[Congressional Record Volume 169, Number 79 (Wednesday, May 10, 2023)]
[House]
[Pages H2195-H2236]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
SECURE THE BORDER ACT OF 2023
Mr. GREEN of Tennessee. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution
383, I call up the bill (H.R. 2) to secure the borders of the United
States, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration
in the House.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 383, the bill
is considered read.
The text of the bill is as follows:
H.R. 2
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.
(a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Secure the
Border Act of 2023''.
(b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents for this Act
is as follows:
Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.
DIVISION A--BORDER SECURITY
Sec. 101. Definitions.
Sec. 102. Border wall construction.
Sec. 103. Strengthening the requirements for barriers along the
southern border.
Sec. 104. Border and port security technology investment plan.
Sec. 105. Border security technology program management.
Sec. 106. U.S. Customs and Border Protection technology upgrades.
Sec. 107. U.S. Customs and Border Protection personnel.
Sec. 108. Anti-Border Corruption Act reauthorization.
Sec. 109. Establishment of workload staffing models for U.S. Border
Patrol and Air and Marine Operations of CBP.
Sec. 110. Operation Stonegarden.
Sec. 111. Air and Marine Operations flight hours.
Sec. 112. Eradication of carrizo cane and salt cedar.
Sec. 113. Border patrol strategic plan.
Sec. 114. U.S. Customs and Border Protection spiritual readiness.
Sec. 115. Restrictions on funding.
Sec. 116. Collection of DNA and biometric information at the border.
Sec. 117. Eradication of narcotic drugs and formulating effective new
tools to address yearly losses of life; ensuring timely
updates to U.S. Customs and Border Protection field
manuals.
Sec. 118. Publication by U.S. Customs and Border Protection of
operational statistics.
Sec. 119. Alien criminal background checks.
Sec. 120. Prohibited identification documents at airport security
checkpoints; notification to immigration agencies.
Sec. 121. Prohibition against any COVID-19 vaccine mandate or adverse
action against DHS employees.
Sec. 122. CBP One app limitation.
Sec. 123. Report on Mexican drug cartels.
Sec. 124. GAO study on costs incurred by States to secure the southwest
border.
Sec. 125. Report by Inspector General of the Department of Homeland
Security.
Sec. 126. Offsetting authorizations of appropriations.
Sec. 127. Report to Congress on foreign terrorist organizations.
Sec. 128. Assessment by Inspector General of the Department of Homeland
Security on the mitigation of unmanned aircraft systems
at the southwest border.
DIVISION B--IMMIGRATION ENFORCEMENT AND FOREIGN AFFAIRS
TITLE I--ASYLUM REFORM AND BORDER PROTECTION
Sec. 101. Safe third country.
Sec. 102. Credible fear interviews.
Sec. 103. Clarification of asylum eligibility.
Sec. 104. Exceptions.
Sec. 105. Employment authorization.
Sec. 106. Asylum fees.
Sec. 107. Rules for determining asylum eligibility.
Sec. 108. Firm resettlement.
Sec. 109. Notice concerning frivolous asylum applications.
Sec. 110. Technical amendments.
Sec. 111. Requirement for procedures relating to certain asylum
applications.
TITLE II--BORDER SAFETY AND MIGRANT PROTECTION
Sec. 201. Inspection of applicants for admission.
Sec. 202. Operational detention facilities.
TITLE III--PREVENTING UNCONTROLLED MIGRATION FLOWS IN THE WESTERN
HEMISPHERE
Sec. 301. United States policy regarding Western Hemisphere cooperation
on immigration and asylum.
Sec. 302. Negotiations by Secretary of State.
Sec. 303. Mandatory briefings on United States efforts to address the
border crisis.
TITLE IV--ENSURING UNITED FAMILIES AT THE BORDER
Sec. 401. Clarification of standards for family detention.
TITLE V--PROTECTION OF CHILDREN
Sec. 501. Findings.
Sec. 502. Repatriation of unaccompanied alien children.
Sec. 503. Special immigrant juvenile status for immigrants unable to
reunite with either parent.
Sec. 504. Rule of construction.
TITLE VI--VISA OVERSTAYS PENALTIES
Sec. 601. Expanded penalties for illegal entry or presence.
TITLE VII--IMMIGRATION PAROLE REFORM
Sec. 701. Immigration parole reform.
Sec. 702. Implementation.
Sec. 703. Cause of action.
Sec. 704. Severability.
TITLE VIII--LEGAL WORKFORCE
Sec. 801. Employment eligibility verification process.
Sec. 802. Employment eligibility verification system.
Sec. 803. Recruitment, referral, and continuation of employment.
Sec. 804. Good faith defense.
Sec. 805. Preemption and States' rights.
Sec. 806. Repeal.
Sec. 807. Penalties.
Sec. 808. Fraud and misuse of documents.
Sec. 809. Protection of Social Security Administration programs.
Sec. 810. Fraud prevention.
Sec. 811. Use of employment eligibility verification photo tool.
Sec. 812. Identity authentication employment eligibility verification
pilot programs.
Sec. 813. Inspector General audits.
Sec. 814. Agriculture workforce study.
Sec. 815. Sense of Congress on further implementation.
Sec. 816. Repealing regulations.
DIVISION A--BORDER SECURITY
SEC. 101. DEFINITIONS.
In this division:
(1) CBP.--The term ``CBP'' means U.S. Customs and Border
Protection.
(2) Commissioner.--The term ``Commissioner'' means the
Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection.
(3) Department.--The term ``Department'' means the
Department of Homeland Security.
(4) Operational control.--The term ``operational control''
has the meaning given such term in section 2(b) of the Secure
Fence Act of 2006 (Public Law 109-367; 8 U.S.C. 1701 note).
(5) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary
of Homeland Security.
(6) Situational awareness.--The term ``situational
awareness'' has the meaning given such term in section
1092(a)(7) of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328; 6 U.S.C. 223(a)(7)).
[[Page H2196]]
(7) Unmanned aircraft system.--The term ``unmanned aircraft
system'' has the meaning given such term in section 44801 of
title 49, United States Code.
SEC. 102. BORDER WALL CONSTRUCTION.
(a) In General.--
(1) Immediate resumption of border wall construction.--Not
later than seven days after the date of the enactment of this
Act, the Secretary shall resume all activities related to the
construction of the border wall along the border between the
United States and Mexico that were underway or being planned
for prior to January 20, 2021.
(2) Use of funds.--To carry out this section, the Secretary
shall expend all unexpired funds appropriated or explicitly
obligated for the construction of the border wall that were
appropriated or obligated, as the case may be, for use
beginning on October 1, 2019.
(3) Use of materials.--Any unused materials purchased
before the date of the enactment of this Act for construction
of the border wall may be used for activities related to the
construction of the border wall in accordance with paragraph
(1).
(b) Plan To Complete Tactical Infrastructure and
Technology.--Not later than 90 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act and annually thereafter until
construction of the border wall has been completed, the
Secretary shall submit to the appropriate congressional
committees an implementation plan, including annual
benchmarks for the construction of 200 miles of such wall and
associated cost estimates for satisfying all requirements of
the construction of the border wall, including installation
and deployment of tactical infrastructure, technology, and
other elements as identified by the Department prior to
January 20, 2021, through the expenditure of funds
appropriated or explicitly obligated, as the case may be, for
use, as well as any future funds appropriated or otherwise
made available by Congress.
(c) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Appropriate congressional committees.--The term
``appropriate congressional committees'' means the Committee
on Homeland Security and the Committee on Appropriations of
the House of Representatives and the Committee on Homeland
Security and Governmental Affairs and the Committee on
Appropriations of the Senate.
(2) Tactical infrastructure.--The term ``tactical
infrastructure'' includes boat ramps, access gates,
checkpoints, lighting, and roads associated with a border
wall.
(3) Technology.--The term ``technology'' includes border
surveillance and detection technology, including linear
ground detection systems, associated with a border wall.
SEC. 103. STRENGTHENING THE REQUIREMENTS FOR BARRIERS ALONG
THE SOUTHERN BORDER.
Section 102 of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant
Responsibility Act of 1996 (Division C of Public Law 104-208;
8 U.S.C. 1103 note) is amended--
(1) by amending subsection (a) to read as follows:
``(a) In General.--The Secretary of Homeland Security shall
take such actions as may be necessary (including the removal
of obstacles to detection of illegal entrants) to design,
test, construct, install, deploy, integrate, and operate
physical barriers, tactical infrastructure, and technology in
the vicinity of the southwest border to achieve situational
awareness and operational control of the southwest border and
deter, impede, and detect unlawful activity.'';
(2) in subsection (b)--
(A) in the subsection heading, by striking ``Fencing and
Road Improvements'' and inserting ``Physical Barriers'';
(B) in paragraph (1)--
(i) in the heading, by striking ``fencing'' and inserting
``barriers'';
(ii) by amending subparagraph (A) to read as follows:
``(A) Reinforced barriers.--In carrying out this section,
the Secretary of Homeland Security shall construct a border
wall, including physical barriers, tactical infrastructure,
and technology, along not fewer than 900 miles of the
southwest border until situational awareness and operational
control of the southwest border is achieved.'';
(iii) by amending subparagraph (B) to read as follows:
``(B) Physical barriers and tactical infrastructure.--In
carrying out this section, the Secretary of Homeland Security
shall deploy along the southwest border the most practical
and effective physical barriers, tactical infrastructure, and
technology available for achieving situational awareness and
operational control of the southwest border.'';
(iv) in subparagraph (C)--
(I) by amending clause (i) to read as follows:
``(i) In general.--In carrying out this section, the
Secretary of Homeland Security shall consult with the
Secretary of the Interior, the Secretary of Agriculture,
appropriate representatives of State, Tribal, and local
governments, and appropriate private property owners in the
United States to minimize the impact on natural resources,
commerce, and sites of historical or cultural significance
for the communities and residents located near the sites at
which physical barriers, tactical infrastructure, and
technology are to be constructed. Such consultation may not
delay such construction for longer than seven days.''; and
(II) in clause (ii)--
(aa) in subclause (I), by striking ``or'' after the
semicolon at the end;
(bb) by amending subclause (II) to read as follows:
``(II) delay the transfer to the United States of the
possession of property or affect the validity of any property
acquisition by the United States by purchase or eminent
domain, or to otherwise affect the eminent domain laws of the
United States or of any State; or''; and
(cc) by adding at the end the following new subclause:
``(III) create any right or liability for any party.''; and
(v) by striking subparagraph (D);
(C) in paragraph (2)--
(i) by striking ``Attorney General'' and inserting
``Secretary of Homeland Security'';
(ii) by striking ``this subsection'' and inserting ``this
section''; and
(iii) by striking ``construction of fences'' and inserting
``the construction of physical barriers, tactical
infrastructure, and technology'';
(D) by amending paragraph (3) to read as follows:
``(3) Agent safety.--In carrying out this section, the
Secretary of Homeland Security, when designing, testing,
constructing, installing, deploying, integrating, and
operating physical barriers, tactical infrastructure, or
technology, shall incorporate such safety features into such
design, test, construction, installation, deployment,
integration, or operation of such physical barriers, tactical
infrastructure, or technology, as the case may be, that the
Secretary determines are necessary to maximize the safety and
effectiveness of officers and agents of the Department of
Homeland Security or of any other Federal agency deployed in
the vicinity of such physical barriers, tactical
infrastructure, or technology.''; and
(E) in paragraph (4), by striking ``this subsection'' and
inserting ``this section'';
(3) in subsection (c)--
(A) by amending paragraph (1) to read as follows:
``(1) In general.--Notwithstanding any other provision of
law, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall waive all legal
requirements necessary to ensure the expeditious design,
testing, construction, installation, deployment, integration,
operation, and maintenance of the physical barriers, tactical
infrastructure, and technology under this section. The
Secretary shall ensure the maintenance and effectiveness of
such physical barriers, tactical infrastructure, or
technology. Any such action by the Secretary shall be
effective upon publication in the Federal Register.'';
(B) by redesignating paragraph (2) as paragraph (3); and
(C) by inserting after paragraph (1) the following new
paragraph:
``(2) Notification.--Not later than seven days after the
date on which the Secretary of Homeland Security exercises a
waiver pursuant to paragraph (1), the Secretary shall notify
the Committee on Homeland Security of the House of
Representatives and the Committee on Homeland Security and
Governmental Affairs of the Senate of such waiver.''; and
(4) by adding at the end the following new subsections:
``(e) Technology.--In carrying out this section, the
Secretary of Homeland Security shall deploy along the
southwest border the most practical and effective technology
available for achieving situational awareness and operational
control.
``(f) Definitions.--In this section:
``(1) Advanced unattended surveillance sensors.--The term
`advanced unattended surveillance sensors' means sensors that
utilize an onboard computer to analyze detections in an
effort to discern between vehicles, humans, and animals, and
ultimately filter false positives prior to transmission.
``(2) Operational control.--The term `operational control'
has the meaning given such term in section 2(b) of the Secure
Fence Act of 2006 (Public Law 109-367; 8 U.S.C. 1701 note).
``(3) Physical barriers.--The term `physical barriers'
includes reinforced fencing, the border wall, and levee
walls.
``(4) Situational awareness.--The term `situational
awareness' has the meaning given such term in section
1092(a)(7) of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328; 6 U.S.C. 223(a)(7)).
``(5) Tactical infrastructure.--The term `tactical
infrastructure' includes boat ramps, access gates,
checkpoints, lighting, and roads.
``(6) Technology.--The term `technology' includes border
surveillance and detection technology, including the
following:
``(A) Tower-based surveillance technology.
``(B) Deployable, lighter-than-air ground surveillance
equipment.
``(C) Vehicle and Dismount Exploitation Radars (VADER).
``(D) 3-dimensional, seismic acoustic detection and ranging
border tunneling detection technology.
``(E) Advanced unattended surveillance sensors.
``(F) Mobile vehicle-mounted and man-portable surveillance
capabilities.
``(G) Unmanned aircraft systems.
``(H) Tunnel detection systems and other seismic
technology.
``(I) Fiber-optic cable.
``(J) Other border detection, communication, and
surveillance technology.
[[Page H2197]]
``(7) Unmanned aircraft system.--The term `unmanned
aircraft system' has the meaning given such term in section
44801 of title 49, United States Code.''.
SEC. 104. BORDER AND PORT SECURITY TECHNOLOGY INVESTMENT
PLAN.
(a) In General.--Not later than 180 days after the date of
the enactment of this Act, the Commissioner, in consultation
with covered officials and border and port security
technology stakeholders, shall submit to the appropriate
congressional committees a strategic 5-year technology
investment plan (in this section referred to as the
``plan''). The plan may include a classified annex, if
appropriate.
(b) Contents of Plan.--The plan shall include the
following:
(1) An analysis of security risks at and between ports of
entry along the northern and southern borders of the United
States.
(2) An identification of capability gaps with respect to
security at and between such ports of entry to be mitigated
in order to--
(A) prevent terrorists and instruments of terror from
entering the United States;
(B) combat and reduce cross-border criminal activity,
including--
(i) the transport of illegal goods, such as illicit drugs;
and
(ii) human smuggling and human trafficking; and
(C) facilitate the flow of legal trade across the southwest
border.
(3) An analysis of current and forecast trends relating to
the number of aliens who--
(A) unlawfully entered the United States by crossing the
northern or southern border of the United States; or
(B) are unlawfully present in the United States.
(4) A description of security-related technology
acquisitions, to be listed in order of priority, to address
the security risks and capability gaps analyzed and
identified pursuant to paragraphs (1) and (2), respectively.
(5) A description of each planned security-related
technology program, including objectives, goals, and
timelines for each such program.
(6) An identification of each deployed security-related
technology that is at or near the end of the life cycle of
such technology.
(7) A description of the test, evaluation, modeling, and
simulation capabilities, including target methodologies,
rationales, and timelines, necessary to support the
acquisition of security-related technologies pursuant to
paragraph (4).
(8) An identification and assessment of ways to increase
opportunities for communication and collaboration with the
private sector, small and disadvantaged businesses,
intragovernment entities, university centers of excellence,
and federal laboratories to ensure CBP is able to engage with
the market for security-related technologies that are
available to satisfy its mission needs before engaging in an
acquisition of a security-related technology.
(9) An assessment of the management of planned security-
related technology programs by the acquisition workforce of
CBP.
(10) An identification of ways to leverage already-existing
acquisition expertise within the Federal Government.
(11) A description of the security resources, including
information security resources, required to protect security-
related technology from physical or cyber theft, diversion,
sabotage, or attack.
(12) A description of initiatives to--
(A) streamline the acquisition process of CBP; and
(B) provide to the private sector greater predictability
and transparency with respect to such process, including
information relating to the timeline for testing and
evaluation of security-related technology.
(13) An assessment of the privacy and security impact on
border communities of security-related technology.
(14) In the case of a new acquisition leading to the
removal of equipment from a port of entry along the northern
or southern border of the United States, a strategy to
consult with the private sector and community stakeholders
affected by such removal.
(15) A strategy to consult with the private sector and
community stakeholders with respect to security impacts at a
port of entry described in paragraph (14).
(16) An identification of recent technological advancements
in the following:
(A) Manned aircraft sensor, communication, and common
operating picture technology.
(B) Unmanned aerial systems and related technology,
including counter-unmanned aerial system technology.
(C) Surveillance technology, including the following:
(i) Mobile surveillance vehicles.
(ii) Associated electronics, including cameras, sensor
technology, and radar.
(iii) Tower-based surveillance technology.
(iv) Advanced unattended surveillance sensors.
(v) Deployable, lighter-than-air, ground surveillance
equipment.
(D) Nonintrusive inspection technology, including non-x-ray
devices utilizing muon tomography and other advanced
detection technology.
(E) Tunnel detection technology.
(F) Communications equipment, including the following:
(i) Radios.
(ii) Long-term evolution broadband.
(iii) Miniature satellites.
(c) Leveraging the Private Sector.--To the extent
practicable, the plan shall--
(1) leverage emerging technological capabilities, and
research and development trends, within the public and
private sectors;
(2) incorporate input from the private sector, including
from border and port security stakeholders, through requests
for information, industry day events, and other innovative
means consistent with the Federal Acquisition Regulation; and
(3) identify security-related technologies that are in
development or deployed, with or without adaptation, that may
satisfy the mission needs of CBP.
(d) Form.--To the extent practicable, the plan shall be
published in unclassified form on the website of the
Department.
(e) Disclosure.--The plan shall include an identification
of individuals not employed by the Federal Government, and
their professional affiliations, who contributed to the
development of the plan.
(f) Update and Report.--Not later than the date that is two
years after the date on which the plan is submitted to the
appropriate congressional committees pursuant to subsection
(a) and biennially thereafter for ten years, the Commissioner
shall submit to the appropriate congressional committees--
(1) an update of the plan, if appropriate; and
(2) a report that includes--
(A) the extent to which each security-related technology
acquired by CBP since the initial submission of the plan or
most recent update of the plan, as the case may be, is
consistent with the planned technology programs and projects
described pursuant to subsection (b)(5); and
(B) the type of contract and the reason for acquiring each
such security-related technology.
(g) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Appropriate congressional committees.--The term
``appropriate congressional committees'' means--
(A) the Committee on Homeland Security and the Committee on
Appropriations of the House of Representatives; and
(B) the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental
Affairs and the Committee on Appropriations of the Senate.
(2) Covered officials.--The term ``covered officials''
means--
(A) the Under Secretary for Management of the Department;
(B) the Under Secretary for Science and Technology of the
Department; and
(C) the Chief Information Officer of the Department.
(3) Unlawfully present.--The term ``unlawfully present''
has the meaning provided such term in section
212(a)(9)(B)(ii) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8
U.S.C. 1182(a)(9)(B)(ii)).
SEC. 105. BORDER SECURITY TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM MANAGEMENT.
(a) In General.--Subtitle C of title IV of the Homeland
Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 231 et seq.) is amended by
adding at the end the following new section:
``SEC. 437. BORDER SECURITY TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM MANAGEMENT.
``(a) Major Acquisition Program Defined.--In this section,
the term `major acquisition program' means an acquisition
program of the Department that is estimated by the Secretary
to require an eventual total expenditure of at least
$100,000,000 (based on fiscal year 2023 constant dollars)
over its life-cycle cost.
``(b) Planning Documentation.--For each border security
technology acquisition program of the Department that is
determined to be a major acquisition program, the Secretary
shall--
``(1) ensure that each such program has a written
acquisition program baseline approved by the relevant
acquisition decision authority;
``(2) document that each such program is satisfying cost,
schedule, and performance thresholds as specified in such
baseline, in compliance with relevant departmental
acquisition policies and the Federal Acquisition Regulation;
and
``(3) have a plan for satisfying program implementation
objectives by managing contractor performance.
``(c) Adherence to Standards.--The Secretary, acting
through the Under Secretary for Management and the
Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection, shall
ensure border security technology acquisition program
managers who are responsible for carrying out this section
adhere to relevant internal control standards identified by
the Comptroller General of the United States. The
Commissioner shall provide information, as needed, to assist
the Under Secretary in monitoring management of border
security technology acquisition programs under this section.
``(d) Plan.--The Secretary, acting through the Under
Secretary for Management, in coordination with the Under
Secretary for Science and Technology and the Commissioner of
U.S. Customs and Border Protection, shall submit to the
Committee on Homeland Security of the House of
Representatives and the Committee on Homeland Security and
Governmental Affairs of the Senate a plan for testing,
evaluating, and using independent verification and validation
of resources relating to the proposed acquisition of border
security technology. Under such plan, the proposed
acquisition of new border security technologies shall be
evaluated through a series of assessments, processes, and
audits to ensure--
[[Page H2198]]
``(1) compliance with relevant departmental acquisition
policies and the Federal Acquisition Regulation; and
``(2) the effective use of taxpayer dollars.''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of contents in section
1(b) of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 is amended by
inserting after the item relating to section 436 the
following new item:
``Sec. 437. Border security technology program management.''.
(c) Prohibition on Additional Authorization of
Appropriations.--No additional funds are authorized to be
appropriated to carry out section 437 of the Homeland
Security Act of 2002, as added by subsection (a).
SEC. 106. U.S. CUSTOMS AND BORDER PROTECTION TECHNOLOGY
UPGRADES.
(a) Secure Communications.--The Commissioner shall ensure
that each CBP officer or agent, as appropriate, is equipped
with a secure radio or other two-way communication device
that allows each such officer or agent to communicate--
(1) between ports of entry and inspection stations; and
(2) with other Federal, State, Tribal, and local law
enforcement entities.
(b) Border Security Deployment Program.--
(1) Expansion.--Not later than September 30, 2025, the
Commissioner shall--
(A) fully implement the Border Security Deployment Program
of CBP; and
(B) expand the integrated surveillance and intrusion
detection system at land ports of entry along the northern
and southern borders of the United States.
(2) Authorization of appropriations.--In addition to
amounts otherwise authorized to be appropriated for such
purpose, there is authorized to be appropriated $33,000,000
for fiscal years 2024 and 2025 to carry out paragraph (1).
(c) Upgrade of License Plate Readers at Ports of Entry.--
(1) Upgrade.--Not later than two years after the date of
the enactment of this Act, the Commissioner shall upgrade all
existing license plate readers in need of upgrade, as
determined by the Commissioner, on the northern and southern
borders of the United States.
(2) Authorization of appropriations.--In addition to
amounts otherwise authorized to be appropriated for such
purpose, there is authorized to be appropriated $125,000,000
for fiscal years 2023 and 2024 to carry out paragraph (1).
SEC. 107. U.S. CUSTOMS AND BORDER PROTECTION PERSONNEL.
(a) Retention Bonus.--To carry out this section, there is
authorized to be appropriated up to $100,000,000 to the
Commissioner to provide a retention bonus to any front-line
U.S. Border Patrol law enforcement agent--
(1) whose position is equal to or below level GS-12 of the
General Schedule;
(2) who has five years or more of service with the U.S.
Border Patrol; and
(3) who commits to two years of additional service with the
U.S. Border Patrol upon acceptance of such bonus.
(b) Border Patrol Agents.--Not later than September 30,
2025, the Commissioner shall hire, train, and assign a
sufficient number of Border Patrol agents to maintain an
active duty presence of not fewer than 22,000 full-time
equivalent Border Patrol agents, who may not perform the
duties of processing coordinators.
(c) Prohibition Against Alien Travel.--No personnel or
equipment of Air and Marine Operations may be used for the
transportation of non-detained aliens, or detained aliens
expected to be administratively released upon arrival, from
the southwest border to destinations within the United
States.
(d) GAO Report.--If the staffing level required under this
section is not achieved by the date associated with such
level, the Comptroller General of the United States shall--
(1) conduct a review of the reasons why such level was not
so achieved; and
(2) not later than September 30, 2027, publish on a
publicly available website of the Government Accountability
Office a report relating thereto.
SEC. 108. ANTI-BORDER CORRUPTION ACT REAUTHORIZATION.
(a) Hiring Flexibility.--Section 3 of the Anti-Border
Corruption Act of 2010 (6 U.S.C. 221; Public Law 111-376) is
amended by striking subsection (b) and inserting the
following new subsections:
``(b) Waiver Requirement.--Subject to subsection (c), the
Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection shall
waive the application of subsection (a)(1)--
``(1) to a current, full-time law enforcement officer
employed by a State or local law enforcement agency who--
``(A) has continuously served as a law enforcement officer
for not fewer than three years;
``(B) is authorized by law to engage in or supervise the
prevention, detection, investigation, or prosecution of, or
the incarceration of any person for, any violation of law,
and has statutory powers for arrest or apprehension; and
``(C) is not currently under investigation, has not been
found to have engaged in criminal activity or serious
misconduct, has not resigned from a law enforcement officer
position under investigation or in lieu of termination, and
has not been dismissed from a law enforcement officer
position;
``(2) to a current, full-time Federal law enforcement
officer who--
``(A) has continuously served as a law enforcement officer
for not fewer than three years;
``(B) is authorized to make arrests, conduct
investigations, conduct searches, make seizures, carry
firearms, and serve orders, warrants, and other processes;
``(C) is not currently under investigation, has not been
found to have engaged in criminal activity or serious
misconduct, has not resigned from a law enforcement officer
position under investigation or in lieu of termination, and
has not been dismissed from a law enforcement officer
position; and
``(D) holds a current Tier 4 background investigation or
current Tier 5 background investigation; or
``(3) to a member of the Armed Forces (or a reserve
component thereof) or a veteran, if such individual--
``(A) has served in the Armed Forces for not fewer than
three years;
``(B) holds, or has held within the past five years, a
Secret, Top Secret, or Top Secret/Sensitive Compartmented
Information clearance;
``(C) holds, or has undergone within the past five years, a
current Tier 4 background investigation or current Tier 5
background investigation;
``(D) received, or is eligible to receive, an honorable
discharge from service in the Armed Forces and has not
engaged in criminal activity or committed a serious military
or civil offense under the Uniform Code of Military Justice;
and
``(E) was not granted any waivers to obtain the clearance
referred to in subparagraph (B).
``(c) Termination of Waiver Requirement; Snap-Back.--The
requirement to issue a waiver under subsection (b) shall
terminate if the Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border
Protection (CBP) certifies to the Committee on Homeland
Security of the House of Representatives and the Committee on
Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of the Senate that
CBP has met all requirements pursuant to section 107 of the
Secure the Border Act of 2023 relating to personnel levels.
If at any time after such certification personnel levels fall
below such requirements, the Commissioner shall waive the
application of subsection (a)(1) until such time as the
Commissioner re-certifies to such Committees that CBP has so
met all such requirements.''.
(b) Supplemental Commissioner Authority; Reporting;
Definitions.--The Anti-Border Corruption Act of 2010 is
amended by adding at the end the following new sections:
``SEC. 5. SUPPLEMENTAL COMMISSIONER AUTHORITY.
``(a) Nonexemption.--An individual who receives a waiver
under section 3(b) is not exempt from any other hiring
requirements relating to suitability for employment and
eligibility to hold a national security designated position,
as determined by the Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border
Protection.
``(b) Background Investigations.--An individual who
receives a waiver under section 3(b) who holds a current Tier
4 background investigation shall be subject to a Tier 5
background investigation.
``(c) Administration of Polygraph Examination.--The
Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection is
authorized to administer a polygraph examination to an
applicant or employee who is eligible for or receives a
waiver under section 3(b) if information is discovered before
the completion of a background investigation that results in
a determination that a polygraph examination is necessary to
make a final determination regarding suitability for
employment or continued employment, as the case may be.
``SEC. 6. REPORTING.
``(a) Annual Report.--Not later than one year after the
date of the enactment of this section and annually thereafter
while the waiver authority under section 3(b) is in effect,
the Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection shall
submit to Congress a report that includes, with respect to
each such reporting period, the following:
``(1) Information relating to the number of waivers granted
under such section 3(b).
