[Congressional Record Volume 159, Number 12 (Tuesday, January 29, 2013)]
[Senate]
[Pages S336-S339]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                           IMMIGRATION REFORM

  Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, as we consider the serious issue of 
immigration reform, it is important for us to understand where we are 
as a country with regard to the laws we have and how they are being 
enforced. I will share some thoughts about that today because the 
American people and Members of Congress need to fully understand what 
is happening. It is well documented that the Obama administration has 
either unilaterally weakened or outright waived the enforcement of 
existing immigration law at the border, in the interior, at the 
worksite and at the welfare office. That is just a fact.
  Last year, I joined with my colleagues at a press conference with the 
top representatives of the Nation's rank-and-file immigration law 
enforcement officers--the presidents of the ICE--Immigration, Customs 
and Enforcement--and Border Patrol unions. Those men, who are elected 
to serve as the voice of their fellow officers, gave a chilling report 
at that press conference--right over in the Senate building, with 
several other Senators--they gave a chilling report about the 
administration's systematic effort to dismantle the enforcement of our 
Nation's immigration laws. It is not just an effort, it is an effective 
plan and action to do so.
  At the center of this misconduct is John Morton, the Director of ICE. 
The evidence I am about to share with you leads me to the unfortunate 
conclusion that Mr. Morton can no longer effectively serve at this post 
and, perhaps more importantly, there can be no comprehensive 
immigration reform as long as he is the person charged with enforcing 
it. What purpose is served to pass new laws if the ones we have are 
ignored by the officials charged with enforcing them?
  This timeline shows how Mr. Morton and the administration have 
undermined enforcement. Most Americans do not fully understand the real 
effect of these immigration policies. In reality, right now, if a State 
law enforcement officer apprehends someone for

[[Page S337]]

speeding and discovers, for example, that he is illegally in the 
country, the result is that nothing happens. They do not even bother to 
call the Federal law enforcement officers to report they have 
apprehended someone who is in violation of our immigration law. And the 
reason they do not call is because nobody will come and get them.
  This is something I have discovered over a number of years. When I 
was attorney general of Alabama, and for 12 years, the top Federal 
prosecutor in the Southern District of Alabama, the U.S. attorney, and 
I discovered how the system works--and it is not working. What happens 
is they release them. At townhall meetings I would ask the people who 
showed up, citizens: What happens if your local police officer 
apprehends someone who is illegally in the country? They say they call 
the Federal people or they arrest them and take them to jail. The 
answer is, no, they do not; they release them. That is what they do 
because the system is utterly broken and not working.
  Let me run through a series of events that have occurred in the last 
several years that further undermine the ability of America to enforce 
its laws. Let me just say, parenthetically, the only way to have a real 
effective law enforcement system is to welcome support and affirm the 
willingness of local law enforcement to participate and assist. There 
are, for example, some 600,000 State and local law officers out there 
every day enforcing our laws, protecting their communities. There are 
far fewer, maybe 15,000 or 30,000 Federal officers, dealing with 
immigration. The real eyes and ears in law enforcement in America are 
those State and local people. States have been sued by this 
administration for even attempting to assist. This administration is 
denying and refusing to renew the cooperative agreements that are 
necessary for Federal and State and local authorities to work together 
to effectively enforce the laws of our country, and this is what is 
causing our problem.

