally. It is
actually an embarrassment.
From October 2022-February 2025, the Fairfax County Adult
Detention Center freed more than a thousand deportable illegal
immigrants from lockup, in direct defiance of over 1,150
detainers lodged by ICE.
The people who the Ranking Member wants to feel safe in
Fairfax, without worrying about whether they are actually safe,
are scared to walk home, are scared to take the bus to work, or
if they are staying in a part of Fairfax that is not the best
part of Fairfax, that they are going to encounter a criminal
that is on release from the Fairfax County Jail.
To Mr. Bier, Congress does have limited powers, but we do
have the power of the purse. It becomes increasingly clear
that, for those jurisdictions that are happy to take Federal
tax dollars when it comes to COPS grants and I'm a supporter of
COPS grants but when those jurisdictions are not actually
implementing policies that create safe communities, that make
maybe people feel safe because you talk about ``feeling safe,''
but are you actually safe in your community? In Fairfax,
arguably, no, I would say they are not.
Making those COPS dollars contingent on 287(g) agreements
is very legal, is very possible. You can shake your head--
Mr. Bier. No, no, it's definitely not--
Mr. Cline. I didn't ask you a question.
Mr. Bier. I mean, you can read.
Mr. Cline. I didn't ask you a question.
Mr. Bier. Well, you--
Mr. Cline. It is quite legal. The bill that I have
introduced would do just that.
Mr. McClintock. The gentleman's time has expired.
Mr. Cline. I yield back.
Mr. McClintock. The Chair recognizes Mr. Raskin.
Mr. Raskin. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Did you want to address
that, Mr. Bier?
Mr. Bier. Yes, really quickly. We have multiple appeals
courts' decisions directly on the point of denying funding to
jurisdictions based on the fact that they have Democratic
leadership.
The point about the Medicaid expansion in the Obamacare
case, it was directly related. It was healthcare spending that
they were making contingent on expanding Medicaid. The Supreme
Court said you cannot coerce States and localities to adopt
Federal policy using money in this way.
There's no question it's unconstitutional for Congress to
do this.
Mr. Raskin. Then, that is the position anyone who is a real
champion of federalism and States' rights would hold, which is
what you can't do indirectly. You can't do it indirectly
through the coercive use of money. You can't give a State a
``godfather offer,'' which is, basically you do what we say or
else.
Commonwealth's Attorney Descano, Sheriff Kincaid, I don't
know if either of you can answer a few questions I have got.
It seems to me like the whole premise of this hearing is to
blame you for the terrible murder and tragedy of Stephanie
Minter.
Here's what I don't understand. The guy was being held for
two years in 2018 and 2019 by ICE under the first Trump
Administration. Why was he not deported then? Why did he end up
back on the streets? Why didn't ICE release him? Can you tell
me why, Mr. Descano? Do you know? Or Ms. Kincaid?
Sheriff Kincaid. Well, that's a good question, and that's
something that I would refer to ICE on, because they did have
him in custody. When he showed up back in our jurisdiction in
2022 we wondered the same.
Mr. Raskin. Yes It is just fascinating to me that we have
got seven witnesses here, and somebody else who is not here, in
addition to Stephanie, is ICE. ICE cannot account for well, I
will get to you if I have got enough time.
That is baffling to me. That is puzzling. I have been
asking about that for the last couple of days. Somebody said,
``well, he was from Sierra Leone, and Sierra Leone didn't want
to take him back.'' Of course, as we know, this Administration
has no problem deporting people to third countries, third-party
countries, removing them to third-party countries.
Why wasn't he removed by ICE? They are the only ones who
have got the power to kick him out of the country. You don't
have the power to deport him, do you, State's Attorney?
Mr. Descano. No, sir, I don't have the power, and quite
frankly--
Mr. Raskin. Yes.
Mr. Descano. --there's nothing in my policies, if somebody
is deportable when they come to my office, there's nothing in
my power to change that.
Mr. Raskin. OK. Do you know exactly how many violent crimes
he committed before he was in the custody of ICE? Because there
were reports that he had committed a stabbing and some
assaults.
Mr. Descano. I don't know the exact number, but there I
believe there were multiple--
Mr. Raskin. OK. ICE was aware. This guy is a violent
criminal. They are holding him and they release him back on the
streets. Then, you do your job, and your only job, which is to
prosecute those offenses. You did that, right?
Mr. Descano. Yes, sir, and we got a multiyear jail sentence
as well.
Mr. Raskin. OK. Sheriff Kincaid, if I'm understanding you
properly, ICE did not issue detainers when he was held for
those offenses. They did once, and you complied with it. On the
other ones, they didn't issue as I understand it, ICE didn't
come forward with a detainer until after Stephanie Minter was
killed. Is that right?
Sheriff Kincaid. A time before when we had to relocate this
individual to a different facility. Other than that, there were
no detainers at all.
Mr. Raskin. OK. Again, I feel like we are in a courtroom in
Fairfax County, Virginia, or in the Richmond legislature.
Obviously, if somebody doesn't like the job that the sheriff is
doing, if somebody doesn't like the job that the Commonwealth's
Attorney is doing, run against them.
One of these sounded Mr. Kennedy, you sounded like a
campaign speech you were making. You have got the right to run
against him. Have you faced a reelection yet, Commonwealth--
Mr. Descano. Yes, sir, I won with 77 percent of my
community's vote.
Mr. Raskin. Are you elected, Sheriff Kincaid, or are you
appointed?
Sheriff Kincaid. No, I'm elected.
Mr. Raskin. Have you won reelection?
Sheriff Kincaid. Several times with the majority of the
vote.
Mr. Raskin. OK. I take it that all these issues, which are
complicated, which are a result of the failure of Congress to
actually engage in comprehensive immigration reform, are
heavily debated in Fairfax County. We don't need to kick off
your next reelection with debates here about your performance
in office. That is beneath the dignity of this Committee to be
telling local officials they should be defeated or should
resign from office. That doesn't make sense to me.
Mr. Bier, what should Congress be doing to get us out of
this constant immigration nightmare? We almost had a ``Big
Bipartisan Deal'' at the end of 2024. Everybody in the Senate
agreed to it. All the Democrats in the House agreed to it.
Then, I think Donald Trump said, ``I don't want a deal. I want
an issue to run on.'' Is that right?
Mr. Bier. The bottom line is, as you said, we need--
bipartisan immigration reform.
Mr. McClintock. Excuse me. Mr. Bier, suspend for a moment.
The gentleman's time has expired.
I will give you a very brief time to answer that question.
You can also respond to it in later questions.
Mr. Bier. We need to get back to legality and orderly
immigration. That means a process for people who are peaceful
people to get legal status, and for people who are peaceful to
come here legally. That's bipartisan immigration reform, in my
opinion.
Mr. McClintock. Chair Jordan?
Chair Jordan. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. McClintock. Oh, I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Let me, first,
introduce Mr. Biggs for a unanimous consent request.
Mr. Biggs. I'm sorry. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'm sorry, Mr.
Chair.
Here's a series of articles. I will just do a few of them,
and then, give the whole stack to you:
(1) ``Virginia Murder Suspect in Bus Stop Stabbing Had
Lengthy Criminal History, Multiple Dropped Charges.''
(2) Abdul Jalloh Allegedly Killed Stephanie Minter at
Fairfax County Bus Shelter After Prosecutors Dropped Charges in
Most Previous Cases. ``Completely Failed Stephanie.''
(3) ``Illegal Alien with Lengthy Arrest Record Allegedly
Butchers Woman at Virginia Bus Stop.''
Then, there is a whole stack of others which I won't read,
but will just submit for the record, if that's OK, Mr. Chair.
Mr. McClintock. Without objection. Chair Jordan?
Chair Jordan. Thank you. Sheriff, why did you let Marvin
Morales-Ortez out of jail?
Sheriff Kincaid. Because I received a court order, a
judicial order from a judge ordering his release.
Chair Jordan. Because the guy beside you wouldn't prosecute
him, right?
Sheriff Kincaid. You'd have to talk to him.
Chair Jordan. This guy, the guy beside you, wouldn't
prosecute the guy who was an illegal migrant who had been
charged with six different crimes; who was arrested for murder
in 2020; who, in 2023, assaulted a police officer, and who, in
September 2025, was charged with aggravated malicious wounding
and brandishing a gun. That guy is released; you can't hold him
because he is not going to be prosecuted, is that right?
Sheriff Kincaid. I'm not sure about, you know--
Chair Jordan. Well, that is what you told us. You sent us a
letter on March 11, 2026, addressed to me and Chair McClintock.
You said, ``On December 16, 2025, the Commonwealth's Attorney
moved to not prosecute the charges of aggravated malicious
wounding and brandishing a firearm by Mr. Morales-Ortez.'' You
had to let him out, didn't you?