``(2) Information relating to the percentage of applicants
who were hired after receiving such a waiver.
``(3) Information relating to the number of instances that
a polygraph was administered to an applicant who initially
received such a waiver and the results of such polygraph.
``(4) An assessment of the current impact of such waiver
authority on filling law enforcement positions at U.S.
Customs and Border Protection.
``(5) An identification of additional authorities needed by
U.S. Customs and Border Protection to better utilize such
waiver authority for its intended goals.
``(b) Additional Information.--The first report submitted
under subsection (a) shall include the following:
``(1) An analysis of other methods of employment
suitability tests that detect deception and could be used in
conjunction with traditional background investigations to
evaluate potential applicants or employees for suitability
for employment or continued employment, as the case may be.
``(2) A recommendation regarding whether a test referred to
in paragraph (1) should be adopted by U.S. Customs and Border
Protection when the polygraph examination requirement is
waived pursuant to section 3(b).
``SEC. 7. DEFINITIONS.
``In this Act:
[[Page H2199]]
``(1) Federal law enforcement officer.--The term `Federal
law enforcement officer' means a `law enforcement officer',
as such term is defined in section 8331(20) or 8401(17) of
title 5, United States Code.
``(2) Serious military or civil offense.--The term `serious
military or civil offense' means an offense for which--
``(A) a member of the Armed Forces may be discharged or
separated from service in the Armed Forces; and
``(B) a punitive discharge is, or would be, authorized for
the same or a closely related offense under the Manual for
Court-Martial, as pursuant to Army Regulation 635-200,
chapter 14-12.
``(3) Tier 4; tier 5.--The terms `Tier 4' and `Tier 5',
with respect to background investigations, have the meaning
given such terms under the 2012 Federal Investigative
Standards.
``(4) Veteran.--The term `veteran' has the meaning given
such term in section 101(2) of title 38, United States
Code.''.
(c) Polygraph Examiners.--Not later than September 30,
2025, the Secretary shall increase to not fewer than 150 the
number of trained full-time equivalent polygraph examiners
for administering polygraphs under the Anti-Border Corruption
Act of 2010, as amended by this section.
SEC. 109. ESTABLISHMENT OF WORKLOAD STAFFING MODELS FOR U.S.
BORDER PATROL AND AIR AND MARINE OPERATIONS OF
CBP.
(a) In General.--Not later than one year after the date of
the enactment of this Act, the Commissioner, in coordination
with the Under Secretary for Management, the Chief Human
Capital Officer, and the Chief Financial Officer of the
Department, shall implement a workload staffing model for
each of the following:
(1) The U.S. Border Patrol.
(2) Air and Marine Operations of CBP.
(b) Responsibilities of the Commissioner.--Subsection (c)
of section 411 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C.
211), is amended--
(1) by redesignating paragraphs (18) and (19) as paragraphs
(20) and (21), respectively; and
(2) by inserting after paragraph (17) the following new
paragraphs:
``(18) implement a staffing model for the U.S. Border
Patrol, Air and Marine Operations, and the Office of Field
Operations that includes consideration for essential
frontline operator activities and functions, variations in
operating environments, present and planned infrastructure,
present and planned technology, and required operations
support levels to enable such entities to manage and assign
personnel of such entities to ensure field and support posts
possess adequate resources to carry out duties specified in
this section;
``(19) develop standard operating procedures for a
workforce tracking system within the U.S. Border Patrol, Air
and Marine Operations, and the Office of Field Operations,
train the workforce of each of such entities on the use,
capabilities, and purpose of such system, and implement
internal controls to ensure timely and accurate scheduling
and reporting of actual completed work hours and
activities;''.
(c) Report.--
(1) In general.--Not later than one year after the date of
the enactment of this Act with respect to subsection (a) and
paragraphs (18) and (19) of section 411(c) of the Homeland
Security Act of 2002 (as amended by subsection (b)), and
annually thereafter with respect to such paragraphs (18) and
(19), the Secretary shall submit to the appropriate
congressional committees a report that includes a status
update on the following:
(A) The implementation of such subsection (a) and such
paragraphs (18) and (19).
(B) Each relevant workload staffing model.
(2) Data sources and methodology required.--Each report
required under paragraph (1) shall include information
relating to the data sources and methodology used to generate
each relevant staffing model.
(d) Inspector General Review.--Not later than 90 days after
the Commissioner develops the workload staffing models
pursuant to subsection (a), the Inspector General of the
Department shall review such models and provide feedback to
the Secretary and the appropriate congressional committees
with respect to the degree to which such models are
responsive to the recommendations of the Inspector General,
including the following:
(1) Recommendations from the Inspector General's February
2019 audit.
(2) Any further recommendations to improve such models.
(e) Appropriate Congressional Committees Defined.--In this
section, the term ``appropriate congressional committees''
means--
(1) the Committee on Homeland Security of the House of
Representatives; and
(2) the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental
Affairs of the Senate.
SEC. 110. OPERATION STONEGARDEN.
(a) In General.--Subtitle A of title XX of the Homeland
Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) is amended by
adding at the end the following new section:
``SEC. 2010. OPERATION STONEGARDEN.
``(a) Establishment.--There is established in the
Department a program to be known as `Operation Stonegarden',
under which the Secretary, acting through the Administrator,
shall make grants to eligible law enforcement agencies,
through State administrative agencies, to enhance border
security in accordance with this section.
``(b) Eligible Recipients.--To be eligible to receive a
grant under this section, a law enforcement agency shall--
``(1) be located in--
``(A) a State bordering Canada or Mexico; or
``(B) a State or territory with a maritime border;
``(2) be involved in an active, ongoing, U.S. Customs and
Border Protection operation coordinated through a U.S. Border
Patrol sector office; and
``(3) have an agreement in place with U.S. Immigration and
Customs Enforcement to support enforcement operations.
``(c) Permitted Uses.--A recipient of a grant under this
section may use such grant for costs associated with the
following:
``(1) Equipment, including maintenance and sustainment.
``(2) Personnel, including overtime and backfill, in
support of enhanced border law enforcement activities.
``(3) Any activity permitted for Operation Stonegarden
under the most recent fiscal year Department of Homeland
Security's Homeland Security Grant Program Notice of Funding
Opportunity.
``(d) Period of Performance.--The Secretary shall award
grants under this section to grant recipients for a period of
not fewer than 36 months.
``(e) Notification.--Upon denial of a grant to a law
enforcement agency, the Administrator shall provide written
notice to the Committee on Homeland Security of the House of
Representatives and the Committee on Homeland Security and
Governmental Affairs of the Senate, including the reasoning
for such denial.
``(f) Report.--For each of fiscal years 2024 through 2028
the Administrator shall submit to the Committee on Homeland
Security of the House of Representatives and the Committee on
Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of the Senate a
report that contains--
``(1) information on the expenditure of grants made under
this section by each grant recipient; and
``(2) recommendations for other uses of such grants to
further support eligible law enforcement agencies.
``(g) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated $110,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2024
through 2028 for grants under this section.''.
(b) Conforming Amendment.--Subsection (a) of section 2002
of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 603) is
amended to read as follows:
``(a) Grants Authorized.--The Secretary, through the
Administrator, may award grants under sections 2003, 2004,
2009, and 2010 to State, local, and Tribal governments, as
appropriate.''.
(c) Clerical Amendment.--The table of contents in section
1(b) of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 is amended by
inserting after the item relating to section 2009 the
following new item:
``Sec. 2010. Operation Stonegarden.''.
SEC. 111. AIR AND MARINE OPERATIONS FLIGHT HOURS.
(a) Air and Marine Operations Flight Hours.--Not later than
120 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the
Secretary shall ensure that not fewer than 110,000 annual
flight hours are carried out by Air and Marine Operations of
CBP.
(b) Unmanned Aircraft Systems.--The Secretary, after
coordination with the Administrator of the Federal Aviation
Administration, shall ensure that Air and Marine Operations
operate unmanned aircraft systems on the southern border of
the United States for not less than 24 hours per day.
(c) Primary Missions.--The Commissioner shall ensure the
following:
(1) The primary missions for Air and Marine Operations are
to directly support the following:
(A) U.S. Border Patrol activities along the borders of the
United States.
(B) Joint Interagency Task Force South and Joint Task Force
East operations in the transit zone.
(2) The Executive Assistant Commissioner of Air and Marine
Operations assigns the greatest priority to support missions
specified in paragraph (1).
(d) High Demand Flight Hour Requirements.--The Commissioner
shall--
(1) ensure that U.S. Border Patrol Sector Chiefs identify
air support mission-critical hours; and
(2) direct Air and Marine Operations to support requests
from such Sector Chiefs as a component of the primary mission
of Air and Marine Operations in accordance with subsection
(c)(1)(A).
(e) Contract Air Support Authorizations.--The Commissioner
shall contract for air support mission-critical hours to meet
the requests for such hours, as identified pursuant to
subsection (d).
(f) Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems.--
(1) In general.--The Chief of the U.S. Border Patrol shall
be the executive agent with respect to the use of small
unmanned aircraft by CBP for the purposes of the following:
(A) Meeting the unmet flight hour operational requirements
of the U.S. Border Patrol.
(B) Achieving situational awareness and operational control
of the borders of the United States.
(2) Coordination.--In carrying out paragraph (1), the Chief
of the U.S. Border Patrol shall coordinate--
[[Page H2200]]
(A) flight operations with the Administrator of the Federal
Aviation Administration to ensure the safe and efficient
operation of the national airspace system; and
(B) with the Executive Assistant Commissioner for Air and
Marine Operations of CBP to--
(i) ensure the safety of other CBP aircraft flying in the
vicinity of small unmanned aircraft operated by the U.S.
Border Patrol; and
(ii) establish a process to include data from flight hours
in the calculation of got away statistics.
(3) Conforming amendment.--Paragraph (3) of section 411(e)
of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 211(e)) is
amended--
(A) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``and'' after the
semicolon at the end;
(B) by redesignating subparagraph (C) as subparagraph (D);
and
(C) by inserting after subparagraph (B) the following new
subparagraph:
``(C) carry out the small unmanned aircraft (as such term
is defined in section 44801 of title 49, United States Code)
requirements pursuant to subsection (f) of section 111 of the
Secure the Border Act of 2023; and''.
(g) Savings Clause.--Nothing in this section may be
construed as conferring, transferring, or delegating to the
Secretary, the Commissioner, the Executive Assistant
Commissioner for Air and Marine Operations of CBP, or the
Chief of the U.S. Border Patrol any authority of the
Secretary of Transportation or the Administrator of the
Federal Aviation Administration relating to the use of
airspace or aviation safety.
(h) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Got away.--The term ``got away'' has the meaning given
such term in section 1092(a)(3) of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328; 6
U.S.C. 223(a)(3)).
(2) Transit zone.--The term ``transit zone'' has the
meaning given such term in section 1092(a)(8) of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law
114-328; 6 U.S.C. 223(a)(8)).
SEC. 112. ERADICATION OF CARRIZO CANE AND SALT CEDAR.
(a) In General.--Not later than 30 days after the date of
the enactment of this Act, the Secretary, in coordination
with the heads of relevant Federal, State, and local
agencies, shall hire contractors to begin eradicating the
carrizo cane plant and any salt cedar along the Rio Grande
River that impedes border security operations. Such
eradication shall be completed--
(1) by not later than September 30, 2027, except for
required maintenance; and
(2) in the most expeditious and cost-effective manner
possible to maintain clear fields of view.
(b) Application.--The waiver authority under subsection (c)
of section 102 of the Illegal Immigration Reform and
Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (8 U.S.C. 1103 note), as
amended by section 103 of this division, shall apply to
activities carried out pursuant to subsection (a).
(c) Report.--Not later than 180 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to the
Committee on Homeland Security of the House of
Representatives and the Committee on Homeland Security and
Governmental Affairs of the Senate a strategic plan to
eradicate all carrizo cane plant and salt cedar along the Rio
Grande River that impedes border security operations by not
later than September 30, 2027.
(d) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated $7,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2024
through 2028 to the Secretary to carry out this subsection.
SEC. 113. BORDER PATROL STRATEGIC PLAN.
(a) In General.--Not later than one year after the date of
the enactment of this Act and biennially thereafter, the
Commissioner, acting through the Chief of the U.S. Border
Patrol, shall issue a Border Patrol Strategic Plan (referred
to in this section as the ``plan'') to enhance the security
of the borders of the United States.
(b) Elements.--The plan shall include the following:
(1) A consideration of Border Patrol Capability Gap
Analysis reporting, Border Security Improvement Plans, and
any other strategic document authored by the U.S. Border
Patrol to address security gaps between ports of entry,
including efforts to mitigate threats identified in such
analyses, plans, and documents.
(2) Information relating to the dissemination of
information relating to border security or border threats
with respect to the efforts of the Department and other
appropriate Federal agencies.
(3) Information relating to efforts by U.S. Border Patrol
to--
(A) increase situational awareness, including--
(i) surveillance capabilities, such as capabilities
developed or utilized by the Department of Defense, and any
appropriate technology determined to be excess by the
Department of Defense; and
(ii) the use of manned aircraft and unmanned aircraft;
(B) detect and prevent terrorists and instruments of
terrorism from entering the United States;
(C) detect, interdict, and disrupt between ports of entry
aliens unlawfully present in the United States;
(D) detect, interdict, and disrupt human smuggling, human
trafficking, drug trafficking, and other illicit cross-border
activity;
(E) focus intelligence collection to disrupt transnational
criminal organizations outside of the international and
maritime borders of the United States; and
(F) ensure that any new border security technology can be
operationally integrated with existing technologies in use by
the Department.
(4) Information relating to initiatives of the Department
with respect to operational coordination, including any
relevant task forces of the Department.
(5) Information gathered from the lessons learned by the
deployments of the National Guard to the southern border of
the United States.
(6) A description of cooperative agreements relating to
information sharing with State, local, Tribal, territorial,
and other Federal law enforcement agencies that have
jurisdiction on the borders of the United States.
(7) Information relating to border security information
received from the following:
(A) State, local, Tribal, territorial, and other Federal
law enforcement agencies that have jurisdiction on the
borders of the United States or in the maritime environment.
(B) Border community stakeholders, including
representatives from the following:
(i) Border agricultural and ranching organizations.
(ii) Business and civic organizations.
(iii) Hospitals and rural clinics within 150 miles of the
borders of the United States.
(iv) Victims of crime committed by aliens unlawfully
present in the United States.
(v) Victims impacted by drugs, transnational criminal
organizations, cartels, gangs, or other criminal activity.
(vi) Farmers, ranchers, and property owners along the
border.
(vii) Other individuals negatively impacted by illegal
immigration.
(8) Information relating to the staffing requirements with
respect to border security for the Department.
(9) A prioritized list of Department research and
development objectives to enhance the security of the borders
of the United States.
(10) An assessment of training programs, including such
programs relating to the following:
(A) Identifying and detecting fraudulent documents.
(B) Understanding the scope of CBP enforcement authorities
and appropriate use of force policies.
(C) Screening, identifying, and addressing vulnerable
populations, such as children and victims of human
trafficking.
SEC. 114. U.S. CUSTOMS AND BORDER PROTECTION SPIRITUAL
READINESS.
Not later than one year after the enactment of this Act and
annually thereafter for five years, the Commissioner shall
submit to the Committee on Homeland Security of the House of
Representatives and the Committee on Homeland Security and
Governmental Affairs of the Senate a report on the
availability and usage of the assistance of chaplains, prayer
groups, houses of worship, and other spiritual resources for
members of CBP who identify as religiously affiliated and
have attempted suicide, have suicidal ideation, or are at
risk of suicide, and metrics on the impact such resources
have in assisting religiously affiliated members who have
access to and utilize such resources compared to religiously
affiliated members who do not.
SEC. 115. RESTRICTIONS ON FUNDING.
(a) Arriving Aliens.--No funds are authorized to be
appropriated to the Department to process the entry into the
United States of aliens arriving in between ports of entry.
(b) Restriction on Nongovernmental Organization Support for
Unlawful Activity.--No funds are authorized to be
appropriated to the Department for disbursement to any
nongovernmental organization that facilitates or encourages
unlawful activity, including unlawful entry, human
trafficking, human smuggling, drug trafficking, and drug
smuggling.
(c) Restriction on Nongovernmental Organization
Facilitation of Illegal Immigration.--No funds are authorized
to be appropriated to the Department for disbursement to any
nongovernmental organization to provide, or facilitate the
provision of, transportation, lodging, or immigration legal
services to inadmissible aliens who enter the United States
after the date of the enactment of this Act.
SEC. 116. COLLECTION OF DNA AND BIOMETRIC INFORMATION AT THE
BORDER.
Not later than 14 days after the date of the enactment of
this Act, the Secretary shall ensure and certify to the
Committee on Homeland Security of the House of
Representatives and the Committee on Homeland Security and
Governmental Affairs of the Senate that CBP is fully
compliant with Federal DNA and biometric collection
requirements at United States land borders.
SEC. 117. ERADICATION OF NARCOTIC DRUGS AND FORMULATING
EFFECTIVE NEW TOOLS TO ADDRESS YEARLY LOSSES OF
LIFE; ENSURING TIMELY UPDATES TO U.S. CUSTOMS
AND BORDER PROTECTION FIELD MANUALS.
(a) In General.--Not later than 90 days after the date of
the enactment of this Act, and not less frequently than
triennially thereafter, the Commissioner of U.S. Customs and
Border Protection shall review and update, as necessary, the
current policies and manuals of the Office of Field
Operations related to inspections at ports of
[[Page H2201]]
entry, and the U.S. Border Patrol related to inspections
between ports of entry, to ensure the uniform implementation
of inspection practices that will effectively respond to
technological and methodological changes designed to disguise
unlawful activity, such as the smuggling of drugs and humans,
along the border.
(b) Reporting Requirement.--Not later than 90 days after
each update required under subsection (a), the Commissioner
of U.S. Customs and Border Protection shall submit to the
Committee on Homeland Security and the Committee on the
Judiciary of the House of Representatives and the Committee
on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs and the
Committee on the Judiciary of the Senate a report that
summarizes any policy and manual changes pursuant to
subsection (a).
SEC. 118. PUBLICATION BY U.S. CUSTOMS AND BORDER PROTECTION
OF OPERATIONAL STATISTICS.
(a) In General.--Not later than the seventh day of each
month beginning with the second full month after the date of
the enactment of this Act, the Commissioner of U.S. Customs
and Border Protection shall publish on a publicly available
website of the Department of Homeland Security information
relating to the total number of alien encounters and
nationalities, unique alien encounters and nationalities,
gang affiliated apprehensions and nationalities, drug
seizures, alien encounters included in the terrorist
screening database and nationalities, arrests of criminal
aliens or individuals wanted by law enforcement and
nationalities, known got aways, encounters with deceased
aliens, and all other related or associated statistics
recorded by U.S. Customs and Border Protection during the
immediately preceding month. Each such publication shall
include the following:
(1) The aggregate such number, and such number
disaggregated by geographic regions, of such recordings and
encounters, including specifications relating to whether such
recordings and encounters were at the southwest, northern, or
maritime border.
(2) An identification of the Office of Field Operations
field office, U.S. Border Patrol sector, or Air and Marine
Operations branch making each recording or encounter.
(3) Information relating to whether each recording or
encounter of an alien was of a single adult, an unaccompanied
alien child, or an individual in a family unit.
(4) Information relating to the processing disposition of
each alien recording or encounter.
(5) Information relating to the nationality of each alien
who is the subject of each recording or encounter.
(6) The total number of individuals included in the
terrorist screening database (as such term is defined in
section 2101 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C.
621)) who have repeatedly attempted to cross unlawfully into
the United States.
(7) The total number of individuals included in the
terrorist screening database who have been apprehended,
including information relating to whether such individuals
were released into the United States or removed.
(b) Exceptions.--If the Commissioner of U.S. Customs and
Border Protection in any month does not publish the
information required under subsection (a), or does not
publish such information by the date specified in such
subsection, the Commissioner shall brief the Committee on
Homeland Security of the House of Representatives and the
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of
the Senate regarding the reason relating thereto, as the case
may be, by not later than the date that is two business days
after the tenth day of such month.
(c) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Alien encounters.--The term ``alien encounters'' means
aliens apprehended, determined inadmissible, or processed for
removal by U.S. Customs and Border Protection.
(2) Got away.--The term ``got away'' has the meaning given
such term in section 1092(a) of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (6 U.S.C. 223(a)).
(3) Terrorist screening database.--The term ``terrorist
screening database'' has the meaning given such term in
section 2101 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C.
621).
(4) Unaccompanied alien child.--The term ``unaccompanied
alien child'' has the meaning given such term in section
462(g) of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C.
279(g)).
SEC. 119. ALIEN CRIMINAL BACKGROUND CHECKS.
(a) In General.--Not later than seven days after the date
of the enactment of this Act, the Commissioner shall certify
to the Committee on Homeland Security and the Committee on
the Judiciary of the House of Representatives and the
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs and
the Committee on the Judiciary of the Senate that CBP has
real-time access to the criminal history databases of all
countries of origin and transit for aliens encountered by CBP
to perform criminal history background checks for such
aliens.
(b) Standards.--The certification required under subsection
(a) shall also include a determination whether the criminal
history databases of a country are accurate, up to date,
digitized, searchable, and otherwise meet the standards of
the Federal Bureau of Investigation for criminal history
databases maintained by State and local governments.
(c) Certification.--The Secretary shall annually submit to
the Committee on Homeland Security and the Committee on the
Judiciary of the House of Representatives and the Committee
on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs and the
Committee on the Judiciary of the Senate a certification that
each database referred to in subsection (b) which the
Secretary accessed or sought to access pursuant to this
section met the standards described in subsection (b).
SEC. 120. PROHIBITED IDENTIFICATION DOCUMENTS AT AIRPORT
SECURITY CHECKPOINTS; NOTIFICATION TO
IMMIGRATION AGENCIES.
(a) In General.--The Administrator may not accept as valid
proof of identification a prohibited identification document
at an airport security checkpoint.
(b) Notification to Immigration Agencies.--If an individual
presents a prohibited identification document to an officer
of the Transportation Security Administration at an airport
security checkpoint, the Administrator shall promptly notify
the Director of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the
Director of U.S. Customs and Border Protection, and the head
of the appropriate local law enforcement agency to determine
whether the individual is in violation of any term of release
from the custody of any such agency.
(c) Entry Into Sterile Areas.--
(1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), if an
individual is found to be in violation of any term of release
under subsection (b), the Administrator may not permit such
individual to enter a sterile area.
(2) Exception.--An individual presenting a prohibited
identification document under this section may enter a
sterile area if the individual--
(A) is leaving the United States for the purposes of
removal or deportation; or
(B) presents a covered identification document.
(d) Collection of Biometric Information From Certain
Individuals Seeking Entry Into the Sterile Area of an
Airport.--Beginning not later than 120 days after the date of
the enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall collect
biometric information from an individual described in
subsection (e) prior to authorizing such individual to enter
into a sterile area.
(e) Individual Described.--An individual described in this
subsection is an individual who--
(1) is seeking entry into the sterile area of an airport;
(2) does not present a covered identification document; and
(3) the Administrator cannot verify is a national of the
United States.
(f) Participation in IDENT.--Beginning not later than 120
days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the
Administrator, in coordination with the Secretary, shall
submit biometric data collected under this section to the
Automated Biometric Identification System (IDENT).
(g) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Administrator.--The term ``Administrator'' means the
Administrator of the Transportation Security Administration.
(2) Biometric information.--The term ``biometric
information'' means any of the following:
(A) A fingerprint.
(B) A palm print.
(C) A photograph, including--
(i) a photograph of an individual's face for use with
facial recognition technology; and
(ii) a photograph of any physical or anatomical feature,
such as a scar, skin mark, or tattoo.
(D) A signature.
(E) A voice print.
(F) An iris image.
(3) Covered identification document.--The term ``covered
identification document'' means any of the following, if the
document is valid and unexpired:
(A) A United States passport or passport card.
(B) A biometrically secure card issued by a trusted
traveler program of the Department of Homeland Security,
including--
(i) Global Entry;
(ii) Nexus;
(iii) Secure Electronic Network for Travelers Rapid
Inspection (SENTRI); and
(iv) Free and Secure Trade (FAST).
(C) An identification card issued by the Department of
Defense, including such a card issued to a dependent.
(D) Any document required for admission to the United
States under section 211(a) of the Immigration and
Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1181(a)).
(E) An enhanced driver's license issued by a State.
(F) A photo identification card issued by a federally
recognized Indian Tribe.
(G) A personal identity verification credential issued in
accordance with Homeland Security Presidential Directive 12.
(H) A driver's license issued by a province of Canada.
(I) A Secure Certificate of Indian Status issued by the
Government of Canada.
(J) A Transportation Worker Identification Credential.
(K) A Merchant Mariner Credential issued by the Coast
Guard.
(L) A Veteran Health Identification Card issued by the
Department of Veterans Affairs.
(M) Any other document the Administrator determines,
pursuant to a rule making in accordance with section 553 of
title 5, United States Code, will satisfy the identity
[[Page H2202]]
verification procedures of the Transportation Security
Administration.
(4) Immigration laws.--The term ``immigration laws'' has
the meaning given that term in section 101 of the Immigration
and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101).
(5) Prohibited identification document.--The term
``prohibited identification document'' means any of the
following (or any applicable successor form):
(A) U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Form I-200,
Warrant for Arrest of Alien.
(B) U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Form I-205,
Warrant of Removal/Deportation.
(C) U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Form I-220A,
Order of Release on Recognizance.
(D) U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Form I-220B,
Order of Supervision.
(E) Department of Homeland Security Form I-862, Notice to
Appear.
(F) U.S. Customs and Border Protection Form I-94, Arrival/
Departure Record (including a print-out of an electronic
record).
(G) Department of Homeland Security Form I-385, Notice to
Report.
(H) Any document that directs an individual to report to
the Department of Homeland Security.
(I) Any Department of Homeland Security work authorization
or employment verification document.
(6) Sterile area.--The term ``sterile area'' has the
meaning given that term in section 1540.5 of title 49, Code
of Federal Regulations, or any successor regulation.
SEC. 121. PROHIBITION AGAINST ANY COVID-19 VACCINE MANDATE OR
ADVERSE ACTION AGAINST DHS EMPLOYEES.
(a) Limitation on Imposition of New Mandate.--The Secretary
may not issue any COVID-19 vaccine mandate unless Congress
expressly authorizes such a mandate.
(b) Prohibition on Adverse Action.--The Secretary may not
take any adverse action against a Department employee based
solely on the refusal of such employee to receive a vaccine
for COVID-19.
(c) Report.--Not later than 90 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall report to the
Committee on Homeland Security of the House of
Representatives and the Committee on Homeland Security and
Governmental Affairs of the Senate on the following:
(1) The number of Department employees who were terminated
or resigned due to the COVID-19 vaccine mandate.
(2) An estimate of the cost to reinstate such employees.
(3) How the Department would effectuate reinstatement of
such employees.
(d) Retention and Development of Unvaccinated Employees.--
The Secretary shall make every effort to retain Department
employees who are not vaccinated against COVID-19 and provide
such employees with professional development, promotion and
leadership opportunities, and consideration equal to that of
their peers.
SEC. 122. CBP ONE APP LIMITATION.
(a) Limitation.--The Department may use the CBP One Mobile
Application or any other similar program, application,
internet-based portal, website, device, or initiative only
for inspection of perishable cargo.
(b) Report.--Not later than 60 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Commissioner shall report to the
Committee on Homeland Security of the House of
Representatives and the Committee on Homeland Security and
Governmental Affairs of the Senate the date on which CBP
began using CBP One to allow aliens to schedule interviews at
land ports of entry, how many aliens have scheduled
interviews at land ports of entry using CBP One, the
nationalities of such aliens, and the stated final
destinations of such aliens within the United States, if any.
SEC. 123. REPORT ON MEXICAN DRUG CARTELS.
Not later than 60 days after the date of the enactment of
this Act, Congress shall commission a report that contains
the following:
(1) A national strategy to address Mexican drug cartels,
and a determination regarding whether there should be a
designation established to address such cartels.
(2) Information relating to actions by such cartels that
causes harm to the United States.
SEC. 124. GAO STUDY ON COSTS INCURRED BY STATES TO SECURE THE
SOUTHWEST BORDER.
(a) In General.--Not later than 90 days after the date of
the enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General of the
United States shall conduct a study to examine the costs
incurred by individual States as a result of actions taken by
such States in support of the Federal mission to secure the
southwest border, and the feasibility of a program to
reimburse such States for such costs.
(b) Contents.--The study required under subsection (a)
shall include consideration of the following:
(1) Actions taken by the Department of Homeland Security
that have contributed to costs described in such subsection
incurred by States to secure the border in the absence of
Federal action, including the termination of the Migrant
Protection Protocols and cancellation of border wall
construction.