  Let me run through some of these areas and problems that have 
occurred recently. I may not be able to finish, and I will make the 
rest of my remarks available in the Record. In a 2010 interview with 
the Chicago Tribune, Director Morton announced ICE may not even process 
or accept illegal aliens transferred to the agency's custody by Arizona 
officials. They were not happy with Arizona, presumably, so they would 
not even accept people local law enforcement turned over.
  On May 27, 2010, an ICE e-mail revealed that low-risk, short-term 
detainees would be able to have visitors stay for an unlimited amount 
of time during a 12-hour window, would be given access to unmonitored 
phone lines, e-mails, and free internet calling. They would also be 
entertained with movie nights, bingo, arts and crafts, dance and 
cooking classes, tutoring and computer training.
  On June 25, 2010, the National ICE Council, the union that represents 
more than 7,000 detention and removal agents within ICE, cast a 
unanimous vote of no confidence in Director Morton. According to the 
officers, their vote reflects ``the growing dissatisfaction among ICE 
employees and union leaders that Director Morton . . . has abandoned 
the agency's core mission of enforcing United States immigration laws 
and enforcing public safety and have, instead, directed [his] attention 
to campaigning for programs and policies leading to amnesty. . . .''
  That is not a good thing for the chief immigration law enforcement 
officer of the country, for his people, the rank and file, putting 
their necks on the line every day, issuing such a report--and it is 
true. Unfortunately, it is. In August of 2010, ICE began circulating a 
draft policy that would significantly limit the circumstances under 
which ICE agents would take custody of illegal aliens. The memo 
provides that immigration officers shall issue detainers or official 
notification to law enforcement agencies that ICE intends to assume 
custody of the alien only after a law enforcement agency has 
independently arrested the alien for a criminal violation.
  A detainer is a big deal. A detainer, if anyone understands how law 
enforcement works, is a critical component of modern law enforcement. 
If a State has a charge against an individual, or if the Federal 
Government has a claim against an individual being held by a different 
law enforcement agency, they place a detainer on that person and when 
the arresting jurisdiction completes its work with the person, they are 
not released on the streets; they are detained until they are turned 
over to the other legitimate law enforcement agency that has pending 
charges. If we do not have that, dangerous criminals are released, and 
it is really an improvement in law enforcement over the last 50 years.
  This is a diminishment of that, significantly. In effect, no longer 
will ICE pick up an illegal alien for illegally entering the country or 
having false identification, or false immigration documents, if they 
are being held by State and local people for some local crime.
  On October 8, 2010--according to ICE deportation statistics, from 
October 2009 through September 2010, the agency deported 390,000 
aliens. But most, half of those at least, were people who were 
convicted of serious criminal offenses, independent of the immigration 
violations.
  On December 6, 2010, interviews and internal communications cited in 
the Washington Post indicated that number, 390,000, was a padded 
number. First, the article charged that ICE included almost 20,000 
removals in fiscal year 2010 that were for the previous year and should 
not have been counted. It also described how ICE extended a Mexican 
repatriation program beyond its normal operating dates, which, in 
effect, added 6,500 removals to the numbers that were not properly 
added.
  On March 2, 2011, in a departmental memorandum, Director Morton 
outlined new enforcement priorities that encouraged ICE agents not to 
enforce the law against most illegal aliens but only to take action 
against those who meet his priorities. Director Morton issued a second 
memorandum on June 17, 2011, further directing ICE agents to refrain 
from enforcing U.S. immigration laws against certain segments of the 
illegal population, criteria similar to that under the DREAM Act, 
despite having no legal or congressional authority to do so and despite 
the fact that the DREAM Act was three times defeated in Congress.
  What they did was they altered the enforcement policies of the 
Federal immigration officers to effect the DREAM Act that had been 
explicitly offered and rejected in Congress on three different 
occasions.
  On June 17, 2011, Director Morton issued a third memorandum, 
instructing ICE personnel to consider refraining from enforcing the law 
against individuals engaged in a protected activity----
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator has used 12 minutes.
  Mr. SESSIONS. I thank the Chair--related to civil or other rights, 
for example union organizing, complaining about employment 
discrimination or housing conditions, and who may be in some 
nonfrivolous dispute with an employer, landlord or contractor. ICE 
agents were directed not to take action against someone who doesn't pay 
their rent and has a dispute with their landlord, apparently. They get 
special exemption.
  On June 23, 2011, leaders of the national ICE union express outrage 
over the June 17 administrative amnesty memoranda authored by Director 
Morton. The law officers say that since the administration was ``unable 
to pass its immigration agenda through legislation, [it] is now 
implementing it through agency policy.'' It also accuses top ICE 
officials of working ``hand-in-hand'' with the open-borders lobby, 
while excluding its own officers from the policy development process. 
In plain words, they are saying the political appointees of ICE are 
advancing the agenda of those here illegally and maneuvering against 
their own law officers trying to do their duty.
  On June 27, 2011, internal memoranda confirm that once the Houston 
Chronicle on August 24, 2010--exposed DHS' directive to review and 
dismiss valid deportation cases then in process, ICE officials 
attempted to publicly distance themselves from such lenient policies 
and deny that they ever existed.
  On October 12, 2011, In testimony before the House Judiciary 
Committee, Director Morton admits that White House Director of 
Intergovernmental Affairs and former National Council of La Raza 
employee now--White House Domestic Policy Director--Cecilia