Sheriff Kincaid. Through a court order by a judge, yes, I
did.
Chair Jordan. You had to let him out.
Sheriff Kincaid. I was ordered to release him by a judge.
Chair Jordan. I see you have got some of your deputies
behind. How is morale in your department, Sheriff? Is it good?
Sheriff Kincaid. I didn't know I was here to talk about
morale, sir, but based on what I--
Chair Jordan. You are here to answer the questions we ask
you; that is what you are here for, yes.
Sheriff Kincaid. Of course, I am.
Chair Jordan. OK.
Sheriff Kincaid. I'm also here to talk about what I was
invited here to talk about.
Chair Jordan. Well, I will refer you to a statement you
made in August, ``Fairfax County Sheriff Stacey Kincaid, a
Democrat, also told 7 News reporter Nick Minnick, `It's
shameful the way things have not been prosecuted.' '' Do you
stand by that statement?
Sheriff Kincaid. If that's what was written, I do.
Chair Jordan. No, I'm not asking if that is what was
written. I'm saying, did you say that and do you stand by that?
Is that having an impact on morale?
Because most of the police departments I know, and sheriffs
and deputies that I know, when they get the bad guys off the
street, they like to see them prosecuted, so they don't come
back on the street, harm the community you are supposed to
protect, and make their job tougher, because they have got to
go get them again when they commit some other crime.
That is why I asked the morale question, in light of your
statement just a few months ago where you said it's shameful
that the guy beside you is not prosecuting people.
Sheriff Kincaid. I did.
Chair Jordan. You said that?
Sheriff Kincaid. I did.
Chair Jordan. OK. Good. Mr. Descano, why did you change
your website?
Mr. Descano. Sir, first, let me address what you said
earlier.
Chair Jordan. No, no, no. You answer the questions we ask.
You answer the questions we ask. I asked a simple question. Why
did you change your website last month?
Mr. Descano. Well, sir, your statement about we're not--
don't want to prosecute guys is absolutely false. My policies
so far in this hearing.
Chair Jordan. I'm reading what you are saying what the
sheriff wrote me is wrong?
Mr. Descano. No, what I'm saying is, that the way that my
policies have been presented in this are outrageous.
Chair Jordan. December 16th, you tell that she said, ``The
Commonwealth's Attorney'' that's you chose not to prosecute Mr.
Morales-Ortez, on December 16th, and they had to release him.
They had to do their job. Because you wouldn't prosecute, what
happened on December 17th, Mr. Descano?
Mr. Descano. Well, sir, let's talk about December 16th--
Chair Jordan. No, no, that's the question. What happened on
December 17th--
Mr. Descano. Well, sir, you got the nuanced--
Chair Jordan. This guy murdered somebody. This guy murdered
somebody. I'm asking you, why did you change your website?
Mr. Descano. Well, do you not want me to talk to you about
the actual case?
Chair Jordan. I want you to answer the first question I
said.
Mr. Descano. Which was about the case, sir.
Chair Jordan. Why did you change your website?
Mr. Descano. Well, sir, because the website is not my
policy. My policy, you--
Chair Jordan. I think the voters--
Mr. Descano. You are referring to a campaign web--
Chair Jordan. I think the voters might be interested in
that.
Mr. Descano. No, sir--
Chair Jordan. This is your campaign website where you said,
``Our office will take immigration consequences into account
when making charging and plea decisions.''
Immigration consequences were certainly part of the game
here, part of the issue here with Mr. Morales-Ortez.
Mr. Descano. No, they weren't.
Chair Jordan. You decided not to prosecute him.
Mr. Descano. They absolutely were not.
Chair Jordan. You decided--
Mr. Descano. You are assuming something that is not--that
is, in fact, untrue, because you are misrepresenting my
policies. My policies do not say that we do not prosecute
people because of their immigration status.
Chair Jordan. Well, if you're proud of your policies, why
did you change your website?
Mr. Descano. Because that's not my policy. As I told you,
sir that is a campaign statement--
Chair Jordan. Well, Mr. Descano--it had been up for six
years.
Mr. Descano. --that I made before I was Commonwealth's
Attorney.
Chair Jordan. A week after we send you a letter saying we
want you to come to testify, shazam, you have changed it.
Mr. Descano. Because I could not--
Chair Jordan. I'm just asking, is that coincidental?
Mr. Descano. Because I could not believe that somebody,
that people were so obtuse that they could not realize what the
difference between a campaign statement and an actual office
policy is.
Chair Jordan. When you make campaign statements, that's
not--those aren't true? You're not being honest with your
voters?
Mr. Descano. That's not what I'm saying at all, sir.
Chair Jordan. It sure sounded like it.
Mr. Descano. What I am saying--
Chair Jordan. It sure sounded like it.
Mr. Descano. It's absolutely not. What I'm saying is that,
when you--
Chair Jordan. You still haven't told me--
Mr. Descano. --write office policies--
Chair Jordan. --why you took it--you still haven't told me
why you took it down.
Mr. Descano. Because I was hoping to come here to talk
about my office policies, not be distracted by a campaign
statement that was made--
Chair Jordan. Not be distracted? This is--
Mr. Descano. --a year before I was actually Commonwealth's
Attorney--
Chair Jordan. Attorney General, Attorney--
Mr. Descano. --and had any cases that were mine.
Chair Jordan. This is almost laughable. This is your
policy. You said it right here. You told the voters: If you
elect me, I will take into account immigration consequences
when making charging and pleading decisions.
Mr. Descano. This is my policy, not what you have in your
hand.
Chair Jordan. Oh, OK. What you said to the voters is not
real? It doesn't count?
Mr. Descano. No, sir, what I'm saying is that, as an office
holder--
Chair Jordan. I just find it interesting--
Mr. Descano. --my office is run by my policy.
Chair Jordan. Your sheriff said you wouldn't prosecute.
This guy gets released; kills someone the next day. We started
asking about it. You change your website and take down the
statements that say you're going to take into account
immigration consequences when you decide what--
Mr. Descano. Well, my policy is public--
Chair Jordan. --when you decide what you are going to
charge.
Mr. Descano. --and it has been public the entire time I've
been in office, sir.
Mr. McClintock. The gentleman's time has expired. Ms. Ross?
Ms. Ross. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you to the Ranking
Member.
To our witnesses who--I know Mr. Bier has been here before.
He is familiar with how this Committee rarely works on getting
to the root of a problem and finding a bipartisan solution. I
think this hearing is a perfect example of that.
To Ms. Minter, I am deeply, deeply sorry for your loss. No
one this Committee, regardless of political party, wants
criminals roaming the street, whether they are here illegally
or whether they are U.S. citizens. What happened to your
daughter is a travesty, and I am so, so sorry.
I also want to apologize to Sheriff Kincaid. This is Police
Week. This is the week where we lift up what you and your team
do to keep our communities safe. It is clear from your
testimony that that is your sole focus. As the first person
here to actually recognize that, I want to thank you for your
service and I want to thank the officers that you brought along
with you.
Sheriff Kincaid. Thank you.
Ms. Ross. State and local law enforcement officers know how
to do their jobs. You have to build trust with community
members to do your job. You have to build trust with those
members to get them to bring crimes to your attention and to
get the evidence you need to prosecute people who have done
things that are just horrible, like in the case of Ms. Minter.
Victims of crime also need to know that if they go to law
enforcement to report a crime, they will not themselves be
either detained or deported, or something happen to them.
Otherwise, we won't be able to deal with people in a civil
society.
I'm going to start with Mr. Bier because he is very
experienced before this Committee. He has done a great deal of
research on the topic of immigrants and crime.
Before President Trump came to office, were immigrants more
or less likely to report crime and I'm not just talking about
illegal immigrants; I'm talking about all immigrants,
naturalized; people who are here legally more or less likely to
report crime and cooperate with the police compared to U.S.
citizens?
Mr. Bier. They were more likely, according to the Crime
Victimization Survey, which is administered by the Department
of Justice every year, more likely to report crimes to the
police than U.S.-born individuals. That also holds true for
noncitizens who half of whom are in the country illegally at
that time.
Ms. Ross. Are immigrant victims of crimes, including those
who have legal status and how are they treated when they report
a crime or go to court to testify?
Mr. Bier. Well, right now, the Administration is targeting
people who go to courthouses. They're arresting witnesses and
victims of crimes. They're working with State and local
jurisdictions that will cooperate with them to make arrests.
We've seen individuals for example, in Palm Beach, Florida,
an individual called 911, a welfare check on his four-year-old
daughter. ICE worked with the Florida police to arrest him
after he called 911. He couldn't believe it; he was shocked
that in America they would prioritize arresting someone based
on effectively, he was an asylum seeker. He had an asylum
application pending. It didn't matter. The ICE laughed at that
because they don't consider that a basis to argue against
detention anymore.