(2) Actions taken by individual States along the southwest
border to secure their borders, and the costs associated with
such actions.
(3) The feasibility of a program within the Department of
Homeland Security to reimburse States for the costs incurred
in support of the Federal mission to secure the southwest
border.
SEC. 125. REPORT BY INSPECTOR GENERAL OF THE DEPARTMENT OF
HOMELAND SECURITY.
(a) Report.--Not later than one year after the date of the
enactment of this Act and annually thereafter for five years,
the Inspector General of the Department of Homeland Security
shall submit to the Committee on Homeland Security of the
House of Representatives and the Committee on Homeland
Security and Governmental Affairs of the Senate a report
examining the economic and security impact of mass migration
to municipalities and States along the southwest border. Such
report shall include information regarding costs incurred by
the following:
(1) State and local law enforcement to secure the southwest
border.
(2) Public school districts to educate students who are
aliens unlawfully present in the United States.
(3) Healthcare providers to provide care to aliens
unlawfully present in the United States who have not paid for
such care.
(4) Farmers and ranchers due to migration impacts to their
properties.
(b) Consultation.--To produce the report required under
subsection (a), the Inspector General of the Department of
Homeland Security shall consult with the individuals and
representatives of the entities described in paragraphs (1)
through (4) of such subsection.
SEC. 126. OFFSETTING AUTHORIZATIONS OF APPROPRIATIONS.
(a) Office of the Secretary and Emergency Management.--No
funds are authorized to be appropriated for the Alternatives
to Detention Case Management Pilot Program or the Office of
the Immigration Detention Ombudsman for the Office of the
Secretary and Emergency Management of the Department of
Homeland Security.
(b) Management Directorate.--No funds are authorized to be
appropriated for electric vehicles or St. Elizabeths campus
construction for the Management Directorate of the Department
of Homeland Security.
(c) Intelligence, Analysis, and Situational Awareness.--
There is authorized to be appropriated $216,000,000 for
Intelligence, Analysis, and Situational Awareness of the
Department of Homeland Security.
(d) U.S. Customs and Border Protection.--No funds are
authorized to be appropriated for the Shelter Services
Program for U.S. Customs and Border Protection.
SEC. 127. REPORT TO CONGRESS ON FOREIGN TERRORIST
ORGANIZATIONS.
(a) In General.--Not later than 90 days after the date of
the enactment of this Act and annually thereafter for five
years, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall submit to the
Committee on Homeland Security of the House of
Representatives and the Committee on Homeland Security and
Governmental Affairs of the Senate an assessment of foreign
terrorist organizations attempting to move their members or
affiliates into the United States through the southern,
northern, or maritime border.
(b) Definition.--In this section, the term ``foreign
terrorist organization'' means an organization described in
section 219 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C.
1189).
SEC. 128. ASSESSMENT BY INSPECTOR GENERAL OF THE DEPARTMENT
OF HOMELAND SECURITY ON THE MITIGATION OF
UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS AT THE SOUTHWEST
BORDER.
Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of
this Act, the Inspector General of the Department of Homeland
Security shall submit to the Committee on Homeland Security
of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Homeland
Security and Governmental Affairs of the Senate an assessment
of U.S. Customs and Border Protection's ability to mitigate
unmanned aircraft systems at the southwest border. Such
assessment shall include information regarding any
intervention between January 1, 2021, and the date of the
enactment of this Act, by any Federal agency affecting in any
manner U.S. Customs and Border Protection's authority to so
mitigate such systems.
DIVISION B--IMMIGRATION ENFORCEMENT AND FOREIGN AFFAIRS
TITLE I--ASYLUM REFORM AND BORDER PROTECTION
SEC. 101. SAFE THIRD COUNTRY.
Section 208(a)(2)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act
(8 U.S.C. 1158(a)(2)(A)) is amended--
(1) by striking ``if the Attorney General determines'' and
inserting ``if the Attorney General or the Secretary of
Homeland Security determines--'';
(2) by striking ``that the alien may be removed'' and
inserting the following:
``(i) that the alien may be removed'';
(3) by striking ``, pursuant to a bilateral or multilateral
agreement, to'' and inserting ``to'';
(4) by inserting ``or the Secretary, on a case by case
basis,'' before ``finds that'';
(5) by striking the period at the end and inserting ``;
or''; and
(6) by adding at the end the following:
``(ii) that the alien entered, attempted to enter, or
arrived in the United States after transiting through at
least one country outside the alien's country of citizenship,
nationality, or last lawful habitual residence en route to
the United States, unless--
[[Page H2203]]
``(I) the alien demonstrates that he or she applied for
protection from persecution or torture in at least one
country outside the alien's country of citizenship,
nationality, or last lawful habitual residence through which
the alien transited en route to the United States, and the
alien received a final judgment denying the alien protection
in each country;
``(II) the alien demonstrates that he or she was a victim
of a severe form of trafficking in which a commercial sex act
was induced by force, fraud, or coercion, or in which the
person induced to perform such act was under the age of 18
years; or in which the trafficking included the recruitment,
harboring, transportation, provision, or obtaining of a
person for labor or services through the use of force, fraud,
or coercion for the purpose of subjection to involuntary
servitude, peonage, debt bondage, or slavery, and was unable
to apply for protection from persecution in each country
through which the alien transited en route to the United
States as a result of such severe form of trafficking; or
``(III) the only countries through which the alien
transited en route to the United States were, at the time of
the transit, not parties to the 1951 United Nations
Convention relating to the Status of Refugees, the 1967
Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees, or the United
Nations Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman
or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.''.
SEC. 102. CREDIBLE FEAR INTERVIEWS.
Section 235(b)(1)(B)(v) of the Immigration and Nationality
Act (8 U.S.C. 1225(b)(1)(B)(v)) is amended by striking
``there is a significant possibility'' and all that follows,
and inserting ``, taking into account the credibility of the
statements made by the alien in support of the alien's claim,
as determined pursuant to section 208(b)(1)(B)(iii), and such
other facts as are known to the officer, the alien more
likely than not could establish eligibility for asylum under
section 208, and it is more likely than not that the
statements made by, and on behalf of, the alien in support of
the alien's claim are true.''.
SEC. 103. CLARIFICATION OF ASYLUM ELIGIBILITY.
(a) In General.--Section 208(b)(1)(A) of the Immigration
and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1158(b)(1)(A)) is amended by
inserting after ``section 101(a)(42)(A)'' the following:
``(in accordance with the rules set forth in this section),
and is eligible to apply for asylum under subsection (a)''.
(b) Place of Arrival.--Section 208(a)(1) of the Immigration
and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1158(a)(1)) is amended--
(1) by striking ``or who arrives in the United States
(whether or not at a designated port of arrival and including
an alien who is brought to the United States after having
been interdicted in international or United States
waters),''; and
(2) by inserting after ``United States'' the following:
``and has arrived in the United States at a port of entry
(including an alien who is brought to the United States after
having been interdicted in international or United States
waters),''.
SEC. 104. EXCEPTIONS.
Paragraph (2) of section 208(b) of the Immigration and
Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1158(b)(2)) is amended to read as
follows:
``(2) Exceptions.--
``(A) In general.--Paragraph (1) shall not apply to an
alien if the Secretary of Homeland Security or the Attorney
General determines that--
``(i) the alien ordered, incited, assisted, or otherwise
participated in the persecution of any person on account of
race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular
social group, or political opinion;
``(ii) the alien has been convicted of any felony under
Federal, State, tribal, or local law;
``(iii) the alien has been convicted of any misdemeanor
offense under Federal, State, tribal, or local law
involving--
``(I) the unlawful possession or use of an identification
document, authentication feature, or false identification
document (as those terms and phrases are defined in the
jurisdiction where the conviction occurred), unless the alien
can establish that the conviction resulted from circumstances
showing that--
``(aa) the document or feature was presented before
boarding a common carrier;
``(bb) the document or feature related to the alien's
eligibility to enter the United States;
``(cc) the alien used the document or feature to depart a
country wherein the alien has claimed a fear of persecution;
and
``(dd) the alien claimed a fear of persecution without
delay upon presenting himself or herself to an immigration
officer upon arrival at a United States port of entry;
``(II) the unlawful receipt of a Federal public benefit (as
defined in section 401(c) of the Personal Responsibility and
Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (8 U.S.C.
1611(c))), from a Federal entity, or the unlawful receipt of
similar public benefits from a State, tribal, or local
entity; or
``(III) possession or trafficking of a controlled substance
or controlled substance paraphernalia, as those phrases are
defined under the law of the jurisdiction where the
conviction occurred, other than a single offense involving
possession for one's own use of 30 grams or less of marijuana
(as marijuana is defined under the law of the jurisdiction
where the conviction occurred);
``(iv) the alien has been convicted of an offense arising
under paragraph (1)(A) or (2) of section 274(a), or under
section 276;
``(v) the alien has been convicted of a Federal, State,
tribal, or local crime that the Attorney General or Secretary
of Homeland Security knows, or has reason to believe, was
committed in support, promotion, or furtherance of the
activity of a criminal street gang (as defined under the law
of the jurisdiction where the conviction occurred or in
section 521(a) of title 18, United States Code);
``(vi) the alien has been convicted of an offense for
driving while intoxicated or impaired, as those terms are
defined under the law of the jurisdiction where the
conviction occurred (including a conviction for driving while
under the influence of or impaired by alcohol or drugs),
without regard to whether the conviction is classified as a
misdemeanor or felony under Federal, State, tribal, or local
law, in which such intoxicated or impaired driving was a
cause of serious bodily injury or death of another person;
``(vii) the alien has been convicted of more than one
offense for driving while intoxicated or impaired, as those
terms are defined under the law of the jurisdiction where the
conviction occurred (including a conviction for driving while
under the influence of or impaired by alcohol or drugs),
without regard to whether the conviction is classified as a
misdemeanor or felony under Federal, State, tribal, or local
law;
``(viii) the alien has been convicted of a crime--
``(I) that involves conduct amounting to a crime of
stalking;
``(II) of child abuse, child neglect, or child abandonment;
or
``(III) that involves conduct amounting to a domestic
assault or battery offense, including--
``(aa) a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence, as
described in section 921(a)(33) of title 18, United States
Code;
``(bb) a crime of domestic violence, as described in
section 40002(a)(12) of the Violence Against Women Act of
1994 (34 U.S.C. 12291(a)(12)); or
``(cc) any crime based on conduct in which the alien
harassed, coerced, intimidated, voluntarily or recklessly
used (or threatened to use) force or violence against, or
inflicted physical injury or physical pain, however slight,
upon a person--
``(AA) who is a current or former spouse of the alien;
``(BB) with whom the alien shares a child;
``(CC) who is cohabitating with, or who has cohabitated
with, the alien as a spouse;
``(DD) who is similarly situated to a spouse of the alien
under the domestic or family violence laws of the
jurisdiction where the offense occurred; or
``(EE) who is protected from that alien's acts under the
domestic or family violence laws of the United States or of
any State, tribal government, or unit of local government;
``(ix) the alien has engaged in acts of battery or extreme
cruelty upon a person and the person--
``(I) is a current or former spouse of the alien;
``(II) shares a child with the alien;
``(III) cohabitates or has cohabitated with the alien as a
spouse;
``(IV) is similarly situated to a spouse of the alien under
the domestic or family violence laws of the jurisdiction
where the offense occurred; or
``(V) is protected from that alien's acts under the
domestic or family violence laws of the United States or of
any State, tribal government, or unit of local government;
``(x) the alien, having been convicted by a final judgment
of a particularly serious crime, constitutes a danger to the
community of the United States;
``(xi) there are serious reasons for believing that the
alien has committed a serious nonpolitical crime outside the
United States prior to the arrival of the alien in the United
States;
``(xii) there are reasonable grounds for regarding the
alien as a danger to the security of the United States;
``(xiii) the alien is described in subclause (I), (II),
(III), (IV), or (VI) of section 212(a)(3)(B)(i) or section
237(a)(4)(B) (relating to terrorist activity), unless, in the
case only of an alien inadmissible under subclause (IV) of
section 212(a)(3)(B)(i), the Secretary of Homeland Security
or the Attorney General determines, in the Secretary's or the
Attorney General's discretion, that there are not reasonable
grounds for regarding the alien as a danger to the security
of the United States;
``(xiv) the alien was firmly resettled in another country
prior to arriving in the United States; or
``(xv) there are reasonable grounds for concluding the
alien could avoid persecution by relocating to another part
of the alien's country of nationality or, in the case of an
alien having no nationality, another part of the alien's
country of last habitual residence.
``(B) Special rules.--
``(i) Particularly serious crime; serious nonpolitical
crime outside the united states.--
``(I) In general.--For purposes of subparagraph (A)(x), the
Attorney General or Secretary of Homeland Security, in their
discretion, may determine that a conviction constitutes a
particularly serious crime based on--
``(aa) the nature of the conviction;
[[Page H2204]]
``(bb) the type of sentence imposed; or
``(cc) the circumstances and underlying facts of the
conviction.
``(II) Determination.--In making a determination under
subclause (I), the Attorney General or Secretary of Homeland
Security may consider all reliable information and is not
limited to facts found by the criminal court or provided in
the underlying record of conviction.
``(III) Treatment of felonies.--In making a determination
under subclause (I), an alien who has been convicted of a
felony (as defined under this section) or an aggravated
felony (as defined under section 101(a)(43)), shall be
considered to have been convicted of a particularly serious
crime.
``(IV) Interpol red notice.--In making a determination
under subparagraph (A)(xi), an Interpol Red Notice may
constitute reliable evidence that the alien has committed a
serious nonpolitical crime outside the United States.
``(ii) Crimes and exceptions.--
``(I) Driving while intoxicated or impaired.--A finding
under subparagraph (A)(vi) does not require the Attorney
General or Secretary of Homeland Security to find the first
conviction for driving while intoxicated or impaired
(including a conviction for driving while under the influence
of or impaired by alcohol or drugs) as a predicate offense.
The Attorney General or Secretary of Homeland Security need
only make a factual determination that the alien previously
was convicted for driving while intoxicated or impaired as
those terms are defined under the jurisdiction where the
conviction occurred (including a conviction for driving while
under the influence of or impaired by alcohol or drugs).
``(II) Stalking and other crimes.--In making a
determination under subparagraph (A)(viii), including
determining the existence of a domestic relationship between
the alien and the victim, the underlying conduct of the crime
may be considered, and the Attorney General or Secretary of
Homeland Security is not limited to facts found by the
criminal court or provided in the underlying record of
conviction.
``(III) Battery or extreme cruelty.--In making a
determination under subparagraph (A)(ix), the phrase `battery
or extreme cruelty' includes--
``(aa) any act or threatened act of violence, including any
forceful detention, which results or threatens to result in
physical or mental injury;
``(bb) psychological or sexual abuse or exploitation,
including rape, molestation, incest, or forced prostitution,
shall be considered acts of violence; and
``(cc) other abusive acts, including acts that, in and of
themselves, may not initially appear violent, but that are a
part of an overall pattern of violence.
``(IV) Exception for victims of domestic violence.--An
alien who was convicted of an offense described in clause
(viii) or (ix) of subparagraph (A) is not ineligible for
asylum on that basis if the alien satisfies the criteria
under section 237(a)(7)(A).
``(C) Specific circumstances.--Paragraph (1) shall not
apply to an alien whose claim is based on--
``(i) personal animus or retribution, including personal
animus in which the alleged persecutor has not targeted, or
manifested an animus against, other members of an alleged
particular social group in addition to the member who has
raised the claim at issue;
``(ii) the applicant's generalized disapproval of,
disagreement with, or opposition to criminal, terrorist,
gang, guerilla, or other non-state organizations absent
expressive behavior in furtherance of a discrete cause
against such organizations related to control of a State or
expressive behavior that is antithetical to the State or a
legal unit of the State;
``(iii) the applicant's resistance to recruitment or
coercion by guerrilla, criminal, gang, terrorist, or other
non-state organizations;
``(iv) the targeting of the applicant for criminal activity
for financial gain based on wealth or affluence or
perceptions of wealth or affluence;
``(v) the applicant's criminal activity; or
``(vi) the applicant's perceived, past or present, gang
affiliation.
``(D) Definitions and clarifications.--
``(i) Definitions.--For purposes of this paragraph:
``(I) Felony.--The term `felony' means--
``(aa) any crime defined as a felony by the relevant
jurisdiction (Federal, State, tribal, or local) of
conviction; or
``(bb) any crime punishable by more than one year of
imprisonment.
``(II) Misdemeanor.--The term `misdemeanor' means--
``(aa) any crime defined as a misdemeanor by the relevant
jurisdiction (Federal, State, tribal, or local) of
conviction; or
``(bb) any crime not punishable by more than one year of
imprisonment.
``(ii) Clarifications.--
``(I) Construction.--For purposes of this paragraph,
whether any activity or conviction also may constitute a
basis for removal is immaterial to a determination of asylum
eligibility.
``(II) Attempt, conspiracy, or solicitation.--For purposes
of this paragraph, all references to a criminal offense or
criminal conviction shall be deemed to include any attempt,
conspiracy, or solicitation to commit the offense or any
other inchoate form of the offense.
``(III) Effect of certain orders.--
``(aa) In general.--No order vacating a conviction,
modifying a sentence, clarifying a sentence, or otherwise
altering a conviction or sentence shall have any effect under
this paragraph unless the Attorney General or Secretary of
Homeland Security determines that--
``(AA) the court issuing the order had jurisdiction and
authority to do so; and
``(BB) the order was not entered for rehabilitative
purposes or for purposes of ameliorating the immigration
consequences of the conviction or sentence.
``(bb) Ameliorating immigration consequences.--For purposes
of item (aa)(BB), the order shall be presumed to be for the
purpose of ameliorating immigration consequences if--
``(AA) the order was entered after the initiation of any
proceeding to remove the alien from the United States; or
``(BB) the alien moved for the order more than one year
after the date of the original order of conviction or
sentencing, whichever is later.
``(cc) Authority of immigration judge.--An immigration
judge is not limited to consideration only of material
included in any order vacating a conviction, modifying a
sentence, or clarifying a sentence to determine whether such
order should be given any effect under this paragraph, but
may consider such additional information as the immigration
judge determines appropriate.
``(E) Additional limitations.--The Secretary of Homeland
Security or the Attorney General may by regulation establish
additional limitations and conditions, consistent with this
section, under which an alien shall be ineligible for asylum
under paragraph (1).
``(F) No judicial review.--There shall be no judicial
review of a determination of the Secretary of Homeland
Security or the Attorney General under subparagraph
(A)(xiii).''.
SEC. 105. EMPLOYMENT AUTHORIZATION.
Paragraph (2) of section 208(d) of the Immigration and
Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1158(d)) is amended to read as
follows:
``(2) Employment authorization.--
``(A) Authorization permitted.--An applicant for asylum is
not entitled to employment authorization, but such
authorization may be provided under regulation by the
Secretary of Homeland Security. An applicant who is not
otherwise eligible for employment authorization shall not be
granted such authorization prior to the date that is 180 days
after the date of filing of the application for asylum.
``(B) Termination.--Each grant of employment authorization
under subparagraph (A), and any renewal or extension thereof,
shall be valid for a period of 6 months, except that such
authorization, renewal, or extension shall terminate prior to
the end of such 6 month period as follows:
``(i) Immediately following the denial of an asylum
application by an asylum officer, unless the case is referred
to an immigration judge.
``(ii) 30 days after the date on which an immigration judge
denies an asylum application, unless the alien timely appeals
to the Board of Immigration Appeals.
``(iii) Immediately following the denial by the Board of
Immigration Appeals of an appeal of a denial of an asylum
application.
``(C) Renewal.--The Secretary of Homeland Security may not
grant, renew, or extend employment authorization to an alien
if the alien was previously granted employment authorization
under subparagraph (A), and the employment authorization was
terminated pursuant to a circumstance described in
subparagraph (B)(i), (ii), or (iii), unless a Federal court
of appeals remands the alien's case to the Board of
Immigration Appeals.
``(D) Ineligibility.--The Secretary of Homeland Security
may not grant employment authorization to an alien under this
paragraph if the alien--
``(i) is ineligible for asylum under subsection (b)(2)(A);
or
``(ii) entered or attempted to enter the United States at a
place and time other than lawfully through a United States
port of entry.''.
SEC. 106. ASYLUM FEES.
Paragraph (3) of section 208(d) of the Immigration and
Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1158(d)) is amended to read as
follows:
``(3) Fees.--
``(A) Application fee.--A fee of not less than $50 for each
application for asylum shall be imposed. Such fee shall not
exceed the cost of adjudicating the application. Such fee
shall not apply to an unaccompanied alien child who files an
asylum application in proceedings under section 240.
``(B) Employment authorization.--A fee may also be imposed
for the consideration of an application for employment
authorization under this section and for adjustment of status
under section 209(b). Such a fee shall not exceed the cost of
adjudicating the application.
``(C) Payment.--Fees under this paragraph may be assessed
and paid over a period of time or by installments.
``(D) Rule of construction.--Nothing in this paragraph
shall be construed to limit the authority of the Attorney
General or Secretary of Homeland Security to set adjudication
and naturalization fees in accordance with section 286(m).''.
[[Page H2205]]
SEC. 107. RULES FOR DETERMINING ASYLUM ELIGIBILITY.
Section 208 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8
U.S.C. 1158) is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(f) Rules for Determining Asylum Eligibility.--In making
a determination under subsection (b)(1)(A) with respect to
whether an alien is a refugee within the meaning of section
101(a)(42)(A), the following shall apply:
``(1) Particular social group.--The Secretary of Homeland
Security or the Attorney General shall not determine that an
alien is a member of a particular social group unless the
alien articulates on the record, or provides a basis on the
record for determining, the definition and boundaries of the
alleged particular social group, establishes that the
particular social group exists independently from the alleged
persecution, and establishes that the alien's claim of
membership in a particular social group does not involve--
``(A) past or present criminal activity or association
(including gang membership);
``(B) presence in a country with generalized violence or a
high crime rate;
``(C) being the subject of a recruitment effort by
criminal, terrorist, or persecutory groups;
``(D) the targeting of the applicant for criminal activity
for financial gain based on perceptions of wealth or
affluence;
``(E) interpersonal disputes of which governmental
authorities in the relevant society or region were unaware or
uninvolved;
``(F) private criminal acts of which governmental
authorities in the relevant society or region were unaware or
uninvolved;
``(G) past or present terrorist activity or association;
``(H) past or present persecutory activity or association;
or
``(I) status as an alien returning from the United States.
``(2) Political opinion.--The Secretary of Homeland
Security or the Attorney General may not determine that an
alien holds a political opinion with respect to which the
alien is subject to persecution if the political opinion is
constituted solely by generalized disapproval of,
disagreement with, or opposition to criminal, terrorist,
gang, guerilla, or other non-state organizations and does not
include expressive behavior in furtherance of a cause against
such organizations related to efforts by the State to control
such organizations or behavior that is antithetical to or
otherwise opposes the ruling legal entity of the State or a
unit thereof.
``(3) Persecution.--The Secretary of Homeland Security or
the Attorney General may not determine that an alien has been
subject to persecution or has a well-founded fear of
persecution based only on--
``(A) the existence of laws or government policies that are
unenforced or infrequently enforced, unless there is credible
evidence that such a law or policy has been or would be
applied to the applicant personally; or
``(B) the conduct of rogue foreign government officials
acting outside the scope of their official capacity.
``(4) Discretionary determination.--
``(A) Adverse discretionary factors.--The Secretary of
Homeland Security or the Attorney General may only grant
asylum to an alien if the alien establishes that he or she
warrants a favorable exercise of discretion. In making such a
determination, the Attorney General or Secretary of Homeland
Security shall consider, if applicable, an alien's use of
fraudulent documents to enter the United States, unless the
alien arrived in the United States by air, sea, or land
directly from the applicant's home country without transiting
through any other country.
``(B) Favorable exercise of discretion not permitted.--
Except as provided in subparagraph (C), the Attorney General
or Secretary of Homeland Security shall not favorably
exercise discretion under this section for any alien who--
``(i) has accrued more than one year of unlawful presence
in the United States, as defined in sections 212(a)(9)(B)(ii)
and (iii), prior to filing an application for asylum;
``(ii) at the time the asylum application is filed with the
immigration court or is referred from the Department of
Homeland Security, has--
``(I) failed to timely file (or timely file a request for
an extension of time to file) any required Federal, State, or
local income tax returns;
``(II) failed to satisfy any outstanding Federal, State, or
local tax obligations; or
``(III) income that would result in tax liability under
section 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 and that was
not reported to the Internal Revenue Service;
``(iii) has had two or more prior asylum applications
denied for any reason;
``(iv) has withdrawn a prior asylum application with
prejudice or been found to have abandoned a prior asylum
application;
``(v) failed to attend an interview regarding his or her
asylum application with the Department of Homeland Security,
unless the alien shows by a preponderance of the evidence
that--
``(I) exceptional circumstances prevented the alien from
attending the interview; or
``(II) the interview notice was not mailed to the last
address provided by the alien or the alien's representative
and neither the alien nor the alien's representative received
notice of the interview; or
``(vi) was subject to a final order of removal,
deportation, or exclusion and did not file a motion to reopen
to seek asylum based on changed country conditions within one
year of the change in country conditions.
``(C) Exceptions.--If one or more of the adverse
discretionary factors set forth in subparagraph (B) are
present, the Attorney General or the Secretary, may,
notwithstanding such subparagraph (B), favorably exercise
discretion under section 208--
``(i) in extraordinary circumstances, such as those
involving national security or foreign policy considerations;
or
``(ii) if the alien, by clear and convincing evidence,
demonstrates that the denial of the application for asylum
would result in exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to
the alien.
``(5) Limitation.--If the Secretary or the Attorney General
determines that an alien fails to satisfy the requirement
under paragraph (1), the alien may not be granted asylum
based on membership in a particular social group, and may not
appeal the determination of the Secretary or Attorney
General, as applicable. A determination under this paragraph
shall not serve as the basis for any motion to reopen or
reconsider an application for asylum or withholding of
removal for any reason, including a claim of ineffective
assistance of counsel, unless the alien complies with the
procedural requirements for such a motion and demonstrates
that counsel's failure to define, or provide a basis for
defining, a formulation of a particular social group was both
not a strategic choice and constituted egregious conduct.
``(6) Stereotypes.--Evidence offered in support of an
application for asylum that promotes cultural stereotypes
about a country, its inhabitants, or an alleged persecutor,
including stereotypes based on race, religion, nationality,
or gender, shall not be admissible in adjudicating that
application, except that evidence that an alleged persecutor
holds stereotypical views of the applicant shall be
admissible.
``(7) Definitions.--In this section:
``(A) The term `membership in a particular social group'
means membership in a group that is--
``(i) composed of members who share a common immutable
characteristic;
``(ii) defined with particularity; and
``(iii) socially distinct within the society in question.
``(B) The term `political opinion' means an ideal or
conviction in support of the furtherance of a discrete cause
related to political control of a state or a unit thereof.
``(C) The term `persecution' means the infliction of a
severe level of harm constituting an exigent threat by the
government of a country or by persons or an organization that
the government was unable or unwilling to control. Such term
does not include--
``(i) generalized harm or violence that arises out of
civil, criminal, or military strife in a country;
``(ii) all treatment that the United States regards as
unfair, offensive, unjust, unlawful, or unconstitutional;
``(iii) intermittent harassment, including brief
detentions;
``(iv) threats with no actual effort to carry out the
threats, except that particularized threats of severe harm of
an immediate and menacing nature made by an identified entity
may constitute persecution; or
``(v) non-severe economic harm or property damage.''.
SEC. 108. FIRM RESETTLEMENT.
Section 208 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8
U.S.C. 1158), as amended by this title, is further amended by
adding at the end the following:
``(g) Firm Resettlement.--In determining whether an alien
was firmly resettled in another country prior to arriving in
the United States under subsection (b)(2)(A)(xiv), the
following shall apply:
``(1) In general.--An alien shall be considered to have
firmly resettled in another country if, after the events
giving rise to the alien's asylum claim--
``(A) the alien resided in a country through which the
alien transited prior to arriving in or entering the United
States and--
``(i) received or was eligible for any permanent legal
immigration status in that country;
``(ii) resided in such a country with any non-permanent but
indefinitely renewable legal immigration status (including
asylee, refugee, or similar status, but excluding status of a
tourist); or
``(iii) resided in such a country and could have applied
for and obtained an immigration status described in clause
(ii);
``(B) the alien physically resided voluntarily, and without
continuing to suffer persecution or torture, in any one
country for one year or more after departing his country of
nationality or last habitual residence and prior to arrival
in or entry into the United States, except for any time spent
in Mexico by an alien who is not a native or citizen of
Mexico solely as a direct result of being returned to Mexico
pursuant to section 235(b)(3) or of being subject to
metering; or
``(C) the alien is a citizen of a country other than the
country in which the alien alleges a fear of persecution, or
was a citizen of such a country in the case of an alien who
renounces such citizenship, and the alien was present in that
country after departing his country of nationality or last
habitual residence and prior to arrival in or entry into the
United States.