[[Page S338]]

Munoz, assisted in preparation of the administrative amnesty memoranda.
  On October 18, 2011, ICE refuses to take any action after the Santa 
Clara County, California, Board of Supervisors votes 3-1 to stop using 
county funds to honor ICE detainers, except in limited circumstances.
  On October 19, 2011, ICE refuses to act after District of Columbia 
Mayor Vincent C. Gray issues an executive order to prevent D.C. police 
from enforcing U.S. immigration law. Among other things, the order 
prohibits all public safety agencies from inquiring about an 
individual's immigration status or from contacting ICE if there is no 
nexus to a criminal investigation.
  On November 22, 2011, ICE refuses to act after Mayor Michael 
Bloomberg signs a measure ordering all city jails to ignore certain ICE 
detainers issued to deport illegal aliens from those jails. As a 
result, New York City jails now release many illegal aliens back into 
the community instead of handing them over to ICE for removal.
  On December 15, 2011, without an opportunity to defend itself, and 
little regard for the maintenance of public safety or the rule of law, 
DHS rescinds Maricopa County, Arizona's 287(g) agreement--a cooperative 
agreement whereby local law enforcement receive training in identifying 
and apprehending illegal aliens. Director Morton tells the Maricopa 
County Attorney that ICE will no longer respond to calls from the 
Maricopa County Sheriff's Office involving traffic stops, civil 
infractions or ``other minor offenses.'' However, it is unclear how ICE 
can refuse to respond to inquiries from the deputies and not directly 
violate federal law, which requires the federal government to respond 
to inquiries by law enforcement agencies to verify immigration status.
  On December 29, 2011, ICE creates a 24-hour hotline for illegal alien 
detainees to be staffed by the Law Enforcement Support Center--the same 
organization that ICE says is too understaffed to keep up with 
immigration status check requests from state and local law enforcement. 
ICE then revises its detainer form to include a new provision that says 
ICE should ``consider this request for a detainer operative only upon 
the subject's conviction.'' This shift in policy to a discretionary 
``post-conviction'' model ignores the fact that being in the country 
illegally is a violation of federal law while simultaneously welcoming 
criminal aliens back onto the streets.
  On January 19, 2012, ICE attorneys in Denver and Baltimore recommend 
that the agency voluntarily close 1,667 removal cases, resulting in the 
release of illegal aliens already in proceedings without consequence 
for violating U.S. immigration laws.
  On February 7, 2012, ICE announces the creation of the ICE Public 
Advocate, who is to serve as a point of contact for aliens in removal 
proceedings, community and advocacy groups, and others who have 
concerns, questions, recommendations, or other issues they would like 
to raise about the administration's executive enforcement and amnesty 
efforts.
  On April 25, 2012, ICE officials announce it has offered to 
voluntarily close over 16,500 illegal alien deportation cases pending 
background checks in connection with the administration's review of 
300,000 pending immigration cases. The administration also announces 
that the number of illegal aliens whose cases it has already dismissed 
is up to 2,700 from just over 1,500 the previous month.
  On April 27, 2012, ICE shifts its policy on Secure Communities, where 
local officers report arrests of persons who are here illegally, to 
stop the enforcement of immigration law against illegal aliens 
apprehended for ``minor traffic offenses.'' When Secure Communities 
identifies illegal aliens pursuant to a traffic offense, ICE will no 
longer ask the local jails to detain the illegal aliens so that ICE may 
begin deportation proceedings; rather, ICE will only consider detaining 
an alien if the alien is ultimately convicted of the offense. Moreover, 
despite claims of limited resources, ICE also announced it plans to 
take action against jurisdictions with arrest rates the agency deems 
too high.
  On June 5, 2012, ICE releases its latest statistics in its case-by-
case review of pending deportation cases and states the Agency's 
attorneys have reviewed over 288,000 cases. Of those reviewed, ICE says 
it plans to voluntarily dismiss 20,648; it states over 4,300 of these 
cases have already been processed and the remaining will be closed 
pending background checks.
  As I noted earlier, last year, I joined several of my colleagues in a 
press conference with the President of the ICE Officers Association, 
Chris Crane. What he said corroborated our worst fears--it was a 
chilling report about the administration's systematic effort to 
dismantle our nation's immigration laws. Here is just some of what he 
had to say:

       As one example, prosecutorial discretion for [those 
     qualifying for DREAM Act amnesty] is solely based on the 
     individuals' claims. Our orders are, if an alien says they 
     went to high school, then let them go. If they say they have 
     a GED, then let them go. Officers have been told that there 
     is no burden for the alien to prove anything. Even with the 
     greatly relaxed new policies, the alien isn't even required 
     to prove that they meet any of the new criteria.
       There is no requirement, or burden to prove anything, on 
     the part of the alien. We believe that significant numbers of 
     people, who [do not meet DREAM Act criteria], are taking 
     advantage of this practice to avoid arrest.
       The administration's new policies do not provide officers 
     with new options or increased flexibility, but instead order 
     officers not to enforce laws and not to take enforcement 
     actions against specific groups, with officers under threat 
     of losing their jobs if they do so.
       We were the only safety net between the community and these 
     [criminal alien] predators, until now. Now, those folks, more 
     and more, are walking out the back doors of these jails. 
     We're walking away from them out in the field, we're 
     encountering them in houses, and we're not allowed to talk to 
     them. We're not allowed to do basic investigative work. And 
     because of that, we're walking away from a lot of bad guys. 
     This is not about individuals who are here to work, or 
     whatever the case may be, there is a much larger problem and 
     everybody is getting wrapped up in the same situation. When 
     you take an officer's ability in the field to distinguish 
     between those types of things, you place the public at risk.

  The situation is so dire that these brave men and women saw no choice 
but to file suit against their leadership, including Director Morton. 
Last Friday, a federal judge ruled that ICE agents and officers have 
the right to challenge the administrative amnesty policies instituted 
by Director Morton and President Obama, which command the agents to 
violate federal law and refrain from detaining most all illegal aliens, 
or face disciplinary action or worse--losing their jobs.
  According to the complaint, even violent offenders are eligible for 
automatic release under these non-enforcement policies. For example, 
ICE agent Samuel Martin, along with another ICE agent, picked up an 
illegal alien from the El Paso County, Texas jail on July 17, 2012. 
While the agents were trying to place the individual in the vehicle, he 
attempted to escape and physically assaulted the agents. Although the 
agents regained custody of the alien and transported him to the El Paso 
Criminal Alien Program office for processing, the agents' supervisors 
ordered them to release the alien without charges and specifically to 
not issue a Notice to Appear, as required by federal law. The agents 
protested the release of the alien but were told ``it was a management 
decision, based on the President's new immigration policies.'' Anyone 
with the slightest experience in law enforcement can see that these 
actions are devastating to law enforcement personnel.
  Let's take a minute and put ourselves in the position of these 
agents. Let's say you stop a 34-year old man for speeding. He speaks 
little English, has no identification, and has no proof that he meets 
any of the criteria of the President's DREAM Act amnesty. But he knows 
enough to say he has been in the country since he was a child. You have 
no way of confirming this or whether he has a criminal record in this 
or any other country, but you have to let him go. This is what is 
happening every day. What a devastating indictment of this 
administration's willful and reckless dismantling of enforcement.
  On August 3, 2012, I wrote to Director Morton regarding reports that 
ICE suspended an agent in the Philadelphia field office for arresting a 
35-year old Mexican citizen unlawfully present in the U.S. with ten 
misdemeanor traffic