Ms. Ross. My understanding is that, last year, ICE agents
event tackled a rape survivor in a courthouse after she gave
sworn testimony in a case against a rapist.
Mr. Bier. Correct.
Ms. Ross. That has been widely reported. OK. Well, thank
you for that.
I only have a few seconds left. I want to ask Professor
Stoever, have you seen situations where victims specifically
declined to call the police because they feared immigration
consequences for themselves or their family members; thus,
allowing violent criminals to go free?
Ms. Stoever. Yes, I absolutely have.
Ms. Ross. Have you had those incidents when the criminal
was a citizen of the United States?
Ms. Stoever. Yes, actually, more often than not, when the
actual abuse perpetrator is a citizen.
Ms. Ross. That means citizens of the United States are not
being prosecuted, is that correct?
Ms. Stoever. Correct.
Ms. Ross. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I yield back.
Mr. McClintock. Mr. Van Drew?
Mr. Van Drew. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I want to bring this--the other side has brought us the
``Bizarro World,'' and I want to bring this to the world of
reality.
First, I want to say to you, Ms. Minter--and I mean--I know
you hear crocodile tears from politicians; you hear how sorry;
you hear how sad; you hear the condolences. None of that does
it justice. There are no words I can ever say. I say this every
time we have another victim's family here. I pray to God
there's a day when this no longer happens and we don't have to
have these hearings.
We are going to have them with the good leadership of our
Chair and this Committee, because it needs to be talked about.
If it needs to be talked about over and over again, and good
Americans like you are willing to be here, because you love
your children, because you loved her, and you are willing to
stand up, I applaud you.
Because more than a condolence, and more than any of that,
is, when somebody says that to you, say, ``Change the policy.
Don't let it happen to somebody else.'' It shouldn't happen to
anybody. God help you; I don't know how you do it, but we are
praying for you.
Second, when I say I want to bring this out of ``Bizarro
World,'' I was thinking about all the empty, a lot of times,
people gather around the kitchen table. Stephanie Minter's
chair, that chair at the table is empty tonight; Laken Riley's
chair is empty tonight; Rachel Morin's chair is empty tonight;
and Jocelyn Nungaray's chair. They are all human beings. They
are all human souls that have families that love them, and they
love their family. They are gone.
We have got more than that. We could spend the whole time
here reading lists of people who have been murdered, hurt,
beaten, and raped because of what has happened and these
policies. They are human beings.
Do you know what the worst of it is? Not the most important
part, but on top of all it, we are paying for all this.
Sanctuary States and sanctuary cities cost a fortune.
The State of New Jersey, where I am, they estimate and this
is not me; this came out in publications $7.3 billion not
million billion every year because of sanctuary policies. That
is a lot of money for people who are really squeezed. It is
horrible and it shouldn't happen.
Also, I want to allude to the fact, you have people who are
worried about, sometimes when ICE goes into where there is a
church, where there is a department store, or there is a school
nobody really wants that. Do you know why that is happening? It
is happening predominantly in Blue States because the local law
enforcement State, county, and local in sanctuary States are
not allowed to cooperate, where normally they would turn
somebody over to ICE, and you wouldn't have to go through that
process. If we all cooperated and worked together and cared
about the people we serve, we'd be in better shape.
Mr. Descano, a simple question. Are American communities
safer when illegal immigrants who commit crimes are deported or
when they remain in those communities? Are they safer when they
are deported, the communities, yes or no? Just yes or no.
Mr. Descano. Well, sir, that's not--
Mr. Van Drew. Yes or no. Yes or no? I'm asking the
questions. You will give me the answer then.
Mr. Descano. I'm trying to answer them.
Mr. Van Drew. No, you are--
Mr. Descano. Because you asked me a question--
Mr. Van Drew. You have been--
Mr. Descano. --that's outside of my purview. I can tell
you--
Mr. Van Drew. Jim Jordan down there asked you questions.
You are a human being. You are sitting next to a woman who lost
her daughter. Can you tell me if illegal criminals are removed
from the country, if we are safer?
Mr. Descano. To suggest that I don't care--
Mr. Van Drew. No.
Mr. Descano. --about what happens in my community--
Mr. Van Drew. Well, this is my time.
Mr. Descano. I go to work every day trying to protect my
community.
Mr. Van Drew. You are going to answer my questions. You are
going to answer my questions. You don't show any discipline.
When I'm asked questions, I answer them. you are not willing to
answer that question? OK.
I ask you this question: Let's talk about Abdul Jalloh. Yes
or no, would Stephanie Minter be alive today if he had been
deported?
Do you know why he wasn't deported? Because, quite frankly,
the Administration was not as aggressive, and if a country
didn't want to accept these awful people that came from the
country, we didn't know where to send them and we held them and
we detained them. Now, we are finding places to send them, so
that this doesn't go on.
That is the answer. That is why that happened. It is not a
mystery. It is not something weird or unusual. They didn't know
where the heck to put them. Now, we just do it and we get it
done.
Nevertheless, would we be safer if he wasn't in the country
then? Would we be safer, yes or no?
Mr. Descano. Sir, your--
Mr. Van Drew. Yes or no, would it be safer if the man
wasn't in the country?
Mr. Descano. Of course--
Mr. Van Drew. Damn it, answer my question.
Mr. Descano. Sir, I'm trying. You keep changing the
question.
Mr. Van Drew. No, it is yes or no. There is a bad guy that
murders people. Are we safer if he is not in the country?
Mr. Descano. Certainly, If somebody is--if some--
Mr. Van Drew. No. You didn't answer the question. I'm
sorry.
I will ask you this: Explain to the lady next to you. Abdul
Jalloh was charged in your county more than 40 times, not four
times, 40 times. Your office dropped the charges in almost
every single case. That is fact. We have it documented. We can
look at it.
Your own Fairfax County Police Department wrote your office
we have it; it is fact May 2025 saying: He has shown a quote,
``blatant disregard for human life'' and was a danger to the
community; and that if he wasn't detained and deported, he
would seriously hurt someone or kill someone. The very man went
out, and then, killed someone.
The question is, couldn't we have done better there?
Mr. McClintock. The gentleman's--yes, the gentleman's time
has expired.
Mr. Van Drew. I know.
Mr. McClintock. I will take that as a rhetorical question.
Mr. Nadler is recognized.
Mr. Nadler. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Chair, this Subcommittee has hardly been busy this
year. Clearly, Republicans have no desire to conduct oversight
of the Trump Administration's brutal and reckless campaign to
strike fear in immigrant communities across the country. They
don't want to draw more attention to an out-of-control
Department of Homeland Security that lets masked agents murder
American citizens and tear children away from their parents.
They can't manage to hold a hearing about ICE detention
facilities that fail to meet the basic medical needs of
detainees and have their highest death rates in decades.
They certainly have no interest in holding a hearing to
justify the Republican plan to hand a $70 billion blank check
to the Trump Administration to advance its reckless, chaotic,
and inhumane immigration policies, when it hasn't even spent
most of the money we gave them in the Big Ugly Bill.
Instead, they have called us here to distract from the
horrors unfolding in Trump's DHS and to focus on one county in
Virginia that has chosen not to join the Trump Administration's
extreme anti-immigrant agenda. They want to shine a spotlight
on Fairfax County, one of the safest places in the country for
a county of its size, because they think it is a good
opportunity to engage in their favorite sport of fearmongering
and demagoguery.
Mr. Descano, is there anything you have heard that you
would like to respond to?
Mr. Descano. Yes. Thank you, Congressman. Just I think that
my policies have been completely misrepresented by some people
on the Committee and on this panel. My policies are prosecution
policies that are meant to keep my community one of the safest
large counties in the country.
Last, I'd like to really drive home the point that, when it
comes to this Abdul Jalloh case, my policies are a red herring.
ICE knew about this gentleman for at least eight years. The
question of, if we would have been safer with him now here,
yes, I wish ICE would have done its job in 2018 or 2019, when
they had him.
The idea that my policies impacted many of these cases that
are being talked about is simply a red herring and not true.
Mr. Nadler. Thank you. Mr. Bier, the Trump Administration
claims that it is only going after the worst of the worst and
targeting criminals. According to ICE's own data, the majority
of immigrants they have detained have no criminal record. Is
the Trump Administration really going after the worst of the
worst?