``(2) Burden of proof.--If an immigration judge determines
that an alien has firmly resettled in another country under
paragraph
[[Page H2206]]
(1), the alien shall bear the burden of proving the bar does
not apply.
``(3) Firm resettlement of parent.--An alien shall be
presumed to have been firmly resettled in another country if
the alien's parent was firmly resettled in another country,
the parent's resettlement occurred before the alien turned 18
years of age, and the alien resided with such parent at the
time of the firm resettlement, unless the alien establishes
that he or she could not have derived any permanent legal
immigration status or any non-permanent but indefinitely
renewable legal immigration status (including asylum,
refugee, or similar status, but excluding status of a
tourist) from the alien's parent.''.
SEC. 109. NOTICE CONCERNING FRIVOLOUS ASYLUM APPLICATIONS.
(a) In General.--Section 208(d)(4) of the Immigration and
Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1158(d)(4)) is amended--
(1) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A), by inserting
``the Secretary of Homeland Security or'' before ``the
Attorney General'';
(2) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``and of the
consequences, under paragraph (6), of knowingly filing a
frivolous application for asylum; and'' and inserting a
semicolon;
(3) in subparagraph (B), by striking the period and
inserting ``; and''; and
(4) by adding at the end the following:
``(C) ensure that a written warning appears on the asylum
application advising the alien of the consequences of filing
a frivolous application and serving as notice to the alien of
the consequence of filing a frivolous application.''.
(b) Conforming Amendment.--Section 208(d)(6) of the
Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1158(d)(6)) is
amended by striking ``If the'' and all that follows and
inserting:
``(A) In general.--If the Secretary of Homeland Security or
the Attorney General determines that an alien has knowingly
made a frivolous application for asylum and the alien has
received the notice under paragraph (4)(C), the alien shall
be permanently ineligible for any benefits under this
chapter, effective as the date of the final determination of
such an application.
``(B) Criteria.--An application is frivolous if the
Secretary of Homeland Security or the Attorney General
determines, consistent with subparagraph (C), that--
``(i) it is so insufficient in substance that it is clear
that the applicant knowingly filed the application solely or
in part to delay removal from the United States, to seek
employment authorization as an applicant for asylum pursuant
to regulations issued pursuant to paragraph (2), or to seek
issuance of a Notice to Appear in order to pursue
Cancellation of Removal under section 240A(b); or
``(ii) any of the material elements are knowingly
fabricated.
``(C) Sufficient opportunity to clarify.--In determining
that an application is frivolous, the Secretary or the
Attorney General, must be satisfied that the applicant,
during the course of the proceedings, has had sufficient
opportunity to clarify any discrepancies or implausible
aspects of the claim.
``(D) Withholding of removal not precluded.--For purposes
of this section, a finding that an alien filed a frivolous
asylum application shall not preclude the alien from seeking
withholding of removal under section 241(b)(3) or protection
pursuant to the Convention Against Torture.''.
SEC. 110. TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS.
Section 208 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8
U.S.C. 1158) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)--
(A) in paragraph (2)(D), by inserting ``Secretary of
Homeland Security or the'' before ``Attorney General''; and
(B) in paragraph (3), by inserting ``Secretary of Homeland
Security or the'' before ``Attorney General'';
(2) in subsection (c)--
(A) in paragraph (1), by striking ``Attorney General'' each
place such term appears and inserting ``Secretary of Homeland
Security'';
(B) in paragraph (2), in the matter preceding subparagraph
(A), by inserting ``Secretary of Homeland Security or the''
before ``Attorney General''; and
(C) in paragraph (3), by inserting ``Secretary of Homeland
Security or the'' before ``Attorney General''; and
(3) in subsection (d)--
(A) in paragraph (1), by inserting ``Secretary of Homeland
Security or the'' before ``Attorney General'' each place such
term appears; and
(B) in paragraph (5)--
(i) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``Attorney General''
and inserting ``Secretary of Homeland Security''; and
(ii) in subparagraph (B), by inserting ``Secretary of
Homeland Security or the'' before ``Attorney General''.
SEC. 111. REQUIREMENT FOR PROCEDURES RELATING TO CERTAIN
ASYLUM APPLICATIONS.
(a) In General.--Not later than 30 days after the date of
the enactment of this Act, the Attorney General shall
establish procedures to expedite the adjudication of asylum
applications for aliens--
(1) who are subject to removal proceedings under section
240 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1229a);
and
(2) who are nationals of a Western Hemisphere country
sanctioned by the United States, as described in subsection
(b), as of January 1, 2023.
(b) Western Hemisphere Country Sanctioned by the United
States Described.--Subsection (a) shall apply only to an
asylum application filed by an alien who is a national of a
Western Hemisphere country subject to sanctions pursuant to--
(1) the Cuban Liberty and Democratic Solidarity (LIBERTAD)
Act of 1996 (22 U.S.C. 6021 note);
(2) the Reinforcing Nicaragua's Adherence to Conditions for
Electoral Reform Act of 2021 or the RENACER Act (50 U.S.C.
1701 note); or
(3) Executive Order 13692 (80 Fed. Reg. 12747; declaring a
national emergency with respect to the situation in
Venezuela).
(c) Applicability.--This section shall only apply to an
alien who files an application for asylum after the date of
the enactment of this Act.
TITLE II--BORDER SAFETY AND MIGRANT PROTECTION
SEC. 201. INSPECTION OF APPLICANTS FOR ADMISSION.
Section 235 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8
U.S.C. 1225) is amended--
(1) in subsection (b)--
(A) in paragraph (1)--
(i) in subparagraph (A)--
(I) in clauses (i) and (ii), by striking ``section
212(a)(6)(C)'' inserting ``subparagraph (A) or (C) of section
212(a)(6)''; and
(II) by adding at the end the following:
``(iv) Ineligibility for parole.--An alien described in
clause (i) or (ii) shall not be eligible for parole except as
expressly authorized pursuant to section 212(d)(5), or for
parole or release pursuant to section 236(a).''; and
(ii) in subparagraph (B)--
(I) in clause (ii), by striking ``asylum.'' and inserting
``asylum and shall not be released (including pursuant to
parole or release pursuant to section 236(a) but excluding as
expressly authorized pursuant to section 212(d)(5)) other
than to be removed or returned to a country as described in
paragraph (3).''; and
(II) in clause (iii)(IV)--
(aa) in the header by striking ``detention'' and inserting
``detention, return, or removal''; and
(bb) by adding at the end the following: ``The alien shall
not be released (including pursuant to parole or release
pursuant to section 236(a) but excluding as expressly
authorized pursuant to section 212(d)(5)) other than to be
removed or returned to a country as described in paragraph
(3).'';
(B) in paragraph (2)--
(i) in subparagraph (A)--
(I) by striking ``Subject to subparagraphs (B) and (C),''
and inserting ``Subject to subparagraph (B) and paragraph
(3),''; and
(II) by adding at the end the following: ``The alien shall
not be released (including pursuant to parole or release
pursuant to section 236(a) but excluding as expressly
authorized pursuant to section 212(d)(5)) other than to be
removed or returned to a country as described in paragraph
(3).''; and
(ii) by striking subparagraph (C);
(C) by redesignating paragraph (3) as paragraph (5); and
(D) by inserting after paragraph (2) the following:
``(3) Return to foreign territory contiguous to the united
states.--
``(A) In general.--The Secretary of Homeland Security may
return to a foreign territory contiguous to the United States
any alien arriving on land from that territory (whether or
not at a designated port of entry) pending a proceeding under
section 240 or review of a determination under subsection
(b)(1)(B)(iii)(III).
``(B) Mandatory return.--If at any time the Secretary of
Homeland Security cannot--
``(i) comply with its obligations to detain an alien as
required under clauses (ii) and (iii)(IV) of subsection
(b)(1)(B) and subsection (b)(2)(A); or
``(ii) remove an alien to a country described in section
208(a)(2)(A),
the Secretary of Homeland Security shall, without exception,
including pursuant to parole or release pursuant to section
236(a) but excluding as expressly authorized pursuant to
section 212(d)(5), return to a foreign territory contiguous
to the United States any alien arriving on land from that
territory (whether or not at a designated port of entry)
pending a proceeding under section 240 or review of a
determination under subsection (b)(1)(B)(iii)(III).
``(4) Enforcement by state attorneys general.--The attorney
general of a State, or other authorized State officer,
alleging a violation of the detention, return, or removal
requirements under paragraph (1), (2), or (3) that affects
such State or its residents, may bring an action against the
Secretary of Homeland Security on behalf of the residents of
the State in an appropriate United States district court to
obtain appropriate injunctive relief.''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``(e) Authority To Prohibit Introduction of Certain
Aliens.--If the Secretary of Homeland Security determines, in
his discretion, that the prohibition of the introduction of
aliens who are inadmissible under subparagraph (A) or (C) of
section 212(a)(6) or under section 212(a)(7) at an
international land or maritime border of the United States is
necessary to achieve operational control (as defined in
section 2 of the Secure Fence Act of 2006 (8 U.S.C. 1701
note)) of such border, the Secretary may prohibit, in whole
or in part, the introduction of such aliens at such border
for such period of time as the Secretary determines is
necessary for such purpose.''.
[[Page H2207]]
SEC. 202. OPERATIONAL DETENTION FACILITIES.
(a) In General.--Not later than September 30, 2023, the
Secretary of Homeland Security shall take all necessary
actions to reopen or restore all U.S. Immigration and Customs
Enforcement detention facilities that were in operation on
January 20, 2021, that subsequently closed or with respect to
which the use was altered, reduced, or discontinued after
January 20, 2021. In carrying out the requirement under this
subsection, the Secretary may use the authority under section
103(a)(11) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C.
1103(a)(11)).
(b) Specific Facilities.--The requirement under subsection
(a) shall include at a minimum, reopening, or restoring, the
following facilities:
(1) Irwin County Detention Center in Georgia.
(2) C. Carlos Carreiro Immigration Detention Center in
Bristol County, Massachusetts.
(3) Etowah County Detention Center in Gadsden, Alabama.
(4) Glades County Detention Center in Moore Haven, Florida.
(5) South Texas Family Residential Center.
(c) Exception.--
(1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraphs (2) and
(3), the Secretary of Homeland Security is authorized to
obtain equivalent capacity for detention facilities at
locations other than those listed in subsection (b).
(2) Limitation.--The Secretary may not take action under
paragraph (1) unless the capacity obtained would result in a
reduction of time and cost relative to the cost and time
otherwise required to obtain such capacity.
(3) South texas family residential center.--The exception
under paragraph (1) shall not apply to the South Texas Family
Residential Center. The Secretary shall take all necessary
steps to modify and operate the South Texas Family
Residential Center in the same manner and capability it was
operating on January 20, 2021.
(d) Periodic Report.--Not later than 90 days after the date
of the enactment of this Act, and every 90 days thereafter
until September 30, 2027, the Secretary of Homeland Security
shall submit to the appropriate congressional committees a
detailed plan for and a status report on--
(1) compliance with the deadline under subsection (a);
(2) the increase in detention capabilities required by this
section--
(A) for the 90 day period immediately preceding the date
such report is submitted; and
(B) for the period beginning on the first day of the fiscal
year during which the report is submitted, and ending on the
date such report is submitted;
(3) the number of detention beds that were used and the
number of available detention beds that were not used
during--
(A) the 90 day period immediately preceding the date such
report is submitted; and
(B) the period beginning on the first day of the fiscal
year during which the report is submitted, and ending on the
date such report is submitted;
(4) the number of aliens released due to a lack of
available detention beds; and
(5) the resources the Department of Homeland Security needs
in order to comply with the requirements under this section.
(e) Notification.--The Secretary of Homeland Security shall
notify Congress, and include with such notification a
detailed description of the resources the Department of
Homeland Security needs in order to detain all aliens whose
detention is mandatory or nondiscretionary under the
Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101 et seq.)--
(1) not later than 5 days after all U.S. Immigration and
Customs Enforcement detention facilities reach 90 percent of
capacity;
(2) not later than 5 days after all U.S. Immigration and
Customs Enforcement detention facilities reach 95 percent of
capacity; and
(3) not later than 5 days after all U.S. Immigration and
Customs Enforcement detention facilities reach full capacity.
(f) Appropriate Congressional Committees.--In this section,
the term ``appropriate congressional committees'' means--
(1) the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of
Representatives;
(2) the Committee on Appropriations of the House of
Representatives;
(3) the Committee on the Judiciary of the Senate; and
(4) the Committee on Appropriations of the Senate.
TITLE III--PREVENTING UNCONTROLLED MIGRATION FLOWS IN THE WESTERN
HEMISPHERE
SEC. 301. UNITED STATES POLICY REGARDING WESTERN HEMISPHERE
COOPERATION ON IMMIGRATION AND ASYLUM.
It is the policy of the United States to enter into
agreements, accords, and memoranda of understanding with
countries in the Western Hemisphere, the purposes of which
are to advance the interests of the United States by reducing
costs associated with illegal immigration and to protect the
human capital, societal traditions, and economic growth of
other countries in the Western Hemisphere. It is further the
policy of the United States to ensure that humanitarian and
development assistance funding aimed at reducing illegal
immigration is not expended on programs that have not proven
to reduce illegal immigrant flows in the aggregate.
SEC. 302. NEGOTIATIONS BY SECRETARY OF STATE.
(a) Authorization To Negotiate.--The Secretary of State
shall seek to negotiate agreements, accords, and memoranda of
understanding between the United States, Mexico, Honduras, El
Salvador, Guatemala, and other countries in the Western
Hemisphere with respect to cooperation and burden sharing
required for effective regional immigration enforcement,
expediting legal claims by aliens for asylum, and the
processing, detention, and repatriation of foreign nationals
seeking to enter the United States unlawfully. Such
agreements shall be designed to facilitate a regional
approach to immigration enforcement and shall, at a minimum,
provide that--
(1) the Government of Mexico authorize and accept the rapid
entrance into Mexico of nationals of countries other than
Mexico who seek asylum in Mexico, and process the asylum
claims of such nationals inside Mexico, in accordance with
both domestic law and international treaties and conventions
governing the processing of asylum claims;
(2) the Government of Mexico authorize and accept both the
rapid entrance into Mexico of all nationals of countries
other than Mexico who are ineligible for asylum in Mexico and
wish to apply for asylum in the United States, whether or not
at a port of entry, and the continued presence of such
nationals in Mexico while they wait for the adjudication of
their asylum claims to conclude in the United States;
(3) the Government of Mexico commit to provide the
individuals described in paragraphs (1) and (2) with
appropriate humanitarian protections;
(4) the Government of Honduras, the Government of El
Salvador, and the Government of Guatemala each authorize and
accept the entrance into the respective countries of
nationals of other countries seeking asylum in the applicable
such country and process such claims in accordance with
applicable domestic law and international treaties and
conventions governing the processing of asylum claims;
(5) the Government of the United States commit to work to
accelerate the adjudication of asylum claims and to conclude
removal proceedings in the wake of asylum adjudications as
expeditiously as possible;
(6) the Government of the United States commit to continue
to assist the governments of countries in the Western
Hemisphere, such as the Government of Honduras, the
Government of El Salvador, and the Government of Guatemala,
by supporting the enhancement of asylum capacity in those
countries; and
(7) the Government of the United States commit to
monitoring developments in hemispheric immigration trends and
regional asylum capabilities to determine whether additional
asylum cooperation agreements are warranted.
(b) Notification in Accordance With Case-Zablocki Act.--The
Secretary of State shall, in accordance with section 112b of
title 1, United States Code, promptly inform the relevant
congressional committees of each agreement entered into
pursuant to subsection (a). Such notifications shall be
submitted not later than 48 hours after such agreements are
signed.
(c) Alien Defined.--In this section, the term ``alien'' has
the meaning given such term in section 101 of the Immigration
and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101).
SEC. 303. MANDATORY BRIEFINGS ON UNITED STATES EFFORTS TO
ADDRESS THE BORDER CRISIS.
(a) Briefing Required.--Not later than 90 days after the
date of the enactment of this Act, and not less frequently
than once every 90 days thereafter until the date described
in subsection (b), the Secretary of State, or the designee of
the Secretary of State, shall provide to the appropriate
congressional committees an in-person briefing on efforts
undertaken pursuant to the negotiation authority provided by
section 302 of this title to monitor, deter, and prevent
illegal immigration to the United States, including by
entering into agreements, accords, and memoranda of
understanding with foreign countries and by using United
States foreign assistance to stem the root causes of
migration in the Western Hemisphere.
(b) Termination of Mandatory Briefing.--The date described
in this subsection is the date on which the Secretary of
State, in consultation with the heads of other relevant
Federal departments and agencies, determines and certifies to
the appropriate congressional committees that illegal
immigration flows have subsided to a manageable rate.
(c) Appropriate Congressional Committees Defined.--In this
section, the term ``appropriate congressional committees''
means the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of
Representatives and the Committee on Foreign Relations of the
Senate.
TITLE IV--ENSURING UNITED FAMILIES AT THE BORDER
SEC. 401. CLARIFICATION OF STANDARDS FOR FAMILY DETENTION.
(a) In General.--Section 235 of the William Wilberforce
Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008 (8
U.S.C. 1232) is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(j) Construction.--
``(1) In general.--Notwithstanding any other provision of
law, judicial determination, consent decree, or settlement
agreement, the detention of any alien child who is
[[Page H2208]]
not an unaccompanied alien child shall be governed by
sections 217, 235, 236, and 241 of the Immigration and
Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1187, 1225, 1226, and 1231). There
is no presumption that an alien child who is not an
unaccompanied alien child should not be detained.
``(2) Family detention.--The Secretary of Homeland Security
shall--
``(A) maintain the care and custody of an alien, during the
period during which the charges described in clause (i) are
pending, who--
``(i) is charged only with a misdemeanor offense under
section 275(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8
U.S.C. 1325(a)); and
``(ii) entered the United States with the alien's child who
has not attained 18 years of age; and
``(B) detain the alien with the alien's child.''.
(b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that
the amendments in this section to section 235 of the William
Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization
Act of 2008 (8 U.S.C. 1232) are intended to satisfy the
requirements of the Settlement Agreement in Flores v. Meese,
No. 85-4544 (C.D. Cal), as approved by the court on January
28, 1997, with respect to its interpretation in Flores v.
Johnson, 212 F. Supp. 3d 864 (C.D. Cal. 2015), that the
agreement applies to accompanied minors.
(c) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a)
shall take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act
and shall apply to all actions that occur before, on, or
after such date.
(d) Preemption of State Licensing Requirements.--
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, judicial
determination, consent decree, or settlement agreement, no
State may require that an immigration detention facility used
to detain children who have not attained 18 years of age, or
families consisting of one or more of such children and the
parents or legal guardians of such children, that is located
in that State, be licensed by the State or any political
subdivision thereof.
TITLE V--PROTECTION OF CHILDREN
SEC. 501. FINDINGS.
Congress makes the following findings:
(1) Implementation of the provisions of the Trafficking
Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008 that govern
unaccompanied alien children has incentivized multiple surges
of unaccompanied alien children arriving at the southwest
border in the years since the bill's enactment.
(2) The provisions of the Trafficking Victims Protection
Reauthorization Act of 2008 that govern unaccompanied alien
children treat unaccompanied alien children from countries
that are contiguous to the United States disparately by
swiftly returning them to their home country absent
indications of trafficking or a credible fear of return, but
allowing for the release of unaccompanied alien children from
noncontiguous countries into the interior of the United
States, often to those individuals who paid to smuggle them
into the country in the first place.
(3) The provisions of the Trafficking Victims Protection
Reauthorization Act of 2008 governing unaccompanied alien
children have enriched the cartels, who profit hundreds of
millions of dollars each year by smuggling unaccompanied
alien children to the southwest border, exploiting and
sexually abusing many such unaccompanied alien children on
the perilous journey.
(4) Prior to 2008, the number of unaccompanied alien
children encountered at the southwest border never exceeded
1,000 in a single year.
(5) The United States is currently in the midst of the
worst crisis of unaccompanied alien children in our nation's
history, with over 350,000 such unaccompanied alien children
encountered at the southwest border since Joe Biden became
President.
(6) In 2022, during the Biden Administration, 152,057
unaccompanied alien children were encountered, the most ever
in a single year and an over 400 percent increase compared to
the last full fiscal year of the Trump Administration in
which 33,239 unaccompanied alien children were encountered.
(7) The Biden Administration has lost contact with at least
85,000 unaccompanied alien children who entered the United
States since Joe Biden took office.
(8) The Biden Administration dismantled effective
safeguards put in place by the Trump Administration that
protected unaccompanied alien children from being abused by
criminals or exploited for illegal and dangerous child labor.
(9) A recent New York Times investigation found that
unaccompanied alien children are being exploited in the labor
market and ``are ending up in some of the most punishing jobs
in the country.''.
(10) The Times investigation found unaccompanied alien
children, ``under intense pressure to earn money'' in order
to ``send cash back to their families while often being in
debt to their sponsors for smuggling fees, rent, and living
expenses,'' feared ``that they had become trapped in
circumstances they never could have imagined.''.
(11) The Biden Administration's Department of Health and
Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra compared placing
unaccompanied alien children with sponsors, to widgets in an
assembly line, stating that, ``If Henry Ford had seen this in
his plant, he would have never become famous and rich. This
is not the way you do an assembly line.''.
(12) Department of Health and Human Services employees
working under Secretary Xavier Becerra's leadership penned a
July 2021 memorandum expressing serious concern that ``labor
trafficking was increasing'' and that the agency had become
``one that rewards individuals for making quick releases, and
not one that rewards individuals for preventing unsafe
releases.''.
(13) Despite this, Secretary Xavier Becerra pressured then-
Director of the Office of Refugee Resettlement Cindy Huang to
prioritize releases of unaccompanied alien children over
ensuring their safety, telling her ``if she could not
increase the number of discharges he would find someone who
could'' and then-Director Huang resigned one month later.
(14) In June 2014, the Obama-Biden Administration requested
legal authority to exercise discretion in returning and
removing unaccompanied alien children from non-contiguous
countries back to their home countries.
(15) In August 2014, the House of Representatives passed
H.R. 5320, which included the Protection of Children Act.
(16) This title ends the disparate policies of the
Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008 by
ensuring the swift return of all unaccompanied alien children
to their country of origin if they are not victims of
trafficking and do not have a fear of return.
SEC. 502. REPATRIATION OF UNACCOMPANIED ALIEN CHILDREN.
(a) In General.--Section 235 of the William Wilberforce
Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008 (8
U.S.C. 1232) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)--
(A) in paragraph (2)--
(i) by amending the heading to read as follows: ``Rules for
unaccompanied alien children.--'';
(ii) in subparagraph (A)--
(I) in the matter preceding clause (i), by striking ``who
is a national or habitual resident of a country that is
contiguous with the United States'';
(II) in clause (i), by inserting ``and'' at the end;
(III) in clause (ii), by striking ``; and'' and inserting a
period; and
(IV) by striking clause (iii); and
(iii) in subparagraph (B)--
(I) in the matter preceding clause (i), by striking ``(8
U.S.C. 1101 et seq.) may--'' and inserting ``(8 U.S.C. 1101
et seq.)--'';
(II) in clause (i), by inserting before ``permit such child
to withdraw'' the following: ``may''; and
(III) in clause (ii), by inserting before ``return such
child'' the following: ``shall''; and
(B) in paragraph (5)(D)--
(i) in the matter preceding clause (i), by striking ``,
except for an unaccompanied alien child from a contiguous
country subject to exceptions under subsection (a)(2),'' and
inserting ``who does not meet the criteria listed in
paragraph (2)(A)''; and
(ii) in clause (i), by inserting before the semicolon at
the end the following: ``, which shall include a hearing
before an immigration judge not later than 14 days after
being screened under paragraph (4)'';
(2) in subsection (b)--
(A) in paragraph (2)--
(i) in subparagraph (A), by inserting before the semicolon
the following: ``believed not to meet the criteria listed in
subsection (a)(2)(A)''; and
(ii) in subparagraph (B), by inserting before the period
the following: ``and does not meet the criteria listed in
subsection (a)(2)(A)''; and
(B) in paragraph (3), by striking ``an unaccompanied alien
child in custody shall'' and all that follows, and inserting
the following: ``an unaccompanied alien child in custody--
``(A) in the case of a child who does not meet the criteria
listed in subsection (a)(2)(A), shall transfer the custody of
such child to the Secretary of Health and Human Services not
later than 30 days after determining that such child is an
unaccompanied alien child who does not meet such criteria; or
``(B) in the case of a child who meets the criteria listed
in subsection (a)(2)(A), may transfer the custody of such
child to the Secretary of Health and Human Services after
determining that such child is an unaccompanied alien child
who meets such criteria.''; and
(3) in subsection (c)--
(A) in paragraph (3), by inserting at the end the
following:
``(D) Information about individuals with whom children are
placed.--
``(i) Information to be provided to homeland security.--
Before placing a child with an individual, the Secretary of
Health and Human Services shall provide to the Secretary of
Homeland Security, regarding the individual with whom the
child will be placed, information on--
``(I) the name of the individual;
``(II) the social security number of the individual;
``(III) the date of birth of the individual;
``(IV) the location of the individual's residence where the
child will be placed;
``(V) the immigration status of the individual, if known;
and
``(VI) contact information for the individual.
``(ii) Activities of the secretary of homeland security.--
Not later than 30 days after receiving the information listed
in clause (i), the Secretary of Homeland Security, upon
determining that an individual with whom a child is placed is
unlawfully
[[Page H2209]]
present in the United States and not in removal proceedings
pursuant to chapter 4 of title II of the Immigration and
Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1221 et seq.), shall initiate such
removal proceedings.''; and
(B) in paragraph (5)--
(i) by inserting after ``to the greatest extent
practicable'' the following: ``(at no expense to the
Government)''; and
(ii) by striking ``have counsel to represent them'' and
inserting ``have access to counsel to represent them''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to any unaccompanied alien child (as such term is
defined in section 462(g) of the Homeland Security Act of
2002 (6 U.S.C. 279(g))) apprehended on or after the date that
is 30 days after the date of the enactment of this Act.
SEC. 503. SPECIAL IMMIGRANT JUVENILE STATUS FOR IMMIGRANTS
UNABLE TO REUNITE WITH EITHER PARENT.
Section 101(a)(27)(J) of the Immigration and Nationality
Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(27)(J)) is amended--
(1) in clause (i), by striking ``, and whose reunification
with 1 or both of the immigrant's parents is not viable due
to abuse, neglect, abandonment, or a similar basis found
under State law''; and
(2) in clause (iii)--
(A) in subclause (I), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(B) in subclause (II), by inserting ``and'' after the
semicolon; and
(C) by adding at the end the following:
``(III) an alien may not be granted special immigrant
status under this subparagraph if the alien's reunification
with any one parent or legal guardian is not precluded by
abuse, neglect, abandonment, or any similar cause under State
law;''.
SEC. 504. RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.
Nothing in this title shall be construed to limit the
following procedures or practices relating to an
unaccompanied alien child (as defined in section 462(g)(2) of
the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 279(g)(2))):
(1) Screening of such a child for a credible fear of return
to his or her country of origin.
(2) Screening of such a child to determine whether he or
she was a victim of trafficking.
(3) Department of Health and Human Services policy in
effect on the date of the enactment of this Act requiring a
home study for such a child if he or she is under 12 years of
age.
TITLE VI--VISA OVERSTAYS PENALTIES
SEC. 601. EXPANDED PENALTIES FOR ILLEGAL ENTRY OR PRESENCE.
Section 275 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8
U.S.C. 1325) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a) by inserting after ``for a subsequent
commission of any such offense'' the following: ``or if the
alien was previously convicted of an offense under subsection
(e)(2)(A)'';
(2) in subsection (b)--
(A) in paragraph (1), by striking ``at least $50 and not
more than $250'' and inserting ``not less than $500 and not
more than $1,000''; and
(B) in paragraph (2), by inserting after ``in the case of
an alien who has been previously subject to a civil penalty
under this subsection'' the following: ``or subsection
(e)(2)(B)''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(e) Visa Overstays.--
``(1) In general.--An alien who was admitted as a
nonimmigrant has violated this paragraph if the alien, for an
aggregate of 10 days or more, has failed--
``(A) to maintain the nonimmigrant status in which the
alien was admitted, or to which it was changed under section
248, including complying with the period of stay authorized
by the Secretary of Homeland Security in connection with such
status; or
``(B) to comply otherwise with the conditions of such
nonimmigrant status.