[[Page S339]]

violations, no driver's license, and apparent ties to a fugitive. The 
alien arrived in the U.S. at the age of 25, meaning that he should not 
qualify for ``deferred action,'' even under the administration's 
unlawfully imposed DREAM Act directive. Yet, according to reports, the 
acting field director, a supervisor, advised the criminal alien that he 
would be let go because he was not a ``presidential priority.''
  On August 15, 2012, Director Morton responded to my letter, stating 
that the agent was in trouble for failing to obey ``chain of command.''
  On September 11, 2012, I responded that the issue was not ``chain of 
command'' but rather the agent's sworn duties under the law and the 
administration's ``priorities'' that contradict that sworn obligation. 
The supervisors' actions in this matter, and Director Morton's support 
for them, disastrously undermine the effectiveness of our immigration 
law enforcement officers in the field and their ability to enforce our 
nation's laws. I stated that his apparent failure to support his 
officers in these incidents and his evident lack of concern for the 
administration's decision to nullify the very laws they were sworn to 
enforce, raised serious questions about his ability to lead the agency.
  Director Morton never responded to that letter.
  There is much more that I could say about this, and I have many more 
examples of actions taken by Mr. Morton that have been demoralizing to 
our agents. It is just not good as a Federal law officer, and it is not 
healthy.
  As I noted earlier, this is what ICE agents are telling us they have 
essentially been told: If an individual claims DREAM Act status--even 
though it never passed into law--they are directed to let them go on 
the spot. It is an evisceration of the law of the United States. Mr. 
Morton has no authority to do so, and he should not be doing that. A 
huge percentage of the people who are arrested are in their thirties or 
below. How are you going to tell? They make the assertion, they make 
the claim, and--according to the testimony and statements of these 
officers--they are told to accept that statement, accept that claim, 
and not detain or deport the person they have apprehended.
  The ICE union vote of no confidence and the detailed charges against 
ICE's leadership are corroborated by those inside the administration 
who are afraid to speak out because they fear retaliation by the Obama 
administration. That is a sad state of affairs.
  In the coming days, these facts and more will come to light. The 
administration has to realize there can be no comprehensive immigration 
reform as long as it is the policy of the Director of ICE, John Morton, 
to refuse to enforce existing law. We can't have an agreement. That is 
why, given everything that we have learned, Director Morton cannot 
continue in office.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator's time has expired.
  Mr. SESSIONS. I ask unanimous consent for 2 additional minutes.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. SESSIONS. We cannot make progress on immigration reform as long 
as the man in charge of enforcing our laws continues to undermine those 
very laws and the efforts and work of his own agents, and refuses to 
act to protect them even when they have been assaulted by people. 
Aliens who have been released have assaulted agents. As I noted, ICE 
agents have filed a lawsuit against Director Morton for undermining 
their ability to do their sworn duty, and the court has just recently 
upheld the validity of that lawsuit to go forward, and it is now going 
forward. These officers are suing Mr. Morton.
  So the Federal Government is abdicating its responsibility. It is 
violating the laws of the United States. It is punishing officers who 
try to do their duty. They are creating a larger illegal population in 
this country. They are encouraging more people to come to the country 
by not enforcing our laws, and at a time of high unemployment, the 
result is we are lowering wages and creating more unemployment.
  They are suing States who try to cooperate. They are explicitly 
eviscerating the 287(g) program--a program I worked hard on a decade 
ago and was expanded--to train State law enforcement officers who can 
help the Federal agents to do their jobs.
  Now the President is making a speech today in Las Vegas, taking 9 
hours to get out there, I understand, to make a speech. He is saying 
again, I guess: Trust me. We need to change the law, and then I will 
enforce it. Then we will have our people follow the rules that you 
passed.
  Well, this failure to deal in good faith and to actually follow the 
laws that Congress has passed is one of the biggest obstacles we face. 
We just have to say it. It is one of the biggest obstacles we face in 
being able to craft some sort of reform of our immigration laws and 
make it worthy of a great nation. We are a nation of immigrants. We 
believe in immigration. But we believe in the law. We believe that 
people should wait their turn and people should be able to be accepted 
here--over 1 million a year--in an orderly process, not a disorderly 
process, and that we shouldn't be rewarding those who violate the law 
and making it even harder for those who comply with the law.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Indiana.

                          ____________________