Mr. Bier. No, not only do 72 percent not have a criminal
conviction and only six percent have a violent criminal
conviction, you look at how DHS internally is classifying its
detainees. They have multiple threat levels, three different
threat levels, and they actually deem 72 percent of the people,
when they have to do it internally decide, OK, we need to
actually rank these people and prioritize. Who do need to be
detain? Seventy-two percent of the people entered and booked
into ICE custody were not deemed a threat. It's according to
their documents, their own analysis from the Department of
Homeland Security under Secretary Noem, who put out this
information.
No, they are not going after public safety threats. That's
totally wrong. They're going after people going to work.
They're racially profiling Americans, as I said. They're even
arresting legal immigrants, and again, setting them up for
arrest by not processing their applications.
Joseph Edlow, who is the head of USCIS, has a policy.
They're just going to shut down processing of the vast majority
of green cards. That results in people losing status and
enables ICE to go out and arrest them, legal immigrants being
arrested because the Department of Homeland Security doesn't do
its job.
Mr. Nadler. Professor Stoever, do you have any recent
examples where victims or witnesses of crimes were afraid to
interact with law enforcement? What happened in those cases?
Ms. Stoever. It's incredibly common now that there's just
an absolute fear of interacting with law enforcement, and even
seeking civil protection orders, the civil remedies. It's not
only a fear of increasing.
What ends up happening if people aren't seeking help, then,
also, I want to add to the conversation that benefits, public
benefits, CHIP, SNAP, have been cutoff to legal immigrants and
those who hold the temporary status. Really, what's happening
is that the abuse is continuing and the people's financial
security is weakening. What we have is greater crime.
Mr. Nadler. Thank you. Mr. Bier, can you explain why civil
immigration detainers are unlawful under the Fourth Amendment?
Mr. Bier. Well, you can't hold someone unless you have
probable cause and a court order. This is not--
Mr. McClintock. Once again, the gentleman's time has
expired. A brief response. You can pick it up on the next
question.
Mr. Bier. There are multiple appeals court decisions on
this. You cannot detain someone based on a civil detainer
that's not based on a court order.
If Fairfax gets a court order, they will detain them, but
without a judicial order, they don't have authority under the
Constitution to detain people.
Mr. McClintock. Thank you.
Mr. Nadler. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I yield back.
Mr. McClintock. The gentleman doesn't have any time to
yield back. Mr. Fry?
Mr. Fry. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'm going to yield to the--
Mr. Nadler. I yielded it, nonetheless.
Mr. Fry. I'm going to yield to the Chair in a second.
This is actually a remarkable hearing, what I have
witnessed today, both from the sheriff and the Commonwealth's
Attorney. The inability, or the unwillingness to prosecute
crimes that are committed in your jurisdiction, is almost a
fireable offense. I hope that the good people of Virginia
remove you from office.
Criminals are back out on the streets in Fairfax County
because you want to virtue signal public safety, and you are
making communities less safe. In fact, we have a bill called
Logan's Law. You would be a poster child. Because I bet, if we
stacked up your plea deals and your dropped charges against
other real prosecutors in the country, what it would show is
that you are actually operating like a public defender and not
a prosecutor.
With that, Mr. Chair, I yield you the balance of my time.
Chair Jordan. I appreciate the gentleman yielding. Mr.
Attorney General, let me ask you a few things here.
Well, first, in your distinguished career, Attorney
General, and you were in the assembly before that. Before all
that, you were a prosecutor yourself, is that right?
Mr. Miyares. That's correct.
Chair Jordan. Yes. Is it usually a good thing if the law
enforcement people aren't getting along with the prosecutor?
Normally, it is better if they get along and they are working
together to keep the bad guys off the street and protect the
community.
Mr. Miyares. No question, it's a cooperative arrangement.
Chair Jordan. Yes. In your time as a prosecutor, I doubt
maybe you did, but I doubt it with your distinguished career
that you ever had your chief law enforcement, in whatever
jurisdiction you were prosecutor, I doubt if you ever had them
say, ``It's shameful the way this prosecutor is not
prosecuting.'' Did that ever happen to you, Mr. Attorney
General?
Mr. Miyares. No, we never had what happened with the
Fairfax Police Chief saying,
What bothers me about this case is the fact that this
absolutely could have been prevented.
Stephanie Minter should be alive right now, and she's not
because Steve Descano's office chose to release him back in the
public.
No, that's never happened in my career.
Chair Jordan. Yes, it doesn't happen in most places where
you have a prosecutor who works with law enforcement to keep
the bad guys off the street.
Now, let's get back to this policy issue that Mr. Descano
was talking about. He says what he said to the voters when he
was running for the job, that doesn't really count. ``I got an
official policy. What I said to the voters, no--forget that.''
Frankly, that is what happens with a lot of policies. I
actually think it should be just the opposite; whatever you
tell the voters, if they elect you, you should do what you
said. He is doing that. He is just trying to wiggle around it
now.
Here's the policy: Consideration of, and this is ``County
of Fairfax, Commonwealth Attorney Procedure Memorandum, 12/15/
2020,'' Policy Title: ``Guidelines for Plea Bargaining,
Charging Decisions, and Sentencing.'' Authorizing Signature:
Steve Descano.
Here's what it says on point 14, Mr. Attorney General:
``Consideration of immigration consequences. Assistant
Commonwealth Attorneys shall consider,'' we all know--we are in
this business of writing laws ``may'' and ``shall'' are two
different words. Right? ``Shall'' means you have got to look at
this stuff.
He puts a little other thing ``shall consider immigration
consequences, where possible, where doing so accords with
justice'' all that stuff. It is not a ``may''; it is a
``shall.''
That is their policy. Do you agree with that, Mr. Attorney
General?
Mr. Miyares. That is their policy, yes, Mr. Chair.
Chair Jordan. Do you believe that has impacted the decision
to let these bad guys on the street who did terrible things?
Again, Ms. Minter is beside you. Her daughter--
Mr. Miyares. Just between 2022-2024, Mr. Descano dropped
the charges on Mr. Jalloh of trespassing, malicious wounding,
theft, petty larceny, trespassing, disorderly conduct, and
malicious wounding.
Chair Jordan. That is like seven crimes, right?
Mr. Miyares. Correct.
Chair Jordan. Now, here's what I want to know. Maybe your
office, Mr. Descano, is willing to give us this information
because you said, ``Oh, no, immigration status'' my last time,
you said immigration status had no determination on the
decision relative to Mr. Morales-Ortez.
I want to know in cases where it did, what were the cases
where you changed the plea agreement or you changed the
charging decision that were based on consideration of their
immigration status?
If you say this doesn't matter anymore; ``We took it down
off the website. I didn't really believe what I told the
voters,'' if that is the case, I want to know, did you ever use
immigration status as a reason to impact the sentence and the
charging decision or plea agreement?
Mr. Descano. Well, sir--
Chair Jordan. Can you get us that information? That's what
I'm asking. Just give us that information. I want to know what
are the cases where we took into account this individual's
immigration status and we changed the charging decision. Can
you give us those cases?
Mr. Descano. Sir, I don't have those cases with me.
Chair Jordan. Well imagine that--
Mr. Descano. I'd love to talk to you about the policy
because I think it's been--
Chair Jordan. You don't have those cases with you? Is it a
significant number?
Mr. Descano. Well, sir, if I may dig into the policy, I
think it will be illustrious.
Chair Jordan. No, I asked you about the cases. I want to
know the number of times you look into there, because here's
what everyone sees. You are trying to say it is not the case.
Everyone sees you have got an American citizen who does a
crime. You have got an illegal immigrant who does the exact
same crime. Your policy strong it seems to me says that this
person will get a different sentence or a different plea
agreement than the American citizen.
Mr. Descano. It absolutely--
Chair Jordan. I want to know if that ever happened.
Mr. Descano. It absolutely says in the policy in black and
white that an immigrant will not get a better outcome than a
U.S. citizen. That is in the policy. That's later. You read
one-half sentence, sir. This is a two-paragraph policy.
Chair Jordan. Well, here's what again, let's go back to the
website you took down.
Mr. McClintock. I'm sorry. I'm sorry, Mr. Chair, the
gentleman's time has expired.
Chair Jordan. I thank the gentleman. I yield.
Mr. McClintock. Mr. Tiffany?
Mr. Tiffany. Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
I want to thank Ms. Minter for the verse that she read at
the end of her testimony. It was moving and thank you so much
for that. Thank you so much for sharing the memories of your
daughter with us with those pictures. I'm just sorry that there
are not going to be more pictures for us to be able to see in
the future. Wishing you the very best.
In Wisconsin Mr. Miyares, I have got a question for you at
the end of a couple of sentences here. In Wisconsin, we had a
terrible situation. It sounds like it is like Fairfax. In Dane
County, which is Madison, Wisconsin, they have the same thing.
They have sanctuary policies.