``(2) Penalties.--An alien who has violated paragraph (1)--
``(A) shall--
``(i) for the first commission of such a violation, be
fined under title 18, United States Code, or imprisoned not
more than 6 months, or both; and
``(ii) for a subsequent commission of such a violation, or
if the alien was previously convicted of an offense under
subsection (a), be fined under such title 18, or imprisoned
not more than 2 years, or both; and
``(B) in addition to, and not in lieu of, any penalty under
subparagraph (A) and any other criminal or civil penalties
that may be imposed, shall be subject to a civil penalty of--
``(i) not less than $500 and not more than $1,000 for each
violation; or
``(ii) twice the amount specified in clause (i), in the
case of an alien who has been previously subject to a civil
penalty under this subparagraph or subsection (b).''.
TITLE VII--IMMIGRATION PAROLE REFORM
SEC. 701. IMMIGRATION PAROLE REFORM.
Section 212(d)(5) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8
U.S.C. 1182(d)(5)) is amended to read as follows:
``(5)(A) Except as provided in subparagraphs (B) and (C)
and section 214(f), the Secretary of Homeland Security, in
the discretion of the Secretary, may temporarily parole into
the United States any alien applying for admission to the
United States who is not present in the United States, under
such conditions as the Secretary may prescribe, on a case-by-
case basis, and not according to eligibility criteria
describing an entire class of potential parole recipients,
for urgent humanitarian reasons or significant public
benefit. Parole granted under this subparagraph may not be
regarded as an admission of the alien. When the purposes of
such parole have been served in the opinion of the Secretary,
the alien shall immediately return or be returned to the
custody from which the alien was paroled. After such return,
the case of the alien shall be dealt with in the same manner
as the case of any other applicant for admission to the
United States.
``(B) The Secretary of Homeland Security may grant parole
to any alien who--
``(i) is present in the United States without lawful
immigration status;
``(ii) is the beneficiary of an approved petition under
section 203(a);
``(iii) is not otherwise inadmissible or removable; and
``(iv) is the spouse or child of a member of the Armed
Forces serving on active duty.
``(C) The Secretary of Homeland Security may grant parole
to any alien--
``(i) who is a national of the Republic of Cuba and is
living in the Republic of Cuba;
``(ii) who is the beneficiary of an approved petition under
section 203(a);
``(iii) for whom an immigrant visa is not immediately
available;
``(iv) who meets all eligibility requirements for an
immigrant visa;
``(v) who is not otherwise inadmissible; and
``(vi) who is receiving a grant of parole in furtherance of
the commitment of the United States to the minimum level of
annual legal migration of Cuban nationals to the United
States specified in the U.S.-Cuba Joint Communique on
Migration, done at New York September 9, 1994, and reaffirmed
in the Cuba-United States: Joint Statement on Normalization
of Migration, Building on the Agreement of September 9, 1994,
done at New York May 2, 1995.
``(D) The Secretary of Homeland Security may grant parole
to an alien who is returned to a contiguous country under
section 235(b)(3) to allow the alien to attend the alien's
immigration hearing. The grant of parole shall not exceed the
time required for the alien to be escorted to, and attend,
the alien's immigration hearing scheduled on the same
calendar day as the grant, and to immediately thereafter be
escorted back to the contiguous country. A grant of parole
under this subparagraph shall not be considered for purposes
of determining whether the alien is inadmissible under this
Act.
``(E) For purposes of determining an alien's eligibility
for parole under subparagraph (A), an urgent humanitarian
reason shall be limited to circumstances in which the alien
establishes that--
``(i)(I) the alien has a medical emergency; and
``(II)(aa) the alien cannot obtain necessary treatment in
the foreign state in which the alien is residing; or
``(bb) the medical emergency is life-threatening and there
is insufficient time for the alien to be admitted to the
United States through the normal visa process;
``(ii) the alien is the parent or legal guardian of an
alien described in clause (i) and the alien described in
clause (i) is a minor;
``(iii) the alien is needed in the United States in order
to donate an organ or other tissue for transplant and there
is insufficient time for the alien to be admitted to the
United States through the normal visa process;
``(iv) the alien has a close family member in the United
States whose death is imminent and the alien could not arrive
in the United States in time to see such family member alive
if the alien were to be admitted to the United States through
the normal visa process;
``(v) the alien is seeking to attend the funeral of a close
family member and the alien could not arrive in the United
States in time to attend such funeral if the alien were to be
admitted to the United States through the normal visa
process;
``(vi) the alien is an adopted child with an urgent medical
condition who is in the legal custody of the petitioner for a
final adoption-related visa and whose medical treatment is
required before the expected award of a final adoption-
related visa; or
``(vii) the alien is a lawful applicant for adjustment of
status under section 245 and is returning to the United
States after temporary travel abroad.
``(F) For purposes of determining an alien's eligibility
for parole under subparagraph (A), a significant public
benefit may be determined to result from the parole of an
alien only if--
``(i) the alien has assisted (or will assist, whether
knowingly or not) the United States Government in a law
enforcement matter;
``(ii) the alien's presence is required by the Government
in furtherance of such law enforcement matter; and
``(iii) the alien is inadmissible, does not satisfy the
eligibility requirements for admission as a nonimmigrant, or
there is insufficient time for the alien to be admitted to
the United States through the normal visa process.
``(G) For purposes of determining an alien's eligibility
for parole under subparagraph (A), the term `case-by-case
basis' means that the facts in each individual case are
considered and parole is not granted based on membership in a
defined class of aliens to be granted parole. The fact that
aliens are considered for or granted parole one-by-one and
not as a group is not sufficient to establish that the parole
decision is made on a `case-by-case basis'.
[[Page H2210]]
``(H) The Secretary of Homeland Security may not use the
parole authority under this paragraph to parole an alien into
the United States for any reason or purpose other than those
described in subparagraphs (B), (C), (D), (E), and (F).
``(I) An alien granted parole may not accept employment,
except that an alien granted parole pursuant to subparagraph
(B) or (C) is authorized to accept employment for the
duration of the parole, as evidenced by an employment
authorization document issued by the Secretary of Homeland
Security.
``(J) Parole granted after a departure from the United
States shall not be regarded as an admission of the alien. An
alien granted parole, whether as an initial grant of parole
or parole upon reentry into the United States, is not
eligible to adjust status to lawful permanent residence or
for any other immigration benefit if the immigration status
the alien had at the time of departure did not authorize the
alien to adjust status or to be eligible for such benefit.
``(K)(i) Except as provided in clauses (ii) and (iii),
parole shall be granted to an alien under this paragraph for
the shorter of--
``(I) a period of sufficient length to accomplish the
activity described in subparagraph (D), (E), or (F) for which
the alien was granted parole; or
``(II) 1 year.
``(ii) Grants of parole pursuant to subparagraph (A) may be
extended once, in the discretion of the Secretary, for an
additional period that is the shorter of--
``(I) the period that is necessary to accomplish the
activity described in subparagraph (E) or (F) for which the
alien was granted parole; or
``(II) 1 year.
``(iii) Aliens who have a pending application to adjust
status to permanent residence under section 245 may request
extensions of parole under this paragraph, in 1-year
increments, until the application for adjustment has been
adjudicated. Such parole shall terminate immediately upon the
denial of such adjustment application.
``(L) Not later than 90 days after the last day of each
fiscal year, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall submit
to the Committee on the Judiciary of the Senate and the
Committee on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives
and make available to the public, a report--
``(i) identifying the total number of aliens paroled into
the United States under this paragraph during the previous
fiscal year; and
``(ii) containing information and data regarding all aliens
paroled during such fiscal year, including--
``(I) the duration of parole;
``(II) the type of parole; and
``(III) the current status of the aliens so paroled.''.
SEC. 702. IMPLEMENTATION.
(a) In General.--Except as provided in subsection (b), this
title and the amendments made by this title shall take effect
on the date that is 30 days after the date of the enactment
of this Act.
(b) Exceptions.--Notwithstanding subsection (a), each of
the following exceptions apply:
(1) Any application for parole or advance parole filed by
an alien before the date of the enactment of this Act shall
be adjudicated under the law that was in effect on the date
on which the application was properly filed and any approved
advance parole shall remain valid under the law that was in
effect on the date on which the advance parole was approved.
(2) Section 212(d)(5)(J) of the Immigration and Nationality
Act, as added by section 701 of this title, shall take effect
on the date of the enactment of this Act.
(3) Aliens who were paroled into the United States pursuant
to section 212(d)(5)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality
Act (8 U.S.C. 1182(d)(5)(A)) before January 1, 2023, shall
continue to be subject to the terms of parole that were in
effect on the date on which their respective parole was
approved.
SEC. 703. CAUSE OF ACTION.
Any person, State, or local government that experiences
financial harm in excess of $1,000 due to a failure of the
Federal Government to lawfully apply the provisions of this
title or the amendments made by this title shall have
standing to bring a civil action against the Federal
Government in an appropriate district court of the United
States for appropriate relief.
SEC. 704. SEVERABILITY.
If any provision of this title or any amendment by this
title, or the application of such provision or amendment to
any person or circumstance, is held to be unconstitutional,
the remainder of this title and the application of such
provision or amendment to any other person or circumstance
shall not be affected.
TITLE VIII--LEGAL WORKFORCE
SEC. 801. EMPLOYMENT ELIGIBILITY VERIFICATION PROCESS.
(a) In General.--Section 274A(b) of the Immigration and
Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1324a(b)) is amended to read as
follows:
``(b) Employment Eligibility Verification Process.--
``(1) New hires, recruitment, and referral.--The
requirements referred to in paragraphs (1)(B) and (3) of
subsection (a) are, in the case of a person or other entity
hiring, recruiting, or referring an individual for employment
in the United States, the following:
``(A) Attestation after examination of documentation.--
``(i) Attestation.--During the verification period (as
defined in subparagraph (E)), the person or entity shall
attest, under penalty of perjury and on a form, including
electronic format, designated or established by the Secretary
by regulation not later than 6 months after the date of the
enactment of title VIII of division B of the Secure the
Border Act of 2023, that it has verified that the individual
is not an unauthorized alien by--
``(I) obtaining from the individual the individual's social
security account number or United States passport number and
recording the number on the form (if the individual claims to
have been issued such a number), and, if the individual does
not attest to United States nationality under subparagraph
(B), obtaining such identification or authorization number
established by the Department of Homeland Security for the
alien as the Secretary of Homeland Security may specify, and
recording such number on the form; and
``(II) examining--
``(aa) a document relating to the individual presenting it
described in clause (ii); or
``(bb) a document relating to the individual presenting it
described in clause (iii) and a document relating to the
individual presenting it described in clause (iv).
``(ii) Documents evidencing employment authorization and
establishing identity.--A document described in this
subparagraph is an individual's--
``(I) unexpired United States passport or passport card;
``(II) unexpired permanent resident card that contains a
photograph;
``(III) unexpired employment authorization card that
contains a photograph;
``(IV) in the case of a nonimmigrant alien authorized to
work for a specific employer incident to status, a foreign
passport with Form I-94 or Form I-94A, or other documentation
as designated by the Secretary specifying the alien's
nonimmigrant status as long as the period of status has not
yet expired and the proposed employment is not in conflict
with any restrictions or limitations identified in the
documentation;
``(V) passport from the Federated States of Micronesia
(FSM) or the Republic of the Marshall Islands (RMI) with Form
I-94 or Form I-94A, or other documentation as designated by
the Secretary, indicating nonimmigrant admission under the
Compact of Free Association Between the United States and the
FSM or RMI; or
``(VI) other document designated by the Secretary of
Homeland Security, if the document--
``(aa) contains a photograph of the individual and
biometric identification data from the individual and such
other personal identifying information relating to the
individual as the Secretary of Homeland Security finds, by
regulation, sufficient for purposes of this clause;
``(bb) is evidence of authorization of employment in the
United States; and
``(cc) contains security features to make it resistant to
tampering, counterfeiting, and fraudulent use.
``(iii) Documents evidencing employment authorization.--A
document described in this subparagraph is an individual's
social security account number card (other than such a card
which specifies on the face that the issuance of the card
does not authorize employment in the United States).
``(iv) Documents establishing identity of individual.--A
document described in this subparagraph is--
``(I) an individual's unexpired State issued driver's
license or identification card if it contains a photograph
and information such as name, date of birth, gender, height,
eye color, and address;
``(II) an individual's unexpired United States military
identification card;
``(III) an individual's unexpired Native American tribal
identification document issued by a tribal entity recognized
by the Bureau of Indian Affairs; or
``(IV) in the case of an individual under 18 years of age,
a parent or legal guardian's attestation under penalty of law
as to the identity and age of the individual.
``(v) Authority to prohibit use of certain documents.--If
the Secretary of Homeland Security finds, by regulation, that
any document described in clause (i), (ii), or (iii) as
establishing employment authorization or identity does not
reliably establish such authorization or identity or is being
used fraudulently to an unacceptable degree, the Secretary
may prohibit or place conditions on its use for purposes of
this paragraph.
``(vi) Signature.--Such attestation may be manifested by
either a handwritten or electronic signature.
``(B) Individual attestation of employment authorization.--
During the verification period (as defined in subparagraph
(E)), the individual shall attest, under penalty of perjury
on the form designated or established for purposes of
subparagraph (A), that the individual is a citizen or
national of the United States, an alien lawfully admitted for
permanent residence, or an alien who is authorized under this
Act or by the Secretary of Homeland Security to be hired,
recruited, or referred for such employment. Such attestation
may be manifested by either a handwritten or electronic
signature. The individual shall also provide that
individual's social security account number or United States
passport number (if the individual claims to have been issued
such a
[[Page H2211]]
number), and, if the individual does not attest to United
States nationality under this subparagraph, such
identification or authorization number established by the
Department of Homeland Security for the alien as the
Secretary may specify.
``(C) Retention of verification form and verification.--
``(i) In general.--After completion of such form in
accordance with subparagraphs (A) and (B), the person or
entity shall--
``(I) retain a paper or electronic version of the form and
make it available for inspection by officers of the
Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Justice,
or the Department of Labor during a period beginning on the
date of the recruiting or referral of the individual, or, in
the case of the hiring of an individual, the date on which
the verification is completed, and ending--
``(aa) in the case of the recruiting or referral of an
individual, 3 years after the date of the recruiting or
referral; and
``(bb) in the case of the hiring of an individual, the
later of 3 years after the date the verification is completed
or one year after the date the individual's employment is
terminated; and
``(II) during the verification period (as defined in
subparagraph (E)), make an inquiry, as provided in subsection
(d), using the verification system to seek verification of
the identity and employment eligibility of an individual.
``(ii) Confirmation.--
``(I) Confirmation received.--If the person or other entity
receives an appropriate confirmation of an individual's
identity and work eligibility under the verification system
within the time period specified, the person or entity shall
record on the form an appropriate code that is provided under
the system and that indicates a final confirmation of such
identity and work eligibility of the individual.
``(II) Tentative nonconfirmation received.--If the person
or other entity receives a tentative nonconfirmation of an
individual's identity or work eligibility under the
verification system within the time period specified, the
person or entity shall so inform the individual for whom the
verification is sought. If the individual does not contest
the nonconfirmation within the time period specified, the
nonconfirmation shall be considered final. The person or
entity shall then record on the form an appropriate code
which has been provided under the system to indicate a final
nonconfirmation. If the individual does contest the
nonconfirmation, the individual shall utilize the process for
secondary verification provided under subsection (d). The
nonconfirmation will remain tentative until a final
confirmation or nonconfirmation is provided by the
verification system within the time period specified. In no
case shall an employer terminate employment of an individual
because of a failure of the individual to have identity and
work eligibility confirmed under this section until a
nonconfirmation becomes final. Nothing in this clause shall
apply to a termination of employment for any reason other
than because of such a failure. In no case shall an employer
rescind the offer of employment to an individual because of a
failure of the individual to have identity and work
eligibility confirmed under this subsection until a
nonconfirmation becomes final. Nothing in this subclause
shall apply to a recission of the offer of employment for any
reason other than because of such a failure.
``(III) Final confirmation or nonconfirmation received.--If
a final confirmation or nonconfirmation is provided by the
verification system regarding an individual, the person or
entity shall record on the form an appropriate code that is
provided under the system and that indicates a confirmation
or nonconfirmation of identity and work eligibility of the
individual.
``(IV) Extension of time.--If the person or other entity in
good faith attempts to make an inquiry during the time period
specified and the verification system has registered that not
all inquiries were received during such time, the person or
entity may make an inquiry in the first subsequent working
day in which the verification system registers that it has
received all inquiries. If the verification system cannot
receive inquiries at all times during a day, the person or
entity merely has to assert that the entity attempted to make
the inquiry on that day for the previous sentence to apply to
such an inquiry, and does not have to provide any additional
proof concerning such inquiry.
``(V) Consequences of nonconfirmation.--
``(aa) Termination or notification of continued
employment.--If the person or other entity has received a
final nonconfirmation regarding an individual, the person or
entity may terminate employment of the individual (or decline
to recruit or refer the individual). If the person or entity
does not terminate employment of the individual or proceeds
to recruit or refer the individual, the person or entity
shall notify the Secretary of Homeland Security of such fact
through the verification system or in such other manner as
the Secretary may specify.
``(bb) Failure to notify.--If the person or entity fails to
provide notice with respect to an individual as required
under item (aa), the failure is deemed to constitute a
violation of subsection (a)(1)(A) with respect to that
individual.
``(VI) Continued employment after final nonconfirmation.--
If the person or other entity continues to employ (or to
recruit or refer) an individual after receiving final
nonconfirmation, a rebuttable presumption is created that the
person or entity has violated subsection (a)(1)(A).
``(D) Effective dates of new procedures.--
``(i) Hiring.--Except as provided in clause (iii), the
provisions of this paragraph shall apply to a person or other
entity hiring an individual for employment in the United
States as follows:
``(I) With respect to employers having 10,000 or more
employees in the United States on the date of the enactment
of title VIII of division B of the Secure the Border Act of
2023, on the date that is 6 months after the date of the
enactment of title.
``(II) With respect to employers having 500 or more
employees in the United States, but less than 10,000
employees in the United States, on the date of the enactment
of title VIII of division B of the Secure the Border Act of
2023, on the date that is 12 months after the date of the
enactment of such title.
``(III) With respect to employers having 20 or more
employees in the United States, but less than 500 employees
in the United States, on the date of the enactment of title
VIII of division B of the Secure the Border Act of 2023, on
the date that is 18 months after the date of the enactment of
such title.
``(IV) With respect to employers having one or more
employees in the United States, but less than 20 employees in
the United States, on the date of the enactment of title VIII
of division B of the Secure the Border Act of 2023, on the
date that is 24 months after the date of the enactment of
such title.
``(ii) Recruiting and referring.--Except as provided in
clause (iii), the provisions of this paragraph shall apply to
a person or other entity recruiting or referring an
individual for employment in the United States on the date
that is 12 months after the date of the enactment of title
VIII of division B of the Secure the Border Act of 2023.
``(iii) Agricultural labor or services.--With respect to an
employee performing agricultural labor or services, this
paragraph shall not apply with respect to the verification of
the employee until the date that is 36 months after the date
of the enactment of title VIII of division B of the Secure
the Border Act of 2023. For purposes of the preceding
sentence, the term `agricultural labor or services' has the
meaning given such term by the Secretary of Agriculture in
regulations and includes agricultural labor as defined in
section 3121(g) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986,
agriculture as defined in section 3(f) of the Fair Labor
Standards Act of 1938 (29 U.S.C. 203(f)), the handling,
planting, drying, packing, packaging, processing, freezing,
or grading prior to delivery for storage of any agricultural
or horticultural commodity in its unmanufactured state, all
activities required for the preparation, processing or
manufacturing of a product of agriculture (as such term is
defined in such section 3(f)) for further distribution, and
activities similar to all the foregoing as they relate to
fish or shellfish facilities. An employee described in this
clause shall not be counted for purposes of clause (i).
``(iv) Extensions.--
``(I) On request.--Upon request by an employer having 50 or
fewer employees, the Secretary shall allow a one-time 6-month
extension of the effective date set out in this subparagraph
applicable to such employer. Such request shall be made to
the Secretary and shall be made prior to such effective date.
``(II) Following report.--If the study under section 814 of
title VIII of division B of the Secure the Border Act of 2023
has been submitted in accordance with such section, the
Secretary of Homeland Security may extend the effective date
set out in clause (iii) on a one-time basis for 12 months.
``(v) Transition rule.--Subject to paragraph (4), the
following shall apply to a person or other entity hiring,
recruiting, or referring an individual for employment in the
United States until the effective date or dates applicable
under clauses (i) through (iii):
``(I) This subsection, as in effect before the enactment of
title VIII of division B of the Secure the Border Act of
2023.
``(II) Subtitle A of title IV of the Illegal Immigration
Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (8 U.S.C.
1324a note), as in effect before the effective date in
section 807(c) of title VIII of division B of the Secure the
Border Act of 2023.
``(III) Any other provision of Federal law requiring the
person or entity to participate in the E-Verify Program
described in section 403(a) of the Illegal Immigration Reform
and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (8 U.S.C. 1324a
note), as in effect before the effective date in section
807(c) of title VIII of division B of the Secure the Border
Act of 2023, including Executive Order 13465 (8 U.S.C. 1324a
note; relating to Government procurement).
``(E) Verification period defined.--
``(i) In general.--For purposes of this paragraph:
``(I) In the case of recruitment or referral, the term
`verification period' means the period ending on the date
recruiting or referring commences.
``(II) In the case of hiring, the term `verification
period' means the period beginning on the date on which an
offer of employment is extended and ending on the date that
is three business days after the date of hire, except as
provided in clause (iii). The offer of employment may be
conditioned in accordance with clause (ii).
[[Page H2212]]
``(ii) Job offer may be conditional.--A person or other
entity may offer a prospective employee an employment
position that is conditioned on final verification of the
identity and employment eligibility of the employee using the
procedures established under this paragraph.
``(iii) Special rule.--Notwithstanding clause (i)(II), in
the case of an alien who is authorized for employment and who
provides evidence from the Social Security Administration
that the alien has applied for a social security account
number, the verification period ends three business days
after the alien receives the social security account number.
``(2) Reverification for individuals with limited work
authorization.--
``(A) In general.--Except as provided in subparagraph (B),
a person or entity shall make an inquiry, as provided in
subsection (d), using the verification system to seek
reverification of the identity and employment eligibility of
all individuals with a limited period of work authorization
employed by the person or entity during the three business
days after the date on which the employee's work
authorization expires as follows:
``(i) With respect to employers having 10,000 or more
employees in the United States on the date of the enactment
of title VIII of division B of the Secure the Border Act of
2023, beginning on the date that is 6 months after the date
of the enactment of such title.
``(ii) With respect to employers having 500 or more
employees in the United States, but less than 10,000
employees in the United States, on the date of the enactment
of title VIII of division B of the Secure the Border Act of
2023, beginning on the date that is 12 months after the date
of the enactment of such title.
``(iii) With respect to employers having 20 or more
employees in the United States, but less than 500 employees
in the United States, on the date of the enactment of title
VIII of division B of the Secure the Border Act of 2023,
beginning on the date that is 18 months after the date of the
enactment of such title.
``(iv) With respect to employers having one or more
employees in the United States, but less than 20 employees in
the United States, on the date of the enactment of title VIII
of division B of the Secure the Border Act of 2023, beginning
on the date that is 24 months after the date of the enactment
of such title.
``(B) Agricultural labor or services.--With respect to an
employee performing agricultural labor or services, or an
employee recruited or referred by a farm labor contractor (as
defined in section 3 of the Migrant and Seasonal Agricultural
Worker Protection Act (29 U.S.C. 1801)), subparagraph (A)
shall not apply with respect to the reverification of the
employee until the date that is 36 months after the date of
the enactment of title VIII of division B of the Secure the
Border Act of 2023. For purposes of the preceding sentence,
the term `agricultural labor or services' has the meaning
given such term by the Secretary of Agriculture in
regulations and includes agricultural labor as defined in
section 3121(g) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986,
agriculture as defined in section 3(f) of the Fair Labor
Standards Act of 1938 (29 U.S.C. 203(f)), the handling,
planting, drying, packing, packaging, processing, freezing,
or grading prior to delivery for storage of any agricultural
or horticultural commodity in its unmanufactured state, all
activities required for the preparation, processing, or
manufacturing of a product of agriculture (as such term is
defined in such section 3(f)) for further distribution, and
activities similar to all the foregoing as they relate to
fish or shellfish facilities. An employee described in this
subparagraph shall not be counted for purposes of
subparagraph (A).
``(C) Reverification.--Paragraph (1)(C)(ii) shall apply to
reverifications pursuant to this paragraph on the same basis
as it applies to verifications pursuant to paragraph (1),
except that employers shall--
``(i) use a form designated or established by the Secretary
by regulation for purposes of this paragraph; and
``(ii) retain a paper or electronic version of the form and
make it available for inspection by officers of the
Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Justice,
or the Department of Labor during the period beginning on the
date the reverification commences and ending on the date that
is the later of 3 years after the date of such reverification
or 1 year after the date the individual's employment is
terminated.
``(3) Previously hired individuals.--
``(A) On a mandatory basis for certain employees.--
``(i) In general.--Not later than the date that is 6 months
after the date of the enactment of title VIII of division B
of the Secure the Border Act of 2023, an employer shall make
an inquiry, as provided in subsection (d), using the
verification system to seek verification of the identity and
employment eligibility of any individual described in clause
(ii) employed by the employer whose employment eligibility
has not been verified under the E-Verify Program described in
section 403(a) of the Illegal Immigration Reform and
Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (8 U.S.C. 1324a note).
``(ii) Individuals described.--An individual described in
this clause is any of the following:
``(I) An employee of any unit of a Federal, State, or local
government.
``(II) An employee who requires a Federal security
clearance working in a Federal, State, or local government
building, a military base, a nuclear energy site, a weapons
site, or an airport or other facility that requires workers
to carry a Transportation Worker Identification Credential
(TWIC).
``(III) An employee assigned to perform work in the United
States under a Federal contract, except that this subclause--
``(aa) is not applicable to individuals who have a
clearance under Homeland Security Presidential Directive 12
(HSPD 12 clearance), are administrative or overhead
personnel, or are working solely on contracts that provide
Commercial Off The Shelf goods or services as set forth by
the Federal Acquisition Regulatory Council, unless they are
subject to verification under subclause (II); and
``(bb) only applies to contracts over the simple
acquisition threshold as defined in section 2.101 of title
48, Code of Federal Regulations.
``(B) On a mandatory basis for multiple users of same
social security account number.--In the case of an employer
who is required by this subsection to use the verification
system described in subsection (d), or has elected
voluntarily to use such system, the employer shall make
inquiries to the system in accordance with the following:
``(i) The Commissioner of Social Security shall notify
annually employees (at the employee address listed on the
Wage and Tax Statement) who submit a social security account
number to which more than one employer reports income and for
which there is a pattern of unusual multiple use. The
notification letter shall identify the number of employers to
which income is being reported as well as sufficient
information notifying the employee of the process to contact
the Social Security Administration Fraud Hotline if the
employee believes the employee's identity may have been
stolen. The notice shall not share information protected as
private, in order to avoid any recipient of the notice from
being in the position to further commit or begin committing
identity theft.
``(ii) If the person to whom the social security account
number was issued by the Social Security Administration has
been identified and confirmed by the Commissioner, and
indicates that the social security account number was used
without their knowledge, the Secretary and the Commissioner
shall lock the social security account number for employment
eligibility verification purposes and shall notify the
employers of the individuals who wrongfully submitted the
social security account number that the employee may not be
work eligible.
``(iii) Each employer receiving such notification of an
incorrect social security account number under clause (ii)
shall use the verification system described in subsection (d)
to check the work eligibility status of the applicable
employee within 10 business days of receipt of the
notification.
``(C) On a voluntary basis.--Subject to paragraph (2), and
subparagraphs (A) through (C) of this paragraph, beginning on
the date that is 30 days after the date of the enactment of
title VIII of division B of the Secure the Border Act of
2023, an employer may make an inquiry, as provided in
subsection (d), using the verification system to seek
verification of the identity and employment eligibility of
any individual employed by the employer. If an employer
chooses voluntarily to seek verification of any individual
employed by the employer, the employer shall seek
verification of all individuals employed at the same
geographic location or, at the option of the employer, all
individuals employed within the same job category, as the
employee with respect to whom the employer seeks voluntarily
to use the verification system. An employer's decision about
whether or not voluntarily to seek verification of its
current workforce under this subparagraph may not be
considered by any government agency in any proceeding,
investigation, or review provided for in this Act.