An illegal Venezuelan immigrant, known gang member, was let
free, and then, later arrested. He was later arrested over 100
miles away in the town of Prairie du Chien in Wisconsin. He was
charged with domestic violence, sexual assault, child abuse,
and strangulation.
Doesn't this make it very clear that these sanctuary
policies they affect all of us, whether it is in our State, our
region, whatever. About all the people that come from our great
State of Wisconsin that visit Washington, DC. It seems to me
that Fairfax County not very far away that this could be a
problem for people who live all over the country, just like
this example where Madison, Dane County, Wisconsin, refused to
remove someone who went on to strangle someone. Isn't this a
really big problem that is being created that does not just
affect places like Dane County, Wisconsin, and Fairfax County,
Virginia?
Mr. Miyares. It is a massive problem, Congressman. If you
meet with victims, as I have through the years, the one thing a
victim will tell you they want--they do not want to become is
just a number, just a statistic.
It has been cited, some of the Fairfax public safety
numbers, but at the end of the day, every victim their life is
changed from the date of the offense, when they have lost their
loved one. It absolutely affects.
What's amazing about this is that, in counties where you
actually have say Bedford County in Virginia with Sheriff
Miller, a great sheriff, and Wes Nance, a great Commonwealth's
Attorney; they don't get these headlines. They don't get these
headlines because they actually cooperate with Federal
immigration authorities.
What happens in Fairfax is they're making a conscious
decision, and you're seeing it over and over again. It's not
just a failure to cooperate with Federal immigration
authorities. It is a conscious decision by Steve Descano to
under-prosecute crimes over and over again.
People, I pointed out what happened when a judge told ICE
that they had to release him because they were not allowed to
deport him to Sierra Leone. The reality is this was so
preventable, because multiple times he was arrested multiple
times. This prosecutor had the policy of under-prosecuting and
dropping charge. It's not just this case. It's multiple cases.
He has made a conscious decision.
I'm a little incredulous he has decided to say: Well, the
promises I made to the campaign, when I was campaigning voters,
they don't really count.
I'm a firm believer, let your ``yes'' be yes; your ``no''
be no. It's not what you say; it's what you do.
He may claim this has no impact on his charging decisions,
but if you look at time and time again and I can go through the
cases, and so can Mr. Kennedy there is a volume of cases where
he has made a conscious decision to under-prosecute and,
essentially, treat illegal immigrants with greater deference
than he would an American citizen who is charged with a crime.
Mr. Tiffany. Is there a correlation with the crime
statistics being done? I was looking at some yesterday that
came out of the Judiciary Committee where it was 67 of the
largest municipalities here in America, the decrease in a year
was, like, 236 fewer murders in the United States. Think about
it: Compared to the previous year, there is a reduction that
there's 236 more people that are alive in America as a result
of this. Is there a correlation with this securing our border
and those places that choose to be tough on crime? Do you think
there's a correlation?
Mr. Miyares. No question. Because I do think sanctuary
policies also create a magnet for groups. If you look at, say,
Fairfax County, it's estimated, roughly, 200,000 illegal aliens
are in Fairfax. If you look right next door to Loudoun, it's
about 25,000. Why? MS-13 and TD and other transnational gangs
understand that they are in a sanctuary, that they can operate
with impunity. They, then, reside in Fairfax, and oftentimes,
are committing their crimes all over
Mr. Tiffany. Fairfax and Dane County, Wisconsin, they are
actually magnets for for violent illegal aliens?
Mr. Miyares. Correct. They know they can go there, and if
they're picked up on a charge, they know they have local
government in this case, the Fairfax Board of Supervisors has
passed the Trust Policy, which is an explicit prohibition on
cooperation. They know this; they're not dumb. They know which
localities open the doors to them and which localities
cooperate with Federal authorities.
Mr. McClintock. The gentleman's time has expired.
Mr. Tiffany. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. McClintock. Mr. Knott?
Mr. Knott. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Ms. Minter, I'm so sorry.
This is, clearly, a preventable crime, despite what has been
said. As the father of two daughters, I can't imagine what
you're going through, what you will go through. Candidly, I
would not be acting as civilly with some of the people you are
seated with, had I suffered what you have had to endure. Thank
you for being here.
Mr. Descano, you said that, quote, ``We prosecute Virginia
cases.'' Is that correct?
Mr. Descano. That is correct, yes.
Mr. Knott. You painted a picture of being rigorous in your
efforts to prosecute bad people. Correct?
Mr. Descano. Yes. When we prosecute, of course, we take a
look at every case.
Mr. Knott. Yes.
Mr. Descano. We are constrained by the evidence.
Mr. Knott. Yes.
Mr. Descano. We are constrained by the law. I will tell
you, Congressman, what is happening here with the number of
cases that we're talking about are there's so much.
Mr. Knott. I want to talk to you about one of those cases.
I want to talk to you about one of those cases, sir.
Mr. Descano. Sir--
Mr. Knott. Mr. Hyrum Rodriguez. Do you remember that case?
Mr. Descano. I do.
Mr. Knott. Leading up to the crime that I want to talk
about, the defendant's criminal history included multiple
charges and arrests for indecent liberties, exposing himself to
a child, exposing himself to a child less than 15 years of age,
disorderly conduct, illegally entering a property to damage,
burglary. He was even sentenced albeit, I would say, too
lightly while he was on probation, while he was under court
supervision.
On June 15, 2023, at four o'clock in the morning, Fairfax
County PD responded to a burglary in process. A mother and her
four-year-old daughter were asleep in the same room, but in
separate beds. The mother was awoken when her four-year-old
daughter was screaming in the next room. She went to
investigate. The attacker dropped the four-year-old and fled
the scene. It was clear that the four-year-old had been
abducted from her bed. Her buttocks had been grabbed. Her torso
had been bruised. The victim displayed immediate bruising. The
mother did not see the attacker's face, but the four-year-old
said he was a, quote, ``big man.''
Law enforcement identified Mr. Rodriguez in two ways.
First, Forensics recovered a finger and palm print from the
window that he jarred open in this case and matched footprints
outside the house where he was standing with a mud print inside
the house.
Second, Eyewitness testimony later identified Rodriguez as
having been loitering for days outside this apartment building.
He had been seen using drugs in the neighborhood, and he had
been pacing around this particular unit in the days leading up
to the crime.
Police secured two warrants. First, statutory burglary,
specifically alleging that Rodriguez entered an occupied
dwelling, seizing a four-year-old with the intent to commit
murder, rape, robbery, or arson. The maximum penalty is 20
years. Second, abduction of a four-year-old with the intent to
defile such person was the second charge, with a maximum
penalty of life.
Once it was handed over to your office, inexplicably so,
you immediately reduced the burglary offense to a misdemeanor,
which capped the sentence at 12 months. You then reduced the
abduction charge to an offense that was a lower degree and
capped the sentence at 10 years.
When you entered into a plea agreement, you tried to bind
the court, they could not sentence this person to any term over
two years. Is that not correct?
Mr. Descano. Sir, I'm so glad you brought this case up
because--
Mr. Knott. Is that not correct?
Mr. Descano. Well, because I would like to explain, sir.
Mr. Knott. It is correct. The court rejected it.
Mr. Descano. Sir, I know the case file--
Mr. Knott. This was a--
Mr. Descano. I would love to talk to you about--
Mr. Knott. I'm talking. It was a judge that was appointed
by Senator Warner.
Mr. Descano. You are assuming--Sir--
Mr. Knott. This is not a Right-wing judge. This is a
liberal judge. Do you know why he rejected it?
Mr. Descano. Sir, I would love to talk about the case--
Mr. Knott. He saw what you should have seen. He cited
overwhelming evidence--
Mr. Descano. Can we talk about the evidence, sir?
Mr. Knott. --that this person was a threat--
Mr. Descano. Because I know it and you don't.
Mr. Knott. Quit talking.
Mr. Descano. I would love to tell you about it.
Mr. Knott. This person was a threat. He yanked a four-year-
old girl out of her bed with the intent to harm her. You wanted
to give him a cap of two years.
Mr. Descano. Sir, this is a great example--
Mr. Knott. Then, when the plea agreement was rejected, what
did you do?
Mr. Descano. Sir, this is a great example--
Mr. Knott. What did you do?
Mr. Descano. This is a great example of a case where--
Mr. Knott. I have prosecuted--I have prosecuted cases--
Mr. Descano. Then, you understand cases that don't have
strong evidence--
Mr. Knott. When you're evading like that, do you know what
that's a sign of? Guilt. What did you do? You dismissed the
case.
Mr. Descano. Sir, can I please talk to you--
Mr. Knott. Mr. Descano, when you dismiss be quiet--
Mr. Descano. --about this case, if you want to know about
it so much?
Mr. Knott. When you dismiss a case, what happens to that
defendant?
Mr. Miyares. He walks free.
Mr. Knott. He walks free. A disgusting, perverted
individual preying on children, that you dismissed the case. As
the father of two young girls one of them is five that is as
shameful as anything I have seen.
Mr. Descano. I have a daughter, too, sir.
Mr. Knott. Quit defending the indefensible.
Mr. Descano. Don't--please don't talk to me, that I don't
care about people in my community.
Mr. Knott. You, clearly, don't.
Mr. Descano. Absolutely not.
Mr. Knott. You dismissed the case, and it's shameful.
You're a coward. You are a coward.
Mr. Descano. Sir, you won't even let me talk to you about
the case, sir.
Mr. Knott. It's indefensible, sir. I yield back.
Mr. McClintock. Mr. Gill?
Mr. Gill. Thank you, Mr. Chair, for holding this hearing on
a really important issue that a lot of Americans care very
deeply about.
Mr. Descano, I want to start with you. I have got a couple
of questions for you.
I have got a document titled, ``Guidelines for Plea
Bargaining, Charging Decisions, and Sentencing.'' It states
that,
Prosecutors shall consider the collateral immigration
consequences of the specific crimes the defendant is charged
with and the detrimental impact that the deportation/removal
has on the families and communities [that] those removed will
leave behind.
This document is your official policy. This is not from
your campaign website. This is the official policy document as
well. Is that correct? Do you recognize this?
Mr. Descano. Yes. You read a portion of the policy, sir.
Mr. Gill. That's right. I'm not going to read the full
thing since it's quite long.
Mr. Descano. Oh, I don't expect you to, sir.
Mr. Gill. It's about 11 pages. It's about 11 pages. I'm not
going to read the full thing.
I want to better understand how you weigh an illegal
alien's immigration status whenever you are making charging
decisions. Do you know who Ander Jose Cortez-Mendez is? Are you
familiar with that case?
Mr. Descano. Yes, sir.
Mr. Gill. OK. This is a Guatemalan illegal alien who was
arrested in March 2024. He was initially charged with, quote,
``carnal knowledge'' of a 13-14-year-old.
Just for those of us who aren't lawyers, can you describe
just very briefly what does ``carnal knowledge'' of a 13-14-
year-old mean in this context?
Mr. Descano. Well, sir, generally, a charge like that
would, typically, refer to underage sex.
Mr. Gill. OK. He raped an underage person. An illegal alien
who raped an underage American. Your office reduced those
charges to a misdemeanor charge of consensual sex with a child
15 years and older. You offered him a 90-day suspended jail
sentence, is that correct?
Mr. Descano. Sir, based on the evidence that we had in the
case--
Mr. Gill. It is correct?
Mr. Descano. It's not related to the policy, sir.
Mr. Gill. That is correct? I just want to ask you, whenever
you were making that charging decision to reduce the charge,
how did you weigh the defendant's immigration status?
Mr. Descano. Well, sir, I'll to be clear, I was not the
lead prosecutor in that case.
Mr. Gill. It was your office.
Mr. Descano. Oh, absolutely, sir. I, of course, rely on my
team of 50-some attorneys to do cases.
Mr. Gill. Sure.
Mr. Descano. What is important is that, oftentimes, as you
know, sir, as a prosecutor, we're constrained by the evidence.
We are constrained by--
Mr. Gill. I just need to know, how did you take into
account the defendant's immigration status in making that
decision?
Mr. Descano. Well, sir, again, I'm saying--
Mr. Gill. How did your office make that determination?
Mr. Descano. I you're, you're--well, what I would say is
that--and thank you for clarifying for you to take a look at
the immigration consequences policy, or when you see--
Mr. Gill. Let me ask it a different way. Did your office
reduce charges against this illegal alien from a felony rape
charge to a misdemeanor charge with a 90-day suspended jail
sentence, in part, because this was an illegal alien in
question?
Mr. Descano. No, this was evidentiary-based.
Mr. Gill. It was evidence there was no it had nothing to do
with the defendant's immigration status?
Mr. Descano. Sir, when--
Mr. Gill. Is that your testimony?
Mr. Descano. If you read the policy, you'll see that it
explicitly carves out--
Mr. Gill. Did it have anything to do with the defendant's
immigration status? It's just yes or no.
Mr. Descano. Well, sir, it was based on the evidence.
Mr. Gill. I'm asking you, was their immigration status part
of the evidence? It's a yes or no.
Mr. Descano. I don't believe so.
Mr. Gill. You don't believe so? Your policy says that you
``shall consider'' the immigration status.
Mr. Descano. Actually, sir, if you actually read the whole
policy, it explicitly carves out cases--
Mr. Gill. Quote,
Prosecutors shall consider the collateral immigration
consequences of the specific crime(s) the defendant is charged
with and the detrimental impact that deportation/removal has on
the families.
Mr. Descano. It also mentions that--
Mr. Gill. Line for line--
Mr. Descano. --it's not outcome-determinative. It also
explicitly states--
Mr. Gill. I understand, and I'm asking you if you weighed,
your office weighed, the defendant's immigration status in
making your charging decisions here.
Mr. Descano. Oh, again, sir, I was not, the lead
prosecutor--
Mr. Gill. I'm asking about your office. I understand you're
not the lead prosecutor.
Mr. Descano. Exactly. I just want to be clear. The way that
the policy is written that case should not have fallen under
the rubric of this policy. This is a narrow policy, and it's
meant to be a narrow policy.
Mr. Gill. He is an illegal alien. I think that would
qualify, would it not?
Mr. Descano. Well, no, sir, because, again, the way that
the policy is being presented as, it is as it is outcome-
determinative, goes to every case.
Mr. Gill. There would be immigration consequences based on
what charge you bring. That would clearly apply to this case.
Mr. Descano. No, sir. Again, that's the reason why I
mentioned earlier you read a portion, but not the entire two
paragraphs of this subheading.
Mr. Gill. ``Prosecutors shall consider.'' I just want to
know, just give me a yes-or-no answer. Did you take into
account the defendant's immigration status?
Mr. Descano. Sir, again, I was not but the way the policy--
Mr. Gill. Did your office take into--
Mr. Descano. The way the policy is written--
Mr. Gill. It's a yes-or-no question.
Mr. Descano. No, they should not have taken--
Mr. Gill. They should not have taken?
Mr. Descano. That's not outcome-determinative in a case
like this, sir.
Mr. Gill. Great. Thank you. My time is up.
Mr. McClintock. Mr. Grothman?
Mr. Grothman. Yes, I had another hearing. I apologize if
I'm asking a question that has already been asked.
Obviously, we have immigration laws in this country. Every
country has immigration laws. We have 800,000 people, about,
naturalized in this country every year. We are right now in a
position in which one out of six Americans in this country are
foreign-born, one out of six people in this country, which is
the all-time high. Nobody could say that, under current law, we
are not more than generous with people who want to come here.
Nevertheless, there's some people who I can only--unless
they are very foolish, they are trying to destroy the country
by, in addition to the 800,000 people getting sworn in, want to
let unlimited other people in the country.
Now, my first question is for Sheriff Kincaid. I hear from
my local sheriffs in Wisconsin, if there's any activity from
Federal agents--FBI, ATF, DEA, U.S. Marshals, and Secret
Service, they always contact, the Federal agency or they call
them, to coordinate with them. Maybe setting up a perimeter, or
maybe if they have to remove somebody, take them to the local
jail.
We are told and that would seem to be automatic as an
American. Nevertheless, we are told, Sheriff Kincaid, that your
office sometimes is reluctant to assist Federal agencies in
ongoing investigations intended to safeguard citizens. How do
you respond to that charge?
Sheriff Kincaid. First and foremost, we never obstruct ICE.
As a matter of fact, we work with them in three or four more
ways. When they request or call and ask for assistance,
especially when it comes to turning someone over, we coordinate
that with them to ensure their safety. As far as not
cooperating with them, we do. We do that all the time, just
like any other law enforcement agency.
Mr. Grothman. OK. Does Virginia law explicitly authorize
compliance with ICE detainers within five days of a criminal
alien's release from your custody?
Sheriff Kincaid. Based on the judicial or the
administrative warrant, there is law that allows for us to turn
an individual over to ICE five times prior to when they are set
to be released.
Mr. Grothman. Do you?
Sheriff Kincaid. ICE does know that.
Mr. Grothman. Yes, and you--
Sheriff Kincaid. We do.
Mr. Grothman. You do? OK. Has your office conducted an
audit of what happens to individuals you have released instead
of honoring ICE detainers, or do you always honor the
detainers?
Sheriff Kincaid. In terms, we honor detainers. It is when
we are presented with a judicial warrant that we will continue
to detain somebody because it's authorized by a judge.