``(D) Verification.--Paragraph (1)(C)(ii) shall apply to
verifications pursuant to this paragraph on the same basis as
it applies to verifications pursuant to paragraph (1), except
that employers shall--
``(i) use a form designated or established by the Secretary
by regulation for purposes of this paragraph; and
``(ii) retain a paper or electronic version of the form and
make it available for inspection by officers of the
Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Justice,
or the Department of Labor during the period beginning on the
date the verification commences and ending on the date that
is the later of 3 years after the date of such verification
or 1 year after the date the individual's employment is
terminated.
``(4) Early compliance.--
``(A) Former e-verify required users, including federal
contractors.--Notwithstanding the deadlines in paragraphs (1)
and (2), beginning on the date of the enactment of title VIII
of division B of the Secure the Border Act of 2023, the
Secretary is authorized to commence requiring employers
required to participate in the E-Verify Program described in
section 403(a) of the Illegal Immigration Reform and
Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (8 U.S.C. 1324a note),
including employers required to participate in such program
by reason of Federal acquisition laws (and regulations
promulgated under those laws, including the Federal
Acquisition Regulation), to commence compliance with the
requirements of this subsection (and any additional
requirements of
[[Page H2213]]
such Federal acquisition laws and regulation) in lieu of any
requirement to participate in the E-Verify Program.
``(B) Former e-verify voluntary users and others desiring
early compliance.--Notwithstanding the deadlines in
paragraphs (1) and (2), beginning on the date of the
enactment of title VIII of division B of the Secure the
Border Act of 2023, the Secretary shall provide for the
voluntary compliance with the requirements of this subsection
by employers voluntarily electing to participate in the E-
Verify Program described in section 403(a) of the Illegal
Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996
(8 U.S.C. 1324a note) before such date, as well as by other
employers seeking voluntary early compliance.
``(5) Copying of documentation permitted.--Notwithstanding
any other provision of law, the person or entity may copy a
document presented by an individual pursuant to this
subsection and may retain the copy, but only (except as
otherwise permitted under law) for the purpose of complying
with the requirements of this subsection.
``(6) Limitation on use of forms.--A form designated or
established by the Secretary of Homeland Security under this
subsection and any information contained in or appended to
such form, may not be used for purposes other than for
enforcement of this Act and any other provision of Federal
criminal law.
``(7) Good faith compliance.--
``(A) In general.--Except as otherwise provided in this
subsection, a person or entity is considered to have complied
with a requirement of this subsection notwithstanding a
technical or procedural failure to meet such requirement if
there was a good faith attempt to comply with the
requirement.
``(B) Exception if failure to correct after notice.--
Subparagraph (A) shall not apply if--
``(i) the failure is not de minimus;
``(ii) the Secretary of Homeland Security has explained to
the person or entity the basis for the failure and why it is
not de minimus;
``(iii) the person or entity has been provided a period of
not less than 30 calendar days (beginning after the date of
the explanation) within which to correct the failure; and
``(iv) the person or entity has not corrected the failure
voluntarily within such period.
``(C) Exception for pattern or practice violators.--
Subparagraph (A) shall not apply to a person or entity that
has engaged or is engaging in a pattern or practice of
violations of subsection (a)(1)(A) or (a)(2).
``(8) Single extension of deadlines upon certification.--In
a case in which the Secretary of Homeland Security has
certified to the Congress that the employment eligibility
verification system required under subsection (d) will not be
fully operational by the date that is 6 months after the date
of the enactment of title VIII of division B of the Secure
the Border Act of 2023, each deadline established under this
section for an employer to make an inquiry using such system
shall be extended by 6 months. No other extension of such a
deadline shall be made except as authorized under paragraph
(1)(D)(iv).''.
(b) Date of Hire.--Section 274A(h) of the Immigration and
Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1324a(h)) is amended by adding at
the end the following:
``(4) Definition of date of hire.--As used in this section,
the term `date of hire' means the date of actual commencement
of employment for wages or other remuneration, unless
otherwise specified.''.
SEC. 802. EMPLOYMENT ELIGIBILITY VERIFICATION SYSTEM.
Section 274A(d) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8
U.S.C. 1324a(d)) is amended to read as follows:
``(d) Employment Eligibility Verification System.--
``(1) In general.--Patterned on the employment eligibility
confirmation system established under section 404 of the
Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act
of 1996 (8 U.S.C. 1324a note), the Secretary of Homeland
Security shall establish and administer a verification system
through which the Secretary (or a designee of the Secretary,
which may be a nongovernmental entity)--
``(A) responds to inquiries made by persons at any time
through a toll-free electronic media concerning an
individual's identity and whether the individual is
authorized to be employed; and
``(B) maintains records of the inquiries that were made, of
verifications provided (or not provided), and of the codes
provided to inquirers as evidence of their compliance with
their obligations under this section.
``(2) Initial response.--The verification system shall
provide confirmation or a tentative nonconfirmation of an
individual's identity and employment eligibility within 3
working days of the initial inquiry. If providing
confirmation or tentative nonconfirmation, the verification
system shall provide an appropriate code indicating such
confirmation or such nonconfirmation.
``(3) Secondary confirmation process in case of tentative
nonconfirmation.--In cases of tentative nonconfirmation, the
Secretary shall specify, in consultation with the
Commissioner of Social Security, an available secondary
verification process to confirm the validity of information
provided and to provide a final confirmation or
nonconfirmation not later than 10 working days after the date
on which the notice of the tentative nonconfirmation is
received by the employee. The Secretary, in consultation with
the Commissioner, may extend this deadline once on a case-by-
case basis for a period of 10 working days, and if the time
is extended, shall document such extension within the
verification system. The Secretary, in consultation with the
Commissioner, shall notify the employee and employer of such
extension. The Secretary, in consultation with the
Commissioner, shall create a standard process of such
extension and notification and shall make a description of
such process available to the public. When final confirmation
or nonconfirmation is provided, the verification system shall
provide an appropriate code indicating such confirmation or
nonconfirmation.
``(4) Design and operation of system.--The verification
system shall be designed and operated--
``(A) to maximize its reliability and ease of use by
persons and other entities consistent with insulating and
protecting the privacy and security of the underlying
information;
``(B) to respond to all inquiries made by such persons and
entities on whether individuals are authorized to be employed
and to register all times when such inquiries are not
received;
``(C) with appropriate administrative, technical, and
physical safeguards to prevent unauthorized disclosure of
personal information;
``(D) to have reasonable safeguards against the system's
resulting in unlawful discriminatory practices based on
national origin or citizenship status, including--
``(i) the selective or unauthorized use of the system to
verify eligibility; or
``(ii) the exclusion of certain individuals from
consideration for employment as a result of a perceived
likelihood that additional verification will be required,
beyond what is required for most job applicants;
``(E) to maximize the prevention of identity theft use in
the system; and
``(F) to limit the subjects of verification to the
following individuals:
``(i) Individuals hired, referred, or recruited, in
accordance with paragraph (1) or (4) of subsection (b).
``(ii) Employees and prospective employees, in accordance
with paragraph (1), (2), (3), or (4) of subsection (b).
``(iii) Individuals seeking to confirm their own employment
eligibility on a voluntary basis.
``(5) Responsibilities of commissioner of social
security.--As part of the verification system, the
Commissioner of Social Security, in consultation with the
Secretary of Homeland Security (and any designee of the
Secretary selected to establish and administer the
verification system), shall establish a reliable, secure
method, which, within the time periods specified under
paragraphs (2) and (3), compares the name and social security
account number provided in an inquiry against such
information maintained by the Commissioner in order to
validate (or not validate) the information provided regarding
an individual whose identity and employment eligibility must
be confirmed, the correspondence of the name and number, and
whether the individual has presented a social security
account number that is not valid for employment. The
Commissioner shall not disclose or release social security
information (other than such confirmation or nonconfirmation)
under the verification system except as provided for in this
section or section 205(c)(2)(I) of the Social Security Act.
``(6) Responsibilities of secretary of homeland security.--
As part of the verification system, the Secretary of Homeland
Security (in consultation with any designee of the Secretary
selected to establish and administer the verification
system), shall establish a reliable, secure method, which,
within the time periods specified under paragraphs (2) and
(3), compares the name and alien identification or
authorization number (or any other information as determined
relevant by the Secretary) which are provided in an inquiry
against such information maintained or accessed by the
Secretary in order to validate (or not validate) the
information provided, the correspondence of the name and
number, whether the alien is authorized to be employed in the
United States, or to the extent that the Secretary determines
to be feasible and appropriate, whether the records available
to the Secretary verify the identity or status of a national
of the United States.
``(7) Updating information.--The Commissioner of Social
Security and the Secretary of Homeland Security shall update
their information in a manner that promotes the maximum
accuracy and shall provide a process for the prompt
correction of erroneous information, including instances in
which it is brought to their attention in the secondary
verification process described in paragraph (3).
``(8) Limitation on use of the verification system and any
related systems.--
``(A) No national identification card.--Nothing in this
section shall be construed to authorize, directly or
indirectly, the issuance or use of national identification
cards or the establishment of a national identification card.
``(B) Critical infrastructure.--The Secretary may authorize
or direct any person or entity responsible for granting
access to, protecting, securing, operating, administering, or
regulating part of the critical infrastructure (as defined in
section 1016(e) of
[[Page H2214]]
the Critical Infrastructure Protection Act of 2001 (42 U.S.C.
5195c(e))) to use the verification system to the extent the
Secretary determines that such use will assist in the
protection of the critical infrastructure.
``(9) Remedies.--If an individual alleges that the
individual would not have been dismissed from a job or would
have been hired for a job but for an error of the
verification mechanism, the individual may seek compensation
only through the mechanism of the Federal Tort Claims Act,
and injunctive relief to correct such error. No class action
may be brought under this paragraph.''.
SEC. 803. RECRUITMENT, REFERRAL, AND CONTINUATION OF
EMPLOYMENT.
(a) Additional Changes to Rules for Recruitment, Referral,
and Continuation of Employment.--Section 274A(a) of the
Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1324a(a)) is
amended--
(1) in paragraph (1)(A), by striking ``for a fee'';
(2) in paragraph (1), by amending subparagraph (B) to read
as follows:
``(B) to hire, continue to employ, or to recruit or refer
for employment in the United States an individual without
complying with the requirements of subsection (b).''; and
(3) in paragraph (2), by striking ``after hiring an alien
for employment in accordance with paragraph (1),'' and
inserting ``after complying with paragraph (1),''.
(b) Definition.--Section 274A(h) of the Immigration and
Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1324a(h)), as amended by section
801(b) of this title, is further amended by adding at the end
the following:
``(5) Definition of recruit or refer.--As used in this
section, the term `refer' means the act of sending or
directing a person who is in the United States or
transmitting documentation or information to another,
directly or indirectly, with the intent of obtaining
employment in the United States for such person. Only persons
or entities referring for remuneration (whether on a retainer
or contingency basis) are included in the definition, except
that union hiring halls that refer union members or nonunion
individuals who pay union membership dues are included in the
definition whether or not they receive remuneration, as are
labor service entities or labor service agencies, whether
public, private, for-profit, or nonprofit, that refer,
dispatch, or otherwise facilitate the hiring of laborers for
any period of time by a third party. As used in this section,
the term `recruit' means the act of soliciting a person who
is in the United States, directly or indirectly, and
referring the person to another with the intent of obtaining
employment for that person. Only persons or entities
referring for remuneration (whether on a retainer or
contingency basis) are included in the definition, except
that union hiring halls that refer union members or nonunion
individuals who pay union membership dues are included in
this definition whether or not they receive remuneration, as
are labor service entities or labor service agencies, whether
public, private, for-profit, or nonprofit that recruit,
dispatch, or otherwise facilitate the hiring of laborers for
any period of time by a third party.''.
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall take effect on the date that is 1 year after the date
of the enactment of this Act, except that the amendments made
by subsection (a) shall take effect 6 months after the date
of the enactment of this Act insofar as such amendments
relate to continuation of employment.
SEC. 804. GOOD FAITH DEFENSE.
Section 274A(a)(3) of the Immigration and Nationality Act
(8 U.S.C. 1324a(a)(3)) is amended to read as follows:
``(3) Good faith defense.--
``(A) Defense.--An employer (or person or entity that
hires, employs, recruits, or refers (as defined in subsection
(h)(5)), or is otherwise obligated to comply with this
section) who establishes that it has complied in good faith
with the requirements of subsection (b)--
``(i) shall not be liable to a job applicant, an employee,
the Federal Government, or a State or local government, under
Federal, State, or local criminal or civil law for any
employment-related action taken with respect to a job
applicant or employee in good-faith reliance on information
provided through the system established under subsection (d);
and
``(ii) has established compliance with its obligations
under subparagraphs (A) and (B) of paragraph (1) and
subsection (b) absent a showing by the Secretary of Homeland
Security, by clear and convincing evidence, that the employer
had knowledge that an employee is an unauthorized alien.
``(B) Mitigation element.--For purposes of subparagraph
(A)(i), if an employer proves by a preponderance of the
evidence that the employer uses a reasonable, secure, and
established technology to authenticate the identity of the
new employee, that fact shall be taken into account for
purposes of determining good faith use of the system
established under subsection (d).
``(C) Failure to seek and obtain verification.--Subject to
the effective dates and other deadlines applicable under
subsection (b), in the case of a person or entity in the
United States that hires, or continues to employ, an
individual, or recruits or refers an individual for
employment, the following requirements apply:
``(i) Failure to seek verification.--
``(I) In general.--If the person or entity has not made an
inquiry, under the mechanism established under subsection (d)
and in accordance with the timeframes established under
subsection (b), seeking verification of the identity and work
eligibility of the individual, the defense under subparagraph
(A) shall not be considered to apply with respect to any
employment, except as provided in subclause (II).
``(II) Special rule for failure of verification
mechanism.--If such a person or entity in good faith attempts
to make an inquiry in order to qualify for the defense under
subparagraph (A) and the verification mechanism has
registered that not all inquiries were responded to during
the relevant time, the person or entity can make an inquiry
until the end of the first subsequent working day in which
the verification mechanism registers no nonresponses and
qualify for such defense.
``(ii) Failure to obtain verification.--If the person or
entity has made the inquiry described in clause (i)(I) but
has not received an appropriate verification of such identity
and work eligibility under such mechanism within the time
period specified under subsection (d)(2) after the time the
verification inquiry was received, the defense under
subparagraph (A) shall not be considered to apply with
respect to any employment after the end of such time
period.''.
SEC. 805. PREEMPTION AND STATES' RIGHTS.
Section 274A(h)(2) of the Immigration and Nationality Act
(8 U.S.C. 1324a(h)(2)) is amended to read as follows:
``(2) Preemption.--
``(A) Single, national policy.--The provisions of this
section preempt any State or local law, ordinance, policy, or
rule, including any criminal or civil fine or penalty
structure, insofar as they may now or hereafter relate to the
hiring, continued employment, or status verification for
employment eligibility purposes, of unauthorized aliens.
``(B) State enforcement of federal law.--
``(i) Business licensing.--A State, locality, municipality,
or political subdivision may exercise its authority over
business licensing and similar laws as a penalty for failure
to use the verification system described in subsection (d) to
verify employment eligibility when and as required under
subsection (b).
``(ii) General rules.--A State, at its own cost, may
enforce the provisions of this section, but only insofar as
such State follows the Federal regulations implementing this
section, applies the Federal penalty structure set out in
this section, and complies with all Federal rules and
guidance concerning implementation of this section. Such
State may collect any fines assessed under this section. An
employer may not be subject to enforcement, including audit
and investigation, by both a Federal agency and a State for
the same violation under this section. Whichever entity, the
Federal agency or the State, is first to initiate the
enforcement action, has the right of first refusal to proceed
with the enforcement action. The Secretary must provide
copies of all guidance, training, and field instructions
provided to Federal officials implementing the provisions of
this section to each State.''.
SEC. 806. REPEAL.
(a) In General.--Subtitle A of title IV of the Illegal
Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996
(8 U.S.C. 1324a note) is repealed.
(b) References.--Any reference in any Federal law,
Executive order, rule, regulation, or delegation of
authority, or any document of, or pertaining to, the
Department of Homeland Security, Department of Justice, or
the Social Security Administration, to the employment
eligibility confirmation system established under section 404
of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant
Responsibility Act of 1996 (8 U.S.C. 1324a note) is deemed to
refer to the employment eligibility confirmation system
established under section 274A(d) of the Immigration and
Nationality Act, as amended by section 802 of this title.
(c) Effective Date.--This section shall take effect on the
date that is 30 months after the date of the enactment of
this Act.
(d) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections, in section
1(d) of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant
Responsibility Act of 1996, is amended by striking the items
relating to subtitle A of title IV.
SEC. 807. PENALTIES.
Section 274A of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8
U.S.C. 1324a) is amended--
(1) in subsection (e)(1)--
(A) by striking ``Attorney General'' each place such term
appears and inserting ``Secretary of Homeland Security''; and
(B) in subparagraph (D), by striking ``Service'' and
inserting ``Department of Homeland Security'';
(2) in subsection (e)(4)--
(A) in subparagraph (A), in the matter before clause (i),
by inserting ``, subject to paragraph (10),'' after ``in an
amount'';
(B) in subparagraph (A)(i), by striking ``not less than
$250 and not more than $2,000'' and inserting ``not less than
$2,500 and not more than $5,000'';
(C) in subparagraph (A)(ii), by striking ``not less than
$2,000 and not more than $5,000'' and inserting ``not less
than $5,000 and not more than $10,000'';
(D) in subparagraph (A)(iii), by striking ``not less than
$3,000 and not more than $10,000'' and inserting ``not less
than $10,000 and not more than $25,000''; and
(E) by moving the margin of the continuation text following
subparagraph (B) two
[[Page H2215]]
ems to the left and by amending subparagraph (B) to read as
follows:
``(B) may require the person or entity to take such other
remedial action as is appropriate.'';
(3) in subsection (e)(5)--
(A) in the paragraph heading, strike ``paperwork'';
(B) by inserting ``, subject to paragraphs (10) through
(12),'' after ``in an amount'';
(C) by striking ``$100'' and inserting ``$1,000'';
(D) by striking ``$1,000'' and inserting ``$25,000''; and
(E) by adding at the end the following: ``Failure by a
person or entity to utilize the employment eligibility
verification system as required by law, or providing
information to the system that the person or entity knows or
reasonably believes to be false, shall be treated as a
violation of subsection (a)(1)(A).'';
(4) by adding at the end of subsection (e) the following:
``(10) Exemption from penalty for good faith violation.--In
the case of imposition of a civil penalty under paragraph
(4)(A) with respect to a violation of subsection (a)(1)(A) or
(a)(2) for hiring or continuation of employment or
recruitment or referral by person or entity and in the case
of imposition of a civil penalty under paragraph (5) for a
violation of subsection (a)(1)(B) for hiring or recruitment
or referral by a person or entity, the penalty otherwise
imposed may be waived or reduced if the violator establishes
that the violator acted in good faith.
``(11) Mitigation element.--For purposes of paragraph (4),
the size of the business shall be taken into account when
assessing the level of civil money penalty.
``(12) Authority to debar employers for certain
violations.--
``(A) In general.--If a person or entity is determined by
the Secretary of Homeland Security to be a repeat violator of
paragraph (1)(A) or (2) of subsection (a), or is convicted of
a crime under this section, such person or entity may be
considered for debarment from the receipt of Federal
contracts, grants, or cooperative agreements in accordance
with the debarment standards and pursuant to the debarment
procedures set forth in the Federal Acquisition Regulation.
``(B) Does not have contract, grant, agreement.--If the
Secretary of Homeland Security or the Attorney General wishes
to have a person or entity considered for debarment in
accordance with this paragraph, and such a person or entity
does not hold a Federal contract, grant, or cooperative
agreement, the Secretary or Attorney General shall refer the
matter to the Administrator of General Services to determine
whether to list the person or entity on the List of Parties
Excluded from Federal Procurement, and if so, for what
duration and under what scope.
``(C) Has contract, grant, agreement.--If the Secretary of
Homeland Security or the Attorney General wishes to have a
person or entity considered for debarment in accordance with
this paragraph, and such person or entity holds a Federal
contract, grant, or cooperative agreement, the Secretary or
Attorney General shall advise all agencies or departments
holding a contract, grant, or cooperative agreement with the
person or entity of the Government's interest in having the
person or entity considered for debarment, and after
soliciting and considering the views of all such agencies and
departments, the Secretary or Attorney General may refer the
matter to any appropriate lead agency to determine whether to
list the person or entity on the List of Parties Excluded
from Federal Procurement, and if so, for what duration and
under what scope.
``(D) Review.--Any decision to debar a person or entity in
accordance with this paragraph shall be reviewable pursuant
to part 9.4 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation.
``(13) Office for state and local government complaints.--
The Secretary of Homeland Security shall establish an
office--
``(A) to which State and local government agencies may
submit information indicating potential violations of
subsection (a), (b), or (g)(1) that were generated in the
normal course of law enforcement or the normal course of
other official activities in the State or locality;
``(B) that is required to indicate to the complaining State
or local agency within five business days of the filing of
such a complaint by identifying whether the Secretary will
further investigate the information provided;
``(C) that is required to investigate those complaints
filed by State or local government agencies that, on their
face, have a substantial probability of validity;
``(D) that is required to notify the complaining State or
local agency of the results of any such investigation
conducted; and
``(E) that is required to report to the Congress annually
the number of complaints received under this paragraph, the
States and localities that filed such complaints, and the
resolution of the complaints investigated by the
Secretary.''; and
(5) by amending paragraph (1) of subsection (f) to read as
follows:
``(1) Criminal penalty.--Any person or entity which engages
in a pattern or practice of violations of subsection (a) (1)
or (2) shall be fined not more than $5,000 for each
unauthorized alien with respect to which such a violation
occurs, imprisoned for not more than 18 months, or both,
notwithstanding the provisions of any other Federal law
relating to fine levels.''.
SEC. 808. FRAUD AND MISUSE OF DOCUMENTS.
Section 1546(b) of title 18, United States Code, is
amended--
(1) in paragraph (1), by striking ``identification
document,'' and inserting ``identification document or
document meant to establish work authorization (including the
documents described in section 274A(b) of the Immigration and
Nationality Act),''; and
(2) in paragraph (2), by striking ``identification
document'' and inserting ``identification document or
document meant to establish work authorization (including the
documents described in section 274A(b) of the Immigration and
Nationality Act),''.
SEC. 809. PROTECTION OF SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION
PROGRAMS.
(a) Funding Under Agreement.--Effective for fiscal years
beginning on or after October 1, 2023, the Commissioner of
Social Security and the Secretary of Homeland Security shall
enter into and maintain an agreement which shall--
(1) provide funds to the Commissioner for the full costs of
the responsibilities of the Commissioner under section
274A(d) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C.
1324a(d)), as amended by section 802 of this title,
including--
(A) acquiring, installing, and maintaining technological
equipment and systems necessary for the fulfillment of the
responsibilities of the Commissioner under such section
274A(d), but only that portion of such costs that are
attributable exclusively to such responsibilities; and
(B) responding to individuals who contest a tentative
nonconfirmation provided by the employment eligibility
verification system established under such section;
(2) provide such funds annually in advance of the
applicable quarter based on estimating methodology agreed to
by the Commissioner and the Secretary (except in such
instances where the delayed enactment of an annual
appropriation may preclude such quarterly payments); and
(3) require an annual accounting and reconciliation of the
actual costs incurred and the funds provided under the
agreement, which shall be reviewed by the Inspectors General
of the Social Security Administration and the Department of
Homeland Security.
(b) Continuation of Employment Verification in Absence of
Timely Agreement.--In any case in which the agreement
required under subsection (a) for any fiscal year beginning
on or after October 1, 2023, has not been reached as of
October 1 of such fiscal year, the latest agreement between
the Commissioner and the Secretary of Homeland Security
providing for funding to cover the costs of the
responsibilities of the Commissioner under section 274A(d) of
the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1324a(d)) shall
be deemed in effect on an interim basis for such fiscal year
until such time as an agreement required under subsection (a)
is subsequently reached, except that the terms of such
interim agreement shall be modified by the Director of the
Office of Management and Budget to adjust for inflation and
any increase or decrease in the volume of requests under the
employment eligibility verification system. In any case in
which an interim agreement applies for any fiscal year under
this subsection, the Commissioner and the Secretary shall,
not later than October 1 of such fiscal year, notify the
Committee on Ways and Means, the Committee on the Judiciary,
and the Committee on Appropriations of the House of
Representatives and the Committee on Finance, the Committee
on the Judiciary, and the Committee on Appropriations of the
Senate of the failure to reach the agreement required under
subsection (a) for such fiscal year. Until such time as the
agreement required under subsection (a) has been reached for
such fiscal year, the Commissioner and the Secretary shall,
not later than the end of each 90-day period after October 1
of such fiscal year, notify such Committees of the status of
negotiations between the Commissioner and the Secretary in
order to reach such an agreement.
SEC. 810. FRAUD PREVENTION.
(a) Blocking Misused Social Security Account Numbers.--The
Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the
Commissioner of Social Security, shall establish a program in
which social security account numbers that have been
identified to be subject to unusual multiple use in the
employment eligibility verification system established under
section 274A(d) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8
U.S.C. 1324a(d)), as amended by section 802 of this title, or
that are otherwise suspected or determined to have been
compromised by identity fraud or other misuse, shall be
blocked from use for such system purposes unless the
individual using such number is able to establish, through
secure and fair additional security procedures, that the
individual is the legitimate holder of the number.
(b) Allowing Suspension of Use of Certain Social Security
Account Numbers.--The Secretary of Homeland Security, in
consultation with the Commissioner of Social Security, shall
establish a program which shall provide a reliable, secure
method by which victims of identity fraud and other
individuals may suspend or limit the use of their social
security account number or other identifying information for
purposes of the employment eligibility verification system
established under section 274A(d) of the Immigration and
Nationality Act (8 U.S.C.
[[Page H2216]]
1324a(d)), as amended by section 802 of this title. The
Secretary may implement the program on a limited pilot
program basis before making it fully available to all
individuals.
(c) Allowing Parents To Prevent Theft of Their Child's
Identity.--The Secretary of Homeland Security, in
consultation with the Commissioner of Social Security, shall
establish a program which shall provide a reliable, secure
method by which parents or legal guardians may suspend or
limit the use of the social security account number or other
identifying information of a minor under their care for the
purposes of the employment eligibility verification system
established under 274A(d) of the Immigration and Nationality
Act (8 U.S.C. 1324a(d)), as amended by section 802 of this
title. The Secretary may implement the program on a limited
pilot program basis before making it fully available to all
individuals.
SEC. 811. USE OF EMPLOYMENT ELIGIBILITY VERIFICATION PHOTO
TOOL.
An employer who uses the photo matching tool used as part
of the E-Verify System shall match the photo tool photograph
to both the photograph on the identity or employment
eligibility document provided by the employee and to the face
of the employee submitting the document for employment
verification purposes.
SEC. 812. IDENTITY AUTHENTICATION EMPLOYMENT ELIGIBILITY
VERIFICATION PILOT PROGRAMS.
Not later than 24 months after the date of the enactment of
this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security, after
consultation with the Commissioner of Social Security and the
Director of the National Institute of Standards and
Technology, shall establish by regulation not less than 2
Identity Authentication Employment Eligibility Verification
pilot programs, each using a separate and distinct technology
(the ``Authentication Pilots''). The purpose of the
Authentication Pilots shall be to provide for identity
authentication and employment eligibility verification with
respect to enrolled new employees which shall be available to
any employer that elects to participate in either of the
Authentication Pilots. Any participating employer may cancel
the employer's participation in the Authentication Pilot
after one year after electing to participate without
prejudice to future participation. The Secretary shall report
to the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of
Representatives and the Committee on the Judiciary of the
Senate the Secretary's findings on the Authentication Pilots,
including the authentication technologies chosen, not later
than 12 months after commencement of the Authentication
Pilots.
SEC. 813. INSPECTOR GENERAL AUDITS.
(a) In General.--Not later than 1 year after the date of
the enactment of this Act, the Inspector General of the
Social Security Administration shall complete audits of the
following categories in order to uncover evidence of
individuals who are not authorized to work in the United
States:
(1) Workers who dispute wages reported on their social
security account number when they believe someone else has
used such number and name to report wages.
(2) Children's social security account numbers used for
work purposes.
(3) Employers whose workers present significant numbers of
mismatched social security account numbers or names for wage
reporting.
(b) Submission.--The Inspector General of the Social
Security Administration shall submit the audits completed
under subsection (a) to the Committee on Ways and Means of
the House of Representatives and the Committee on Finance of
the Senate for review of the evidence of individuals who are
not authorized to work in the United States. The Chairmen of
those Committees shall then determine information to be
shared with the Secretary of Homeland Security so that such
Secretary can investigate the unauthorized employment
demonstrated by such evidence.
SEC. 814. AGRICULTURE WORKFORCE STUDY.
Not later than 36 months after the date of the enactment of
this Act, the Secretary of the Department of Homeland
Security, in consultation with the Secretary of the
Department of Agriculture, shall submit to the Committee on
the Judiciary of the House of Representatives and the
Committee on the Judiciary of the Senate, a report that
includes the following:
(1) The number of individuals in the agricultural
workforce.
(2) The number of United States citizens in the
agricultural workforce.
(3) The number of aliens in the agricultural workforce who
are authorized to work in the United States.
(4) The number of aliens in the agricultural workforce who
are not authorized to work in the United States.
(5) Wage growth in each of the previous ten years,
disaggregated by agricultural sector.
(6) The percentage of total agricultural industry costs
represented by agricultural labor during each of the last ten
years.
(7) The percentage of agricultural costs invested in
mechanization during each of the last ten years.
(8) Recommendations, other than a path to legal status for
aliens not authorized to work in the United States, for
ensuring United States agricultural employers have a
workforce sufficient to cover industry needs, including
recommendations to--
(A) increase investments in mechanization;
(B) increase the domestic workforce; and
(C) reform the H-2A program.
SEC. 815. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON FURTHER IMPLEMENTATION.
It is the sense of Congress that in implementing the E-
Verify Program, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall
ensure any adverse impact on the Nation's agricultural
workforce, operations, and food security are considered and
addressed.
SEC. 816. REPEALING REGULATIONS.
The rules relating to ``Temporary Agricultural Employment
of H-2A Nonimmigrants in the United States'' (87 Fed. Reg.
61660 (Oct. 12, 2022)) and to ``Adverse Effect Wage Rate
Methodology for the Temporary Employment of H-2A
Nonimmigrants in Non-Range Occupations in the United States''
(88 Fed. Reg. 12760 (Feb. 28, 2023)) shall have no force or
effect, may not be reissued in substantially the same form,
and any new rules that are substantially the same as such
rules may not be issued.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The bill, as amended, shall be debatable for
5 hours, with 2 hours equally divided and controlled by the chair and
ranking minority member of the Committee on Homeland Security, or their
respective designees, 2 hours equally divided and controlled by the
chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on the Judiciary, or
their respective designees, and 1 hour equally divided and controlled
by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Foreign
Affairs, or their respective designees.
The gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Green), the gentleman from
Mississippi (Mr. Thompson), the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Jordan), and
the gentleman from New York (Mr. Nadler) each will control 60 minutes.
The gentleman from Texas (Mr. McCaul) and the gentleman from New York
(Mr. Meeks) each will control 30 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Green).
General Leave
Mr. GREEN of Tennessee. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all
Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their
remarks and to include extraneous material on H.R. 2.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Tennessee?
There was no objection.
Mr. GREEN of Tennessee. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I
may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 2, the Secure the
Border Act of 2023.
Last year, Republicans made a commitment to America to secure our
borders, protect our Nation, and safeguard our communities. Today,
House Republicans are delivering on that promise.
No matter where you sit on the political spectrum, it is undeniable
that we are in the midst of a severe border crisis. In just over 2
years, President Biden and Secretary Mayorkas have intentionally turned
our Nation's border into a place of chaos and devastation, one
controlled by the drug cartels.
The administration's refusal to enforce the law or implement
effective policies to secure the border has led us to this point,
completely dismantling any semblance of law and order. Over the past
several months, the members of the Committee on Homeland Security have
been hard at work crafting a solution to address the administration's
self-inflicted crisis at our borders.
With input from our colleagues across the Republican Conference, as
well as Border Patrol agents, victims of illegal alien crime and the
drug crisis, small business owners, State and local law enforcement,
and farmers and ranchers, the committee has taken the time to fully
understand Secretary Mayorkas' record-breaking humanitarian crisis.
These are the everyday Americans bearing the brunt of this crisis who
are all too often overlooked by the media and the DC beltway. The
numbers that they, and now all Americans, are facing are staggering:
More than 5 million encounters at the southwest border since
President Biden took office;
Over 1.4 million known got-aways since February 2021;
193 aliens on the terrorist watch list encountered along the
southwest border trying to enter the country between ports of entry
from fiscal year 2021 to fiscal year 2023;
Over 14,000 pounds of fentanyl seized in fiscal year 2023, enough to
kill the entire U.S. population nine and a half times;
[[Page H2217]]
Over 61,000 criminal aliens arrested by CBP attempting to cross the
U.S. borders since the beginning of FY 2021.
And just as we think it can't get any worse, tomorrow marks the end
of the only tool that Customs and Border Protection has left under this
administration, title 42.
As we have approached the end of title 42 the past few days, CBP has
been reporting an even greater increase in the number of alien
encounters and got-aways, which are already off the charts.
Whether my colleagues on the other side want to admit it or not, Mr.
Biden and Mr. Mayorkas' border crisis has turned every State into a
border State, and the American people have had enough.
From a record number of fentanyl deaths to rising crime, it is the
families and communities across America that are left to pay the price
of this administration's open borders and antisecurity policies.
These policies are enriching and emboldening transnational criminal
organizations who have increasingly threatened the safety and security
of all Americans.
However, we are here with a solution.
Thanks to the hard work of many members across multiple committees,
H.R. 2 requires the administration to secure the border, enforce the
law, and reduce illegal immigration, once again.
Specifically, division A of the bill addresses the immediate impact
of the border crisis by focusing on mitigating and stopping the surge
of illegal border crossers and illicit drugs that are flowing across
our borders between ports of entry.
Over 30 years ago, the United States Government began building the
border barrier system. We have heard from frontline agents on the
ground that an effective border barrier system is a proven critical
component in deterring and discouraging illegal activity. That is why
H.R. 2 directs the Secretary of Homeland Security to immediately resume
construction of the border wall.
The bill requires at least 900 miles of wall to be built, using the
materials that American taxpayers have already paid for, but that under
President Biden are laying unused and left to deteriorate in the
desert.
This bill makes targeted investments in border technology that not
only supplements the border wall system, but also integrates new,
advanced, and improved technologies into Border Patrol operations that
will prioritize frontline personnel safety and the detection of illicit
activity.
We know that Border Patrol agents are leaving at a faster rate than
the CBP Commissioner can hire them. Under the Biden administration,
Border Patrol agents are stretched thin, both physically and mentally.
They are overwhelmed and overworked.
Customs and Border Protection agents are leaving before reaching
their retirement eligibility because of poor working conditions and low
morale due to a horrendous lack of support from the Biden
administration and the inability to do what they signed up to do--
enforce the law.
{time} 1830
During the committee's field hearing on March 15, Border Patrol Chief
Raul Ortiz testified that he needs approximately 22,000 agents to
achieve Border Patrol's mission. H.R. 2 mandates CBP expand their force
by over 3,000 agents to reach that total of 22,000 agents.
The bill also aims to return agents back to their law enforcement
duties in the field by ensuring they are not responsible for serving as
processing coordinators, something that the Biden administration is
forcing highly trained law enforcement agents to do.
The bill addresses the retention challenges that Border Patrol is
facing by providing qualified agents with a retention bonus. They need
to know that all of us in Congress have their back and appreciate their
sacrifice.
The Department of Homeland Security has made very blatant attempts to
bury the release of its monthly border statistics or withhold certain
information from the public. That is why H.R. 2 requires DHS to
publicly disclose all monthly data, including known got-aways and known
or suspected terrorists, before the seventh day of each month.
Congress will not tolerate this administration's lack of transparency
to the American people, who deserve to know who and what is coming into
our country.
To further enhance border security measures, this bill increases
support for Operation Stonegarden, a grant program that provides funds
to State, local, and Tribal law enforcement agencies that are forced to
deal directly with the crisis, given the administration's complete
dereliction of duty.
Under H.R. 2, Operation Stonegarden grants will be increased to $110
million per year, and we know this support can't come soon enough for
our State and local law enforcement.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 2, and I reserve
the balance of my time.
House of Representatives
Committee on Homeland Security
Washington, DC, May 4, 2023.
Hon. Jason Smith,
Chairman, Committee on Ways and Means,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Smith: I write regarding H.R. 2794, the
``Border Reinforcement Act of 2023,'' of which the Committee
on Ways and Means received an additional referral. I
appreciate your support in bringing this legislation before
the House of Representatives, and that the Committee on Ways
and Means will forego further consideration of the bill.
The Committee on Homeland Security concurs with the mutual
understanding that by foregoing consideration of this bill at
this time, the Committee on Ways and Means does not waive
jurisdiction over the subject matter contained in this
legislation in the future. In addition, should a conference
on this bill be necessary, I would support your request to
have the Committee on Ways and Means represented on the
conference committee.
I will include our letters on H.R. 2794 in the Committee
report on this measure and in the Congressional Record during
floor consideration of this bill. I look forward to working
with you on this legislation and appreciate your cooperation
on this matter.
Sincerely,
Mark E. Green, MD,
Chairman.
____
U.S. House of Representatives,
Committee on Ways and Means,
Washington, DC, May 4, 2023.
Hon. Mark Green,
Chairman, Committee on House Homeland Security, Ford House
Office Building, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Green: Thank you for your letter regarding
H.R. 2794, the ``Border Reinforcement Act of 2023.'' As you
noted, the Committee on Ways and Means was granted an
additional referral on this bill. I agree to forego action on
this bill so that it may proceed expeditiously to the House
floor for consideration.
The Committee takes this action with our mutual
understanding that by foregoing consideration of H.R. 2794 at
this time, we do not waive any jurisdiction over subject
matter contained in this or similar legislation, and that our
Committee will be appropriately consulted and involved as the
bill or similar legislation moves forward so that we may
address any remaining issues in our jurisdiction. Our
Committee also reserves the right to seek appointment of an
appropriate number of conferees to any House-Senate
conference involving this or similar legislation, and asks
that you support any such request.
Finally, I would ask that a copy of our exchange of letters
on this matter be included in the Congressional Record during
floor consideration of H.R. 2794.
Sincerely,
Jason Smith,
Chairman,
Committee on Ways and Means.
____
House of Representatives,
Committee on the Judiciary,
Washington, DC, May 2, 2023.
Hon. Mark Green,
Chairman, Committee on Homeland Security,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Green: I write regarding H.R. 2794, the
``Border Reinforcement Act of 2023.'' Provisions of this bill
fall within the Judiciary Committee's Rule X jurisdiction,
and I appreciate that you consulted with us on those
provisions. The Judiciary Committee agrees that it shall be
discharged from further consideration of the bill so that it
may proceed expeditiously to the House floor.
The Committee takes this action with the understanding that
forgoing further consideration of this measure does not in
any way alter the Committee's jurisdiction or waive any
future jurisdictional claim over these provisions or their
subject matter. We also reserve the right to seek appointment
of an appropriate number of conferees in the event of a
conference with the Senate involving this measure or similar
legislation.
I ask that you please include this letter in your
committee's report to accompany this legislation or insert
this letter in the Congressional Record during consideration
of H.R. 2794 on the House floor. I appreciate the cooperative
manner in which our committees have worked on this matter,
and I look
[[Page H2218]]
forward to working collaboratively in the future on matters
of shared jurisdiction. Thank you for your attention to this
matter.
Sincerely,
Jim Jordan,
Chairman.
____
House of Representatives,
Committee on Homeland Security,
Washington, DC, May 3, 2023.
Hon. Jim Jordan,
Chairman, Committee on the Judiciary,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Jordan: Thank you for your letter regarding
H.R. 2794, the ``Border Reinforcement Act of 2023.'' I
appreciate your support in bringing this legislation before
the House of Representatives, and that the Committee on the
Judiciary will forego further consideration of the bill.
The Committee on Homeland Security concurs with the mutual
understanding that by foregoing consideration of this bill at
this time, the Committee on Judiciary does not waive
jurisdiction over the subject matter contained in this
legislation in the future. In addition, should a conference
on this bill be necessary, I would support your request to
have the Committee on the Judiciary represented on the
conference committee.
I will include our letters on H.R. 2794 in the Committee
report on this measure and in the Congressional Record during
floor consideration of this bill. I look forward to working
with you on this legislation and appreciate your cooperation
on this matter.
Sincerely,
Mark E. Green, MD,
Chairman.
Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as
I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong opposition to the child
deportation act. This cruel, inhumane, and unworkable bill was written
in an extreme MAGA Republican echo chamber.
Considering H.R. 2 today under a closed rule is a cynical move on the
part of Republicans to exploit the operational challenges associated
with the lifting of title 42 public health restrictions.
Republicans have a short memory. Just in February, they voted to lift
title 42 when they voted to lift the COVID-19 health emergency. It sets
Customs and Border Protection up for failure by shifting all processing
to ports of entry without providing any additional resources.
To make matters worse, it would bar CBP from leveraging technology to
process migrants in an orderly way. H.R. 2 doesn't fund a single new
officer at our ports of entry, where more than 90 percent of fentanyl
is interdicted.
In committee, we tried to get an additional 1,700 officers to build
greater capacity, but Republicans refused to do it.
Furthermore, this xenophobic bill would strip DHS funding from any
community or religious organization that helps migrants. The language
is so broad that an organization that places water in a remote area of
the desert or provides a pregnant mother with a safe place to sleep
would be ineligible for DHS funding. It is so broad that they may be
refused homeland security grants to help protect their facilities.
Denying assistance to nonprofits is just plain shameful, particularly
after what we saw in Brownsville this past weekend. There is reporting
that a man who rammed his SUV into a crowd outside a migrant shelter,
killing 8 and injuring at least 10 others, was fueled by invasion and
alien rhetoric. My heart goes out to everyone hurt by this senseless
act of violence.
The language in this bill is so far-reaching that it would force the
American Red Cross to verify every person's immigration status before
providing lifesaving services. Can you imagine if they had to say,
``Show your papers,'' before evacuating people? That is just inhumane.
Get this: H.R. 2 is so broadly written that it would actually impede
detention and deportation.
Mr. Speaker, FOX News viewers who support deporting migrants should
take a look at section 115(c) in division A. If enacted, it would
prohibit DHS from contracting with any nongovernmental organization to
transport or shelter ``inadmissible aliens.''
This language would prevent ICE from contracting with private
companies to facilitate deportation or provide detention space because
these companies are nongovernmental organizations. Yes, you heard that
right. This bill is so poorly written that it could actually prevent
ICE from deporting people.
Over the next 2 hours, Democrats will discuss many other problematic
provisions of this extreme MAGA bill that Republicans cobbled together
and that we learned yesterday would blow a $6.1 billion hole in the
budget.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this child
deportation act, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. GREEN of Tennessee. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the
gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Higgins).
Mr. HIGGINS of Louisiana. Mr. Speaker, my, my, my. My colleagues
across the aisle say we have a short memory. We don't have a short
memory. This has seemed like an eternity over the last 2 years. We had
no idea, as a nation, that this much injury could be brought upon our
country in this short period of time.
H.R. 2 is the strongest border security package that has ever been
brought to the floor in this body. Why has the majority party, the
Republicans that were elected to power by the American people last
year, drafted this bill over the course of the last year carefully and
strategically? Because we are responding to the total collapse of our
sovereignty at the southern border brought upon America by my
colleagues across the aisle.
If you want more of what you see on the TV today, then by all means
America can support my Democratic colleagues and their policies because
those are the policies that have brought this disaster upon our Nation.
H.R. 2 addresses it aggressively.
Our southern border is no longer a sovereign border wherein America
controls the northern portion and Mexico controls the southern. It is
now a theater of engagement controlled by the cartels. H.R. 2 corrects
it.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to stand
in support of H.R. 2 because it addresses aggressively the injury that
our Nation suffers brought upon us by weak, disastrous policies out of
the Democratic executive branch, the White House, and Democratic
majority control for the last 4 years.
Mr. Speaker, I urge strong support of H.R. 2.
Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, the extreme MAGA Republican
default on America act, which the last speaker voted for, would result
in an across-the-board cut of 22 percent for the Department of Homeland
Security, which would undermine border security.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms.
Jackson Lee).
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Mr. Speaker, this bears an important, absolute, and imperative
necessity of a little walk down memory lane. In actuality, the American
people really want to uphold her values, the values that they have come
to understand as a core of who we are.
The Homeland Security Committee traditionally, as the chairman and I
have seen over the years, worked in a bipartisan manner. A little
history is that just more than a decade ago, there was a bipartisan,
comprehensive immigration bill led by the late John McCain.
Unfortunately, interestingly enough, the Senate moved, and the House
simply imploded that dream, the dream that those who came to this
country without anything and did not know they had come wrongly, if
you will, young people, could be DACA recipients and ultimately work
their way toward citizenship.
It was an effective asylum process, and we argued vigorously for
legal immigration. People dutifully got in line, but consistently, as
we refused to build on the comprehensive immigration structure, even
though Democrats supported heavily enhancing the border--my bill some
years ago provided enormous new equipment and technology.
One of our colleagues even explained, by the way, this new border
wall that everyone wants to talk about is not a border wall because it
is indented onto U.S. soil. Once you get over the wall, you are already
eligible to apply for asylum.
Most of the people who come, come through legal points of entry, so
why the cruelty of this bill?
I can be for legal immigration, and I can be for securing this
Nation, and I don't have to take a sledgehammer and bloody the very
fabric of this Nation.
It is interesting that we offered 43 Democratic amendments. None were
accepted.
[[Page H2219]]
Is there something wrong with body cameras for our officers at the
border? Not accepted.
Is there something wrong with refusing to separate 9-month-olds and
5-year-olds from their families, family unification, committing to not
separating families? Is that something wrong?
I work with NGOs. I am in Texas. I am in Houston. We are getting some
of those migrants in Houston, and there will be an NGO that will be
dealing with individuals who are not statused.
What you want to have happen, as is happening in El Paso because of
the overwhelming, is that you want no resources, people on the street,
and, I am so sad and ashamed to say, the loss of individuals in
Brownsville in what seemed to be a murderous rage. We cannot do this.
Mr. Speaker, I urge Republicans who support detaining and deporting
more migrants to take a look at section 115(c) in division A.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 1
minute to the gentlewoman from Texas.
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, if enacted, it would prohibit DHS from
contracting with any nongovernmental organization to transport or
shelter ``inadmissible aliens.''
What is that? This language would prevent ICE from being able to
contract with private companies that facilitate deportation or provide
detention space because they are nongovernmental organizations.
Ironically, it seems that this child deportation act may actually
undermine our friends on the other side's MAGA deportation agenda.
Why are we not more committed, Mr. Speaker, to coming together around
the ideals of the Statue of Liberty? Bring us your forlorn, your worn,
your desperate.
Yes, they are coming in droves, but the President has a plan. There
will be more interaction with Guatemala. There will be processes in
Mexico. There will be more officers at the border for those who are
seeking asylum.
Why should we reject that? Why don't we come and find a way to stand
up the infrastructure because a border wall that is $45 million per
mile is not going to be the only solution.
Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to take this bill off the floor, go
back to the drawing board, work with those of us in the Homeland
Security Committee, with all the amendments we offered, and make a
reasonable difference in the lives of Americans.
Mr. Speaker, might I put back on the table, because they are all in
my office all the time, that the DACA recipients need a response. They
are paramedics, doctors, lawyers, teachers. How dare we ignore the
talent that is here that wants to be patriotic Americans.
I only ask for mercy. Take the bill back. Help our children. Make a
difference. Honor the Statue of Liberty and protect the national border
of this United States of America. We can do it, and it is not being
done either by Texas or by the United States of America. We want to do
it. The people in Houston want to be humanitarian, and they want to be
safe.
Mr. Speaker, I am here today to reassert my opposition to H.R. 2--
Secure the Border Act of 2023.
I along with my colleagues have attempted to address many of the ills
these bills purport by offering common sense amendments that
Republicans have continued to refuse any meaningful consideration.
I would like to highlight some of my amendments that were offered in
both the Judiciary Committee Markup and the Homeland Security Committee
Markup for H.R. 2.
In addressing, H.R. 2, the Secure the Border Act of 2023, we need the
American people to understand that this is an unfortunate patchwork of
extreme anti-immigrant proposals that would only add to more chaos at
the border.
It includes a variety of illogical measures that would shut down the
U.S. asylum system and target families and children for the cruelest
forms of treatment.
One measure would make overstaying a visa a crime--for the first time
in our history.
I offered amendments to H.R. 2 along with many of my Democratic
Colleagues both during Homeland Security Committee markup and for
consideration by the House Rules Committee for inclusion for
consideration during the of this bill--but all Democratic amendments
were rejected by the Republican majority.
As a senior member of the House Committees on Homeland Security and
Judiciary I have a well-established public record for working to
address our Nation's most pressing immigration issues through sound
government policies.
Immigration is not a criminal matter but categorized as a civil claim
because seeking to travel, requesting refugee status, or attempting to
make a better life in another country should not result in criminal
prosecution.
There are nations who do seek to punish U.S. citizens who are
traveling abroad through criminal prosecution with tragic consequences.
I have worked on the issue of unlawfully detained U.S. citizens who
are held in other countries for a host of reasons that come down to the
politics of a country and not due to a defendable immigration policy.
The conduct of the previous Administration in the forced separation
of I offered would have added a mens rea requirement such that to be
criminally liable, a person must knowingly and willingly overstay their
visa.
It is important to remember that an individual can make an honest
mistake about when they need to depart the country, be physically
incapable of departing the country, or unable to return because of
circumstances beyond their control in their home country.
Yet this bill has no exceptions or flexibility when it comes to
overstaying a nonimmigrant visa. It is also important to remember that
if a person overstays their visa, they are already subject to removal.
The addition of a criminal penalty is both cruel and unnecessary.
Our immigration system needs reforms, and we are absolutely
interested in bold new ideas to fix it, but this is not one of them.
My first amendment for H.R. 2, was offered to require U.S. Customs
and Border Protection (CBP) and U.S. Immigration and Customs
Enforcement (ICE) to provide Congress with a plan for implementing--
within one year--the use of body-worn cameras by its agents and
officers who are engaged in border security or immigration enforcement
activities. Any implementation of a plan for body-worn cameras would
require additional congressional action.
Both CBP and ICE have already begun deploying body-worn cameras to
their frontline officers and agents to provide greater transparency
into interactions with the public.
In the event there are allegations of excessive force or other
misconduct by an officer or agent, footage from body-worn cameras can
enhance the agencies' ability to investigate.
Several studies on the effectiveness of body-worn cameras have found
that police officers wearing cameras generate significantly fewer
complaints and ``use of force'' reports relative to officers without
cameras.
And savings from reduced complaints against officers, and the reduced
time required to resolve such complaints, can result in substantial
cost savings.
It is troubling that the underlying bill seems to seek cost savings
at the expense of ensuring orderly and fair processing of asylum
seekers; It would make more sense to save money by investigating
complaints more quickly and preventing misconduct in the first place.
My second amendment for H.R. 2, was offered to clarify that the
official policy of the United States as implemented by the agencies of
the Department of Homeland Security shall be to keep families together
and not remove children from parents or responsible adults unless the
safety or welfare of the child is at risk.
The official policy of the Trump Administration was to separate
children from their parents. No child--no matter where they are born--
should be separated from their family, particularly after surviving the
harrowing journey to the U.S. border.
My amendment was offered to stand firm in our principles that should
bar CBP from separating children from their families unless there is
evidence that the child is being trafficked. It further directs the
DHS, in coordination with the State Department and HHS and the Attorney
General to provide quarterly reports to Congress on the status of
efforts to reunify migrant families and prevent future family
separations.
Never again should we allow families to be ripped apart.
These are common-sense amendments that have been repeatedly
disregarded by my colleagues across the aisle who have instead chosen
to put forward legislative attacks on our most vulnerable populations.
Border security can be done in Bipartisan solutions.
It is time we stop the negativity and counterproductive efforts that
are ripping apart our country, and to instead focus on coming together
to work towards sensible and effective solutions that can work for the
betterment and growth of our country and the security at the southern
and northern border.
I urge my colleagues to vote no on this wrong minded legislation.
Section 115(c)--Deportation & Detention
Mr. Speaker, I urge Republicans who support detaining and deporting
more migrants to take a look at section 115(c) in Division A.
[[Page H2220]]
If enacted, it would prohibit DHS from contracting with any
``nongovernmental organization'' to transport or shelter QUOTE
``inadmissible aliens'' UNQUOTE.
This language would prevent ICE from being able to contract with
private companies that facilitate deportations or provide detention
space because they are nongovernmental organizations.
Ironically, it seems that the ``Child Deportation Act'' may actually
undermine the extreme MAGA deportation agenda.
Mr. GREEN of Tennessee. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the
gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Guest), the vice chair of the Committee
on Homeland Security.
{time} 1845
Mr. GUEST. Mr. Speaker, make no mistake: Our border is broken.
This administration, for over 2 years, has been unwilling or unable
to secure our southern border.
Statistics show that in FY21, President Biden set a record with 1.9
million encounters. In FY22, he broke that record with 2.7 million
encounters. In FY23, President Biden is on pace to break that record
once again.
The numbers to my left paint a grim picture of the dire situation
along our southern border, and these numbers will only grow worse as
title 42 expires.
Republicans from Homeland Security, from Judiciary, from Foreign
Affairs, have worked together to craft legislation that will combat the
border crisis, a crisis created by the failures of this administration.
This legislation will hire thousands of new agents, pay retention
bonuses to our frontline officers, invest in new technology, construct
hundreds of miles of walls and barriers, and support our local and
State partners.
Congress must fill the gap of leadership created by the inaction of
this administration. We must stop the flow of illegal drugs from
pouring into our communities. We must end the flood of immigrants that
are coming across each and every day. We must support the hardworking
men and women of law enforcement who are on the front lines of this
crisis.
We will not back down from this fight, and any veto threat by this
President be damned. We will deliver security to the American people.
Mr. Speaker, I urge support on this measure.
Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, Republicans want it both
ways. First, they vote to reduce the number of Border Patrol agents in
the field by 1,400 under their default in America act, and now all of a
sudden, they want to do something different. So either you are for it
or you are against it, but you can't have it both ways.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr.
Payne).
Mr. PAYNE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the ranking member, Mr. Thompson, for
the opportunity to speak here today.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 2. During the nearly 17
hours that the Committee on Homeland Security met to consider the
border bill offered by Mr. Green, Democrats offered more than 40
amendments in order to remedy significant shortcomings in the bill.
In an effort to offer new provisions to bolster operations at Customs
and Border Protection and build up the fiscal year 2023 Omnibus
Appropriations Act, which is what was supposed to be going on, working
on the budget that night, under Democratic leadership, they provide
over $17 billion to CBP to not only enhance port of entry operations
but also increase funding to the U.S. Border Patrol by 17 percent.
All of the amendments were rejected by the committee Republicans.
Instead of working with Democrats to provide bipartisan solutions to
fix our broken immigration system, H.R. 2 is just a far-right, MAGA-
style immigration bill advanced by Republicans that would tear at the
fabric of American values and drastically limit asylum opportunities
while doing nothing to create an orderly system.
The xenophobia bill filed in this space of religious values that
Republicans claim to live by, at best, H.R. 2 is a deeply distrustful
effort to exploit irregular migration at the southwest border, which is
expected to intensify with the termination of title 42 health
restrictions.
To make political points with Donald Trump and his devoted, extreme
MAGA base, the hardworking civil servants who work to keep our border
secure deserve so much better.
Mr. Speaker, I urge Republicans who support detaining and deporting
more migrants to take a look at section 115(c), division A. If enacted,
it would prohibit DHS from contracting with any nongovernmental
organizations to transport or shelter ``inadmissible aliens.'' This
language would prevent ICE from being able to contract with private
companies that facilitate deportations or provide detention space,
because they want a nongovernmental organization to do it.
Now, for the life of me, here we are again. You can't have it both
ways. You want all of this deportation to happen, but now you are
limiting the organization from doing it.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 30
seconds to the gentleman from New Jersey.
Mr. PAYNE. Mr. Speaker, just one last point.
Ironically, it seems that the child deportation act may actually
undermine the MAGA extreme deportation agenda.
Listening to my colleague, the ranking member from Mississippi, we
have already torn children and babies away from their families. Now, it
appears that we won't even help women who might be pregnant in this
endeavor. I mean, how far do you want to go?
Mr. GREEN of Tennessee. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Gimenez).
Mr. GIMENEZ. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 2.
We have a crisis at our southern border. When title 42 expires in
just a few hours, that crisis will become a complete catastrophe.
In an effort to play petty politics, the Biden administration and
Secretary Mayorkas have traded many effective policies implemented by
President Trump for chaotic, unorderly, and inhumane immigration.
I arrived in the United States with my family shortly after the
communist takeover of my native homeland. I understand the plight of
many of those who are fleeing socialist regimes in Cuba, Venezuela, and
Nicaragua, because I, too, am an exile. I, too, am an immigrant.
We have legal processes already in place for people to immigrate to
America legally and to solicit political asylum legally.
But what the Biden administration is doing is offensive, cruel, and
inhumane. Lethal fentanyl is flooding our border, killing nearly
100,000 Americans every single year. According to The New York Times,
there are over 85,000 migrant children unaccounted for, and many are
being subjected to forced labor and child sex trafficking. I repeat:
85,000 unaccounted for children here in the United States. I ask you:
Is that humane? I think not.
Lack of enforcement of our border is incentivizing illegal
immigration and enriching corrupt Mexican drug cartels that extort the
most vulnerable.
While the Biden administration endangers the American people, H.R. 2
tackles the crisis head-on. This bill resumes construction of the
border wall that is needed, increases the number of border agents to
22,000, increases Federal grants to local law enforcement in border
States, protects migrant children from human trafficking, streamlines
the asylum process, and enforces background checks to bar repeat
criminal offenders from reentering our country.
H.R. 2 provides a solution to the crisis that President Biden has
created. Believe me, he has created it. Secretary Mayorkas and the
Biden administration have failed to protect America, and our country is
more dangerous than ever before.
Mr. Speaker, I urge support of the measure.
Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, the Congressional Budget
Office says the child deportation act would ``decrease the population
of the United States by about 600,000 people, mostly by reducing the
number of unaccompanied children present in the country.''
Republicans claim to be concerned about exploitation and abuse of
unaccompanied children, but their answer is
[[Page H2221]]
to slam the door shut and deport them from the United States.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr.
Goldman).
Mr. GOLDMAN of New York. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to
H.R. 2, which is a cruel and draconian bill that demonizes asylum
seekers, harms unaccompanied migrant children, and defunds programs
that support nonprofit organizations and local governments that are
essential to the humane processing of asylum seekers coming to our
shores hoping for a better life.
Just a brief response to the gentleman from Florida. Our law says
that anyone crossing the border anywhere can apply for asylum. There is
no such thing as lawful asylum and unlawful asylum. In fact, this is an
area that we should address in a bipartisan way. We are in desperate
need for comprehensive immigration reform. We need thoughtful and
effective border security. We need more immigration judges to process
asylum applicants. We need more visas for those to enter this country
legally, and we need a pathway to citizenship that all of our ancestors
have benefited from.
But this bill is the opposite of that. It was unilaterally written by
House Republicans as a partisan messaging bill with no chance of
becoming law. With this bill, Republicans are putting politics over
people.
In our committee, Democrats offered more than 30 amendments to try to
amend and improve this bill. Every single Republican voted ``no'' on
every single amendment. One even expressed shock that Democrats would
dare to try to change their bill.
Sadly, the Republicans rejected one of my amendments that would do
more to address border security and fentanyl trafficking than anything
else in this bill: An amendment to stop the massive flood of American
guns to drug cartels in Mexico, those same cartels that the chairman
from Tennessee says are in control of the border. These guns give the
cartels their power, it fuels the violence, and facilitates their
illegal trade.
Mexico has one gun shop, and it takes months of background checks to
purchase a gun. But the latest estimates that we have here are that
more than 500,000 American-made guns are exported to Mexico, including
assault weapons of war, and many land in the hands of cartels to fuel
their human and drug trafficking operation. There isn't a single
mention of guns in H.R. 2, not one.
This bill is supposed to be about border security. Our border is
broken, as one of my colleagues just said. How can we fix the border
when the cartels are ruling it with American guns? Any serious attempt
to secure our borders has to address the exportation of more than
500,000 American guns per year to Mexico.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 1
minute to the gentleman from New York.
Mr. GOLDMAN of New York. Mr. Speaker, just like the gun violence
epidemic that is ravaging our country, Republicans refuse to address
the source of the problem. We need comprehensive immigration reform,
meaningful solutions to address our broken immigration system, and to
live up to our American values. This bill is nothing of the sort.
Instead, it turns a real crisis that needs serious solutions into a
political messaging tool.
Mr. Speaker, therefore, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no.''
{time} 1900
Mr. GREEN of Tennessee. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the
gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. DesJarlais).
Mr. DesJARLAIS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman, my colleague from
Tennessee.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 2. If you watch TV and
listen to the administration and Secretary Mayorkas, they would tell
you that the border is secure and that the border is not open. In other
words, they are telling you to believe what they say and not what you
see.
Anybody who looks at the border can see the crisis that is there.
They can look in their communities and see the tragedy that is
unfolding with fentanyl.
They can look to the sanctuary cities where all the mayors love to
say: ``We will take anyone. Send your immigrants to our cities.'' Now,
they are screaming: ``No more.'' As soon as they got a taste of what
the border States are feeling and dealing with every day, they wanted
no part of it.
The toll that this is causing our country is hard to grasp. Look no
further than our SNAP program. Everyone wants to expand SNAP and make
sure no one goes hungry. I agree that anyone in need should get food,
but we cannot get an answer to how many people who are here illegally
are on the SNAP program. We have been trying for a year. We have asked
Secretary Mayorkas via letter, and we have asked Secretary Vilsack via
letter how many people who are here illegally or undocumented are on
SNAP.
We know that 45 percent of non-documented households receive SNAP,
and only 21 percent of U.S. citizens receive SNAP. When I bring this up
in committee, I am told it is very hard to get SNAP benefits if you are
in the country illegally, but there are several exceptions--more than
11.
Two of the main exceptions are: One, if you are under 18, you
automatically qualify. We all know how many children are coming across
the border. They are receiving SNAP benefits. The other is if you are
seeking asylum. Well, who is coming here that is not seeking asylum?
I heard the gentleman mention that anyone can claim asylum, but what
we are seeing here is not true asylum seeking. It is what they are told
to say because they know that is the clearest pathway into the country.
People are just simply being released in record numbers. Mr. Speaker,
5 million to 6 million people have come into our country illegally.
Do you know who hates illegal immigration more than any of us? People
who did it right. We have the most generous immigration system in the
world. Almost a million per year can come here legally. We are letting
millions in illegally, and the people who do it right resent that.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. GREEN of Tennessee. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds
to the gentleman from Tennessee.
Mr. DesJARLAIS. Mr. Speaker, I urge support of this measure because
we are a country of laws, and it is not right to allow your first
measure in entering this country to be something illegal. It flies in
the face of all the people who did it correctly.
Thank God we have a chairman like Chairman Green who is addressing
this issue. It should be a bipartisan issue. Everyone is feeling it. It
is time that we act.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the Republicans for bringing this forward. It is
important, and I strongly support it.
Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, on March 15, Border Patrol
Chief Ortiz told the Homeland Security Committee that ``cartels control
an awful lot of the southern border south of the United States.''
Last time I checked, south of the United States meant Mexico and not
five of the nine U.S. Border Patrol sectors.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr.
Menendez).
Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Mississippi for
yielding.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to discuss H.R. 2, the House Republicans'
border bill that fails to fix our broken immigration system.
I have been to our southern border twice since January because I do
believe it is important that we experience those challenges firsthand.
Despite there being an immense amount of work to do at our border, this
legislation fails to meet the moment.
Instead of solutions, Republicans want a wall; a wall that would
immediately be obsolete upon completion and would only serve as a
painful reminder of the Republicans' failed border policies; a wall
that would cost almost $25 million per mile to complete, resulting in a
total bill to the American taxpayers of over $11 billion.
For a party that talks about wasteful government spending, how can
this possibly be the best use of our taxpayer dollars?
Mr. Speaker, I and my colleagues on the Homeland Security Committee
offered numerous amendments to this
[[Page H2222]]
bill to address some of its core deficiencies. When I offered an
amendment to strike this wasteful spending on an inefficient wall, it
was rejected by every single Republican.
Operation Blue Lotus, a Biden administration program, has stopped
over 4,000 pounds of fentanyl from being brought into the U.S. and has
led to dozens of arrests and the seizure of thousands of pounds of
illicit drugs. Yet, when I offered an amendment to provide
congressional authorization for this successful program, it was
rejected, again, by every single Republican.
Even on the issues that Republicans talk most about, like fentanyl,
this bill fails to address those challenges.
Even worse, this bill treats migrants as our enemies instead of our
neighbors who are simply looking to give their families the
opportunities to be hopeful about their tomorrows, to give them their
fair shot at their American Dream, the fair shot that all of our
families were given by this country.
This bill also seeks to punish nonprofits and NGOs that, by caring
for our most vulnerable neighbors, reflect the best of who we are as a
country. Organizations like Catholic Charities that feed, house, and
take care of migrants could lose Federal funding by simply fulfilling
their spiritual mission of supporting those most in need.
Democrats offered amendments to ensure that NGOs would not be
penalized for providing services to pregnant women, children, and
families. Each amendment failed because not a single Republican was
willing to stand up and vote for it.
This should not be who we are as a country. If this bill becomes law,
it will say to the world that this is who we have become.
Mr. Speaker, I am a ``no'' on H.R. 2, and I urge all of my colleagues
to do the same.
Mr. GREEN of Tennessee. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the
gentleman from California (Mr. McCarthy), the Speaker of the United
States House of Representatives.
Mr. McCARTHY. Mr. Speaker, I thank Chairman Green for his work.
Mr. Speaker, when we took the majority and Mr. Green became chairman,
he didn't stay in Washington to figure out what the problem was. He
actually took his committee to the border to see firsthand.
Mr. Speaker, unfortunately, the ranking member on the other side
wouldn't attend. He stands up speaker after speaker thinking he knows
what is happening on the border from far away in Washington.
I have been to the border four times in the past 3 years. I have seen
the fear in the eyes of the ranchers who have had their property broken
into. I have heard the frustration in the voice of the Border Patrol
agents who are stretched to the limit.
Mr. Speaker, 2\1/2\ years ago, when I went to the border, I sat with
the agents in El Paso. They told me they saw something different that
they hadn't seen before. They were actually catching people on the
terrorist watch list. I came down and had a press conference and
announced what they told me.
Mr. Speaker, I would have thought that the Members on the other side
of the aisle, knowing what has happened with 9/11 and others, that they
would rise up in a united front to protect America.
Do you know what I heard from my colleagues on the other side of the
aisle? They said that I was lying. They said that they had as much
security clearance as I did, that it must not be true. In Washington,
they thought they knew all, but they didn't go to the border to
actually talk to the people who work right there.
It is interesting, though, that the next day, the administration had
to say it was true. Do you know what the administration did then? They
withheld the information from Congress so they could no longer find out
how many people we would catch on the terrorist watch list. They wanted
to deny knowing going forward.
My good friend on the other side of the aisle, the ranking member of
the Homeland Security Committee, I am sure he knows that, in the month
of February, we caught more people on the terrorist watch list in this
1 month than the entire time of the last administration.
In the last administration, the 4 years of everybody who came across
on the terrorist watch list, this February, more came across. I am sure
from far away he might probably think that is not true, too.
Mr. Speaker, I felt the sorrow in the words of the mothers and
fathers who lost their children to fentanyl. Do you know what? You can
stay in Washington if you want, and you will still hear the sorrows of
the mothers and the fathers.
Today alone, 300 Americans will be poisoned by fentanyl. It is the
equivalent of an airline crashing each and every day in America. I
don't hear them rising up. Every day there are 300. They come from all
walks of life.
Mr. Speaker, they want to stand and say ``no'' to H.R. 2. I want them
to look in the eyes of the parents of the young children. They didn't
buy fentanyl when they died. They were at college and bought Xanax. It
doesn't just happen to the kids who are maybe into partying or others.
Just last year, on spring break, six kids OD'd in Florida. They
didn't belong to a fraternity. They went to West Point. They didn't buy
fentanyl. They all didn't take cocaine. Four of them did. The other two
simply gave them mouth-to-mouth resuscitation.
Do you know what? Vote ``no.'' Go ahead and vote ``no.'' If you won't
lead, we will. If you want to take the same approach as the President,
that you want to ignore a problem and say it is not happening, we won't
sit back. We don't sit back in Washington. We go to the border to
actually see what is going on. We listen. We learn. Then, we sit in
committee.
Even though your committee went and had a hearing--I am sure they are
very proud that they protested and didn't go. Who lost? More Americans
lost. More Americans will die by their actions. For their sake and for
our Nation's safety, we must secure our border.
This is President Biden's record on the border: record crossings,
record carelessness, and record chaos. More than 11,000 people were
caught yesterday crossing the border illegally, the highest single-day
total ever.
Mr. Speaker, I look forward to hearing what the ranking member's
quote is coming forward. Maybe he will quote the Secretary that the
border is secure and believe him. You sit in Washington.
What is the administration's plan for these 11,000? According to NBC
News, the plan--it is brilliant; listen to it--is to release many of
them into the United States with no court dates and no way to track
them. That worked so well in the past. Just ask the 85,000 children
that the Biden administration lost.
Mr. Speaker, I look forward to hearing the other side get up and tell
me why they are voting ``no.''
They don't want to find these 85,000 kids? Don't take my word for it.
This comes from The New York Times.
Tomorrow, as you sit here in debate and fight to make sure the border
is still wide open, title 42 expires. Everyone knows we are days away
from disaster. The mayor of El Paso, which recently declared a state of
emergency, says: ``There is no light at the end of the tunnel. We are
preparing for the unknown.''
The Governor of Arizona says that President Biden has been
unresponsive. Governor Abbott of Texas rightly pointed out that this is
not a Texas problem. This is a problem for the entire United States.
Mr. Speaker, I heard President Biden say yesterday that lifting title
42 means it is going to be chaotic for a little while. With all due
respect, Mr. President, it has been chaotic for 2 years because of your
actions.
{time} 1915
On the very day President Biden took office, he decided against the
advice of the border security experts, and he single-handedly removed
the successful border policies of the previous administration.
The first thing President Biden did was he stopped construction of
the border wall. He spends money now just to house the equipment and
materials. He halted deportation. He ended remain in Mexico, and he
called for amnesty for millions of people who broke the law.
His actions sent a clear message to the world, including the cartels:
the border is open.
[[Page H2223]]
I remember on one of my trips down to the border right after the
President took office, we had a new facility built. That day they hit a
record number at the facility that they thought would never make
capacity, but they did. As we walked in, we interviewed those who were
standing in line.
We asked them: Why did you come?
They said: President Biden told us to. He told us the border was
open.
We asked: How long was the trek?
Weeks, months, but the President invited us.
The world listened, and the cartels acted.
To this day, the southern border is being flooded by illegal aliens
from more than 140 countries: Yemen, Russia, China, and others.
Yet, how has this administration responded?
A responsible administration would have told the American people in
clear terms that this is a crisis. However, the Biden administration
tells the public that there is no crisis. Rather than leveling with the
American people, the Biden administration is choosing to mislead them.
I don't know if the ranking leader has ever been to Tucson, Arizona,
but I was there recently. In Tucson, Arizona, the cartels control the
border. Every single person who comes across that border wears a
camouflage outfit. On their feet and on their shoes is a piece of rug.
Seventy-one percent who come across that border are single males. They
don't run up to the border agents. They run from them. It is one of the
highest areas of get-aways.
It is a large terrain. Every day Americans risk their lives to go
rescue people on the cliffs who have fallen. We took balloons up so we
could actually calculate who was coming across.
When this became such a reported case, do you know what the Biden
administration did, Mr. Speaker?
They cut the number of balloons.
Do you know why?
Because they said the numbers would go down. That is how they want to
deal with it. They want to lie to the American public.
There is no better example than Secretary Mayorkas' comments that the
border is secure.
Mr. Speaker, I hope the ranking member gets up after me, and I would
like him to answer one question: Does he believe Secretary Mayorkas
that the border is secure?
You have been chairman. You are ranking now. I am sure at some time
you went to the border--but not when your committee did and not when we
wanted to work on this bill.
You wanted to protest. You wanted to not go because you could learn
everything you needed from right here in Washington--maybe from the
Secretary.
I would like to know how many of you who stand up and say that you
are going to vote against H.R. 2 believe Secretary Mayorkas?
Do you believe the border is secure?
Honestly, tell us. Tell the American public if that is what you
believe.
Everyone knows that isn't true.
You can't say the border is secure when more than 4.5 million people
have crossed our border illegally in the 24 months since President
Biden has taken office.
There is not one piece of legislation that has changed from one
administration to the other. The only thing that changed was the
President.
And what did President Biden do?
He lifted all the actions of President Trump and President Obama.
That is what happened to our border.
You can't say the border is secure when more than 175 individuals on
the terrorist watch list have tried to cross our border.
You can't say the border is secure when human trafficking has grown
into a multibillion-dollar business for the cartels.
You can't say the border is secure when you don't control the border
and when the number one employer in some of these border towns is the
cartels.
You can't say the border is secure when I sit there with a mayor, who
happens to be from the other party, and he tells me a personal story
that his daughter called, and he told her not to go outside because
there was a car chase, a car chase because a cartel hired a young
American to drive somebody they put across, and the car was going
through--it is not an unusual thing. It happens often. Schools there,
they would tell me they had to close for 45 days.
This car chase ended like others. It killed an innocent American, an
innocent American who was going to a retirement party. She was a 65-
year-old grandmother. She was going to have her friends celebrate a
life of work and was looking forward to the times, with all the work
and investment she had put in, to spend with her grandchildren and
travel, but, no, her life was taken from her. And the Secretary said
that our border is secure.
If you would travel to these towns, then you would know this too. If
you would spend the time, then you would understand.
You see, Mr. Speaker, many of those elected officials aren't
Republicans. They are Americans. They are registered as Democrats. They
say they are disgusted by what this administration is doing.
While the Biden administration is missing in action, House
Republicans are going to take action. We spent 2 years listening to
those who have lived through the border crisis: Border Patrol agents,
ranchers, families, businesses, and local leaders.
When I was in Tucson, I sat with a rancher. He told me that he has
found five dead bodies on his ranch. His grandson, 7 years old, found
one just last year. This is human life. Fifty-two died in a tractor
trailer.
I sat with one who told me the story that when he looked down the
road, he saw three young children, one not even 1, the other 3, and the
other 4. Had the rancher not found them, they wouldn't be alive.
What about those who don't make it?
What about those who don't pay the cartels?
I sat with one news-covering agent who told the story of a woman who
didn't pay the cartels, so the cartels took her life. They didn't just
take her life. They wanted to show it to everybody in the world. So
they strung her body up in a tree, cut her legs off, and set her on
fire.
You see, if you go to the border, you will learn these stories. You
will actually know what is happening there. So I don't think you would
take a partisan position. You wouldn't talk in talking points. You
would actually believe that 4.5 million people in the last year came
across. If 11,000 came across yesterday--title 42 is going to be
lifted.
If you don't like our bill, what is your answer?
What is your plan?
What are you going to do?
As I promised, we brought their government to them--visiting the
border, gathering facts, and holding hearings.
What we learned directly informed not only our Commitment to America,
but also the Secure the Border Act.
Here is what this bill does:
It fully provides for effective border enforcement policies,
infrastructure, and advanced technology.
It increases the number of Border Patrol agents and gives them the
bonus pay they deserve.
It ends catch and release and strengthens current laws to protect
unaccompanied children from exploitation by human traffickers. I hope
everybody who votes ``no'' reads The New York Times. I hope you read
the stories about these young children.
It reinstates the so-called remain in Mexico provisions.
And it resumes construction of the border wall because the border
wall works.
The Secure the Border Act is the strongest border security bill to
come through Congress in more than 100 years.
If it passes, I am confident that we will stop the flood of fentanyl
into our country, solve the Biden border crisis, and support our Border
Patrol agents so they can continue to keep us safe.
Fentanyl is the number one killer of Americans between the ages of 18
and 45.
If anybody thinks about their life between the ages of 18 and 45,
those are the years in which you reproduce. Those are your most
productive years in business. Those are the years of those who
volunteer to serve in the military to defend our freedom.
Right now, the most productive population age in our country is being
killed.
However, I listen to the other side, and they are going to say: ``No,
continue it.''
[[Page H2224]]
By the actions of this President, Mr. Ranking Member, you don't have
to go to the border because now every city is a border city.
You see, in my hometown of Bakersfield, in the elementary school, a
father registered his son just after Thanksgiving. The public school
district did a really good job. They noticed in 2 days this boy had an
issue. They didn't sit back, they went to his house, and they met with
his father.
They said: We feel your son has a challenge learning and other
things. We want to work with you, and we want to help him.
Literally, they went to his house in 2 days. They watched him as he
came to school.
Do you know what he did when he came to school?
He walked over to a vape room. He had a backpack, and he came into
the class. They looked in the backpack. He had 150 pills. This kid was
not even 16 years old. I think he was only 12. The counselor took out a
pill to see what it was. They had to call an ambulance because the
counselor touched a fentanyl pill.
I am far from the border. Just up the road in my district, they
pulled over a car. I believe it had more than 500,000 fentanyl pills.
California law says you couldn't ask the individuals if they were
citizens--and they weren't.
I can't tell you how much jail time they got because in California
they believe in a lot of your policies, and so the individuals didn't
even have to have bail. They both got a ticket and were told to show
back up. They never did. They probably got back in the car
and delivered more of those fentanyl pills coming across the border. Of
those 300 Americans who will die today, I am not sure if one of those
pills was theirs.
I do know this: Tomorrow when I cast a ``yes'' vote for H.R. 2, we
are doing something to stop the fentanyl. We are doing something for
those families. We are doing something for the next generation of
Americans.
If you believe that the rule of law is one of the greatest strengths
of this Nation, you cannot keep it if you have millions of people who
break it by entering it.
There is no nation as generous as America. One million people will
become citizens this year, and one million more next year. We are
different from any other nation, but what we have today is something
that we don't even control: our own operation of our borders.
Mr. Speaker, I urge all my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on the Secure
the Border Act, vote ``yes'' on security over chaos, and vote ``yes''
to stop fentanyl killing our children.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. DesJarlais). Members are reminded to
address their remarks to the Chair and not to each other in the second
person.
Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, at some point you have to
correct the Record. We had a debt ceiling budget vote several weeks
ago. The Republican-approved debt ceiling budget would cut the DHS
budget by 22 percent.
So you can't be for something, but you don't invest in what you say
you are for.
I will step back a little further and say that if Republicans are
really serious about border security, then they would have joined
Democrats in passing last year's government funding bill. It provided
more than $17 billion to Customs and Border Protection alone and a 17
percent increase in the Border Patrol budget, but unfortunately,
Speaker McCarthy voted against that, too.
{time} 1930
Democrats have been to the border. In April of this year, I took nine
Members to the border. We talked to a lot of people. I have been on the
committee quite a while. I have gone to the border a number of times to
see, so one visit I didn't go to is not the end of the world. I was on
the border before the Speaker was in Congress, so there is history here
that we just need to make sure that we all understand.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr.
Correa).
Mr. CORREA. Mr. Speaker, I just want to say that most of my life I
have lived on both sides of the border, and since taking over my
subcommittee this year, in the last 4 months, I have gone to Laredo,
Brownsville, Yuma, El Centro, San Ysidro, Otay; and just Monday, Otay,
Tijuana, Mexico.
I am doing this because I think it is important that we leave
Washington and go and ask the border agents, go ask the port
authorities what is going on, tell me what they need.
I saw these men and women in blue uniforms at our ports of entry.
They are very proud of their work. They said: Lou, look, this is 99
percent of the trade we have, the integration of the North American
markets. We are making it happen thanks to the investments by Congress
in personnel, technology, and infrastructure.
Then they said: But we have to keep out that 1 percent, that
fentanyl, those narcotics. They proudly said: We here at the ports of
entry are responsible for stopping over 90 percent of the fentanyl that
comes into this country.
I asked them, of course: What do you need to do your job better?
They said: We are looking to you in Washington for more support. We
are 2,400 personnel down, CBP agents. They said the proposals here by
my colleagues on the other side do nothing to support the additional
hiring of men and women in blue uniforms. Those blue uniforms are
responsible for stopping over 90 percent of the fentanyl that is coming
across the border.
I proposed amendments to this legislation for better pay, retention,
childcare for those workers that have to do forced overtime. All of my
amendments were turned down.
If we are serious about stopping fentanyl, we have to invest more in
those blue uniforms, and this legislation does absolutely nothing to do
that.
Let's be frank here. I have also gone to farmers and small businesses
in my district, and they are also very scared. They are scared of
becoming criminals. You put in a mandatory E-Verify, and every one of
those farmers who employ undocumented farmworkers is going to be
criminalized. Every one of those small businesses in my district that
are calling me and saying, ``Lou, we need immigration reform,'' will
also become criminals because they employ undocumented.
We seem to forget we have a 3.6 percent unemployment rate in this
country. Those folks that are coming across the border are disappearing
into the fabric of our economic society. They are getting jobs. They
are working. They are part of our fabric.
Unless we have immigration reform, unless we have a way to get
workers into this country that is teamed up with some of these
proposals, it is not going to work. At the end of the day, the private
sector that needs workers, folks that need a job will figure out how to
make it work.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 1
minute to the gentleman from California.
Mr. CORREA. Mr. Speaker, this bill is not enough. This bill is not
about creating a solution. It is simply messaging.
This bill is not addressing the fentanyl problem. The best
investments are where it will be stopped at the border.
The bill is not addressing the employment issue. In every sector of
our economy, in every State of our Union, we need workers. We don't
need to criminalize, make employers criminals for trying to hire
somebody to harvest this crop.
Mr. GREEN of Tennessee. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the
gentleman from New York (Mr. D'Esposito).
Mr. D'ESPOSITO. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 2, the
Secure the Border Act.
Mr. Speaker, I must say that I find it quite comical and a little bit
scary that we just heard that this bill is nothing more than,
``messaging.'' When I was sitting in this seat, I was wondering for a
moment if we were debating a bill or having some juvenile partisan
contest about how many times we could say MAGA and extreme, which have
nothing to do with this bill.
What is extreme, however, is the unprecedented levels of illegal
migrants, fentanyl, and other deadly drugs that have come across our
open border.
Title 42 ends this week, and we still have heard no plan from the
White House on how they plan to deal with the levels of illegal
migrants that continue daily to travel across our southern border.
[[Page H2225]]
House Republicans are delivering where President Biden refuses to.
The Secure the Border Act will help us regain operational control of
the border, combat illegal immigration, and stop fentanyl smugglers.
This legislation will support the brave men and women serving as
members of the Border Patrol by hiring an additional 22,000 Border
Patrol agents. This hiring blitz will allow Border Patrol agents to
return to their law enforcement mission in the field and not simply act
as processing coordinators. We will be providing incentives,
solidifying institutional knowledge, and help with the mass exodus
caused by the dereliction of duty of Secretary Mayorkas.
Additionally, this bill will end the controversial catch-and-release
policy which puts migrants into communities while awaiting their
hearings.
The Secure the Border Act will also increase transparency over the
Federal Government and strengthen current law to protect unaccompanied
children at the border from human trafficking.
We have heard about these amendments. There were amendments about a
border that we were told by Democrats were secure.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. GREEN of Tennessee. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds
to the gentleman from New York.
Mr. D'ESPOSITO. Mr. Speaker, instead of focusing on our border, these
amendments focused on challenge points, climate change, and about
moments in a news cycle.
Well, to my friends on the other side of the aisle, that news cycle
is devastating to many, devastating to those who have now been at the
hands of the cartel, devastating to those who have lost children and
grandchildren to fentanyl.
While the Biden administration is ignoring the safety and security of
our country, House Republicans are delivering on our commitment to a
nation that is safe.
Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, the extreme MAGA Republican
default on America act, which the last Speaker voted for, would result
in CBP not being able to seize nearly 900 pounds of fentanyl because of
the draconian cuts to its budget.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr.
Robert Garcia).
Mr. ROBERT GARCIA of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong
opposition to this un-American and cruel bill.
Now, I immigrated to this country as a small child, and I love our
country for all it has provided me and my family. Immigrants love this
country. They dedicate their lives to working, and they make a
community stronger.
This bill does not uphold our values as a nation. A bill that was
true to those values would uplift and celebrate the contributions of
immigrants. Real patriots know that love of country is actually about
helping people.
Let's be crystal clear. We all want a safe and secure border, and the
best way to achieve that is through comprehensive immigration reform
and creating legal pathways for people who want to come here to work.
Sadly, this bill does not do that. Instead, it doubles down on a
failed anti-immigrant agenda. This bill guts the fundamental right to
seek asylum. It strips protections for unaccompanied children, and it
wastes more money on Donald Trump's pointless border wall, a monument
to hate which does nothing to protect us.
Now, in the Homeland Security Committee, I helped lead the fight
against harmful provisions of this bill that target nonprofits who
partner with our border agencies to care for our asylum seekers, but
House Republicans are moving ahead with these disastrous policies that
would require charities to check the immigration status of those who
need care even in a crisis.
By defunding nonprofits, this cold-hearted bill would ignore what the
Gospel teaches us. It ignores our brothers and sisters who are tired,
poor, hungry, and sick; those who are most in need of help.
If this bill ever becomes law, it would cause chaos and suffering.
We need real immigration reform, and America is ready for that
debate. Let's rise to the occasion and create an America that reflects
kindness and centers on helping people. Being anti-