Mr. Grothman. OK. Mr. Miyares, can you give a high-level
overview of the findings of your September 2025, investigation
into Fairfax County's the Fairfax County Commonwealth's
Attorney's Office?
Mr. Miyares. Yes, sir. We conducted one and saw that, in
our opinion, Mr. Descano views himself more as a social worker
than a prosecutor. That as a result, he has systematic failed
the victims in Fairfax County. We talk to so many, not just
those and including victims that were immigrants, but everyday
citizens that have felt that the Fairfax County Commonwealth's
Attorney's Office had failed them.
Mr. Grothman. OK. Could you respond, or do you agree with
everything Sheriff Kincaid has told you?
Mr. Miyares. I do find it curious, what we have is they
keep trying to say they need a judicial warrant. As you know,
DHS and others said that is not required in this case.
What you've seen, actually, in Virginia, disturbingly, is
that we just had our current Governor pass an Executive Order,
her first one, EO 1, that banned cooperation with Federal
immigration authorities, not just with the State police,
overturning Governor Youngkin's policies, but also the
Department of Corrections. In other words, someone that is a
convicted felon in a Virginia prison, even then. You are seeing
a lot of bad policies from Fairfax being brought statewide.
Mr. Grothman. OK. That's kind of shocking. I guess, if you
would elaborate on it a little bit, and what would happen in
this country if--or what effect that has on people who are here
illegally and are illegally committing crimes?
Mr. Miyares. We, as a Nation, allow, roughly, one-million
legal immigrants a year. We are a good, decent, and generous
people. That's who we are. I'm the child of an immigrant.
What Americans do not like is be seen that they're being
taken advantage of. During the Biden Administration, between 8-
10 million illegal immigrants came into this country. That is
larger than the population of 32 U.S. States. That is not
tenable. People are not doing it the right way.
There is not a country on the planet that is as generous
with legal immigration as we are. It's not even close. What we
don't appreciate right now are people that are cutting in line
and breaking our laws. It's something we all learned in grade
school. We have too many policymakers who decided that's OK and
they shrug their shoulders. They turned a blind eye.
In this case, Steve Descano deciding to adopt policies,
taking someone's illegal immigration status and under-
prosecuting cases, in which we're seeing the tragic results, as
we're seeing today.
Mr. McClintock. The gentleman's time has expired. Ms.
Scanlon?
Ms. Scanlon. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I practiced alongside
immigration attorneys for a period of time before coming to
Congress, so have a sense of just how broken our immigration
system is and how hard it is, even for people who are trying to
follow the rules, to actually follow the rules. A lot of the
conversation we have in Congress seems to come from folks who
don't understand how the system is actually working, or not
working.
If our Republican colleagues want to talk about who and
what is making Americans less safe today, it is this White
House and its chaos and its reckless mass deportation agenda.
Families and communities are being torn apart. Citizens have
been ripped from their homes with no warrants in cases of
mistaken identity. Federal agents have shot and killed
Americans in our streets for daring to question their unlawful
tactics.
The White House has prioritized meeting deportation quotas,
and in doing so, has targeted all immigrants, including those
who have followed our rules and who, until this administration
changed the rules, those folks were in our country legally.
The majority of folks who have been detained by ICE have no
criminal record here or in their home countries. That is
according to the agency's own data. While ICE and CBP claim to
be ``claim'' to be focusing on the worst of the worst, instead
they have gone after toddlers with Spider-Man backpacks,
parents taking their kids to school or to the hospital for
cancer treatment, hardworking people showing up at work,
spouses of military veterans and active duty service members,
and law-abiding people who are showing up for their interviews
and court hearings, as they are following the rules to do what
they need to do to become citizens or obtain other forms of
legal status.
Who does any of this make more safe? Aside from the trauma
and the heartbreak that these policies have inflicted on
individual families and communities, the damage to our economy
is mounting by the day.
That damage comes from companies rethinking their
investments in the United States, because they see their
citizens, their folks, getting abused by our immigration
agents.
Tourists who have decided not to visit Disney World or
celebrate our 250th Anniversary or attend the World Cup this
year. We have seen bookings from overseas are down 20-30
percent across the country, but we are particularly sensitive
to it in Philadelphia.
We are seeing physicians, researchers, and students from
around the world who have been deterred from bringing their
talents and what they can bring to our country by additional
visa fees, and by the risks of being targeted by misguided
immigration agents.
Throughout our country's history, immigrants have been
drawn here by the promise of America and its brighter future.
They bring meaningful contributions to our economy, our
culture, our social fabric in all our communities.
We should be fixing our outdated, broken immigration system
to make it better and more efficient, not undermining it or
just trying to gut it entirely. Because failing to do that work
is a huge disservice to all us and to the future success of our
Nation.
Our Republican colleagues have tried to say this is about
fighting crime, but in pursuit of this Administration's
indiscriminate crackdown, they are diverting Federal law
enforcement, prosecutors, and resources away from serious
threats, including child exploitation, fentanyl trafficking,
and domestic terrorism.
This is really misguided. It seems to be entirely about
politics and not about actual safety.
Mr. Descano, in the few seconds we have left, is there
anything you would like to add? Because you seem like you have
been a very practical and engaged public servant.
Mr. Descano. Well, thank you, Congresswoman, and there are
a few things I would love to add.
First, let me be clear. My policy that we're talking about
was written with legal permanent residents in mind for minor
crimes. It was based off the Padilla v. Kentucky U.S. Supreme
Court case that said it is a good idea for prosecutors and
defense attorneys to take into account and to know collateral
immigration consequences.
The other thing I'd like to say is, Mr. Miyares and Mr.
Kennedy, they've never been to my office. They've never seen
the case files that I've seen. They jump to a bunch of
conclusions--
[Mr. McClintock gavels for order.]
Mr. McClintock. The gentleman's time has expired. I will
let you finish that sentence.
Mr. Descano. Thank you, sir. They jump to conclusions about
case outcomes that we may not be thrilled about and give them
and ascribe reasons that simply aren't the reasons.
Mr. McClintock. Thank you. Mr. Onder?
Ms. Scanlon. Thank you.
Mr. Onder. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Descano, in your
written testimony, you wrote, ``The system failed Ms. Minter.''
Do you consider yourself part of that failure?
Mr. Descano. Sir, I do believe that the entire system did
fail. I will tell you that I wish that there were things that
we could have done and had the things to go forward--with on
some of those cases.
Mr. Onder. OK. You said that. OK. Did the police fail Ms.
Minter?
Mr. Descano. No, sir. I think what the--
Mr. Onder. Did Sheriff Kincaid fail Ms. Minter?
Mr. Descano. No, sir, but I think that--
Mr. Onder. Everyone failed Ms. Minter. The system failed
the amorphous system, not you; you, a soft-on-crime Soros
prosecutor; not you who does not honor ICE detainers. Neither
of you believe in honoring ICE civil detainers, no judicial
detainers that in most cases are not even possible to obtain.
Ms. Minter, do you feel the system failed you and your
daughter Stephanie?
Ms. Minter. [Ms. Minter nods her head in the affirmative.]
Mr. Onder. Yes. Do you feel, Ms. Minter, that you can opine
or not, if you don't do you feel that Mr. Descano's
prosecutor's officer hears victims?
Ms. Minter. Hears victims?
Mr. Onder. Takes victims into account, and potential
victims?
Ms. Minter. No.
Mr. Onder. Because, based on the policies of Fairfax
County, both the sheriff's office and the prosecutor's office,
what happened to you and your family was entirely preventable.
Ms. Minter. I believe it was.
Mr. Onder. Yes. When you have the policy of not cooperating
with ICE by the way, in violation of Federal law these things
are going to happen. People who should not have been in the
United States of America at all, criminal illegal aliens, in
our solicitousness, to appease the radical Left base of the
Democrat Party and their open borders policies, it is a policy
we don't want to deport anyone.
Mr. Descano even said it on his campaign website. ``Well,
that's not really the policy of the Fairfax County's County
Prosecutor's Office.'' OK. Were you lying to the voters or are
you lying to us now today?
Ms. Minter. What I believe is that these vicious criminals,
the criminals that keep hurting our people should not be out of
here. They need to be deported. You know what? I don't think it
has to do with ICE--
Mr. Onder. Right.
Ms. Minter. It has to do with having--we're nowhere. We're
not a country without illegals coming in--
Mr. Onder. Without--
Ms. Minter. --and without people coming in from other
countries. That's what our country is built on.
Mr. Onder. There is no such thing as a sovereign Nation
without secure borders. Well, thank you. No, thank you, and
thank you for your courage being here today.
Yes, it is nice to give lip service, ``Oh, the system
failed you, Ms. Minter.'' It is another thing to do something
about it, especially when the radical base of your party
doesn't want you to do anything about it. We know that two
elected officials to your Left today, we know where they sided.
Did they side with victims, or did they side with their radical
left, open borders base? We know the answer to that.
Mr. Bier, you implied in that somehow, because the United
States is so dysfunctional regarding legal immigration, that
this somehow encourages illegal immigration. In some way, I may
believe that.
I want to give you some numbers. In 2024, the United States
admitted it gave 1.36 million to foreign nationals green cards;
226,000 family sponsored visas; 150,000 employment-based visas;
and 52,000 diversity legal lottery visas. In early 2026, there
was an asylum backlog of 3.5 million cases. Mid-2025, temporary
protected status backlog, 1.2 million cases.
Mr. Miyares said--and I think I got this right, ``there's
no country on this planet that's more generous to legal
immigrants than the United States of America.''
If the numbers I read to you, Mr. Bier, are not enough,
what is the right number? Because, roughly a billion people on
this planet live on $2 or less per day, and I imagine quite a
few of them would like to immigrate to the United States. What
is that number? Is there a number? Should all the billion be
able to immigrate into the United States legally or illegally?
Mr. Bier. Well, the United States ranks in the bottom
third--
Mr. McClintock. The gentleman's time has expired. Mr. Bier,
I will give you a few seconds to respond.
Mr. Bier. The United States ranks at the bottom third of
wealthy countries for its foreign-born share of the population,
for the rate at which it admits people. We're a very large
country, and we have 338 million in here.
Mr. Onder. So, the goal is--
Mr. Bier. One million people is a third of a percent of the
population. That's half of what it was in the early 20th
century, and we survived that and thrived as a result of it.
Yes, we can allow more legal immigration to the United
States. We should have processes that are fair, that allow
people an opportunity to come, and protect our rights as
Americans to associate and contract trade with the people born
in other countries.
Mr. McClintock. Mr. Bier, you--
Mr. Onder. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. McClintock. Thank you. The gentleman's time has
expired.
Mr. Onder. I yield back my negative time.
Mr. McClintock. The gentleman's time has expired. Now, I
will recognize myself for five minutes.
Oh, we have got a unanimous consent request. Ms. Jayapal?
Ms. Jayapal. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I seek unanimous consent
to enter into the record an opinion piece from our Seattle City
Attorney entitled, ``Seattle's Welcoming City Policies Keep Us
Safe.''
Mr. McClintock. Without objection. I will now recognize
myself for five minutes.
Mr. Descano, in the case of Mr. Rodriguez whose charges you
dropped, in the case of the four-year-old who was attacked in
her own bedroom, I understand he was later taken into custody
by ICE and deported. I'm just curious, did you notify ICE of
that release, so that they could deport him? Was it the little
girl's mother who had to call ICE to get him out of your
community?
Mr. Descano. Sir, we did not call ICE.
Mr. McClintock. The mother had to call ICE to get him out
of your community.
Mr. Miyares, we keep hearing from Sheriff Kincaid, among
others, that they would be happy to respond to a Federal
judicial warrant to honor a detainer request. Well, is a
Federal judicial warrant possible to obtain in a State crime?
Mr. Miyares. No, it's not, and they know this.
Mr. McClintock. If deportation is a civil matter, how does
one get a Federal judicial warrant?
Mr. Miyares. You can't. Again, they know this.
Mr. McClintock. They're basically lying to the public? They
are counting on the public not understanding that what they are
asking for is legally impossible?
Mr. Miyares. It's legally impossible, yes, Mr. Chair.
Mr. McClintock. Mr. Kennedy, do you find it odd that the
Democrats are blaming ICE for not deporting this particular
suspect who is accused of murdering of Stephanie Minter? Yet,
at the same time, they refuse to notify ICE, so they can deport
such suspects, and they refuse to fund ICE, so that they can
deport such suspects.
Mr. Kennedy. I do find it odd, but I'm actually going to
extend agreement to the Democratic side, because I believe that
Mr. Jalloh should never have been deported whatsoever. He
should have spent the rest of his natural life, before
Stephanie Minter's death, in the Virginia Department of
Corrections. Short of that, he should have been deported to
Sierra Leone after he served his sentence.
None of that came about. He was never sent to prison. Mr.
Descano said that he obtained a sentence for him for multiple
years. He never left Fairfax County. He was never sentenced to
prison. He spent time in jail and was released because of good
time credits. Mr. Jalloh should have spent the rest of his life
in prison, then, been deported.
Mr. McClintock. Understood. I actually have to go on. We
keep hearing these sanctuary policies enhance public safety.
What have your studies shown?
Mr. Kennedy. That these aren't the same thing. Every single
person who is injured or is the victim of a property crime, a
person crime, let alone a homicide, it was a completely
preventable homicide. It was a completely preventable crime.
These are all excess things that didn't have to happen.
When it comes to repeat offenders, I identify in my
testimony 25 incidents--25 and half of them are unknown to the
rest of the public--
Mr. McClintock. That is including--
Mr. Kennedy. --where escalating violence occurred
escalating violence.
Mr. McClintock. That is including three out of seven
homicides in Fairfax County.
The Center for Immigration Studies looked at the SCAAP
documentation from States seeking reimbursement for illegal
aliens held in their State prisons. They found that illegal
aliens are, typically, at least three times as likely to be
incarcerated than citizens or lawfully present aliens.
Mr. Miyares, the Democrats say this is all necessary to get
illegal immigrants to report crimes. In fact, if an alien is
the witness to or a victim of a crime, don't they qualify for a
U visa to remain in this country under current law?
Mr. Miyares. Well, I don't think it builds community trust,
either, when you see a catch-and-release program being
instituted by this Commonwealth's Attorney's Office. That does
not build trust for you to come forward to testify.
Mr. McClintock. Someone is not going to report a crime if
they know that criminal is going to be back on the streets
later that afternoon to take vengeance. Is that correct?
Mr. Miyares. That is correct. What you've seen is a
revolving door. Every policy Mr. Descano advocates for,
policies he's supported in the general assembly, is to allow a
revolving door. Changing our bond policies in Virginia, and his
own personal policies that they have in Virginia, it is to
release criminals back into the community time and time again.
We know from his official policy that he takes and factors in
their immigration status as well.
Mr. McClintock. Ironically, when these criminals are
released back into the community, they tend to prey on the
illegal immigrant community where they have come from, do they
not?
Mr. Miyares. No question.
Mr. McClintock. We had just a case recently where a legal
immigrant from Bangladesh had her head bashed in by an illegal
Haitian national with a long rap sheet, who had been allowed to
remain in this country under the TPS program.
You mentioned that Governor Spanberger is expected to sign
legislation that would forbid cooperation with ICE. I assume
that would forbid notifying ICE if and when Stephanie Minter's
killer is released?
Mr. Miyares. Correct. Correct. He will be, presumably, in
the Virginia Department of Corrections. Under a current
Executive Order, as we've noted, there's a there's no
requirement of a judicial warrant. They won't notify ICE.
Despite all her public pronouncements--
Mr. McClintock. Ms. Minter may I just--
Mr. Miyares. Yes.
Mr. McClintock. Ms. Minter, Sheriff Kincaid said that she
didn't have her budget to make a phone call to ICE to honor a
detainer. Does that make you feel more safe? What is your
response to Sheriff Kincaid?
Ms. Minter. I'm just going to start keeping a list and
calling ICE myself. It might be easier.
Mr. McClintock. Oh, my time is expired.
Ms. Jayapal. Mr. Chair, I have a few more unanimous consent
requests.
Mr. McClintock. Go ahead.
Ms. Jayapal. I ask unanimous consent to enter into the
record the Cato Institute, Mr. Bier's policy analysis titled,
``Immigrants Cut Victimization Rates and Boost Crime
Reporting.''
Mr. McClintock. Yes, we have seen it. Without objection.
Ms. Jayapal. Another one titled, ``Family Says Virginia
Domestic Violence Victim Didn't Seek Help Due to Immigration
Fears.''
Another one entitled, ``She Testified about Being Raped.
Then ICE Showed Up,'' from The Atlantic.
Mr. McClintock. Without objection
Ms. Jayapal. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. McClintock. If there is no further business to be
brought before the Committee, I want to thank our witnesses for
appearing before the Subcommittee today.
Without objection, all Members will have five legislative
days to submit additional written questions for the witnesses
or additional materials for the record.
Mr. McClintock. Without objection, the hearing is adjourned
[Whereupon, at 12:44 p.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]
All materials submitted for the record by the Members of
the Subcommittee on Immigration Integrity, Security, and
Enforce-
ment can be found at the following links: https://
docs.house.gov/Committee/Calendar/ByEvent.aspx?EventID=119272.
[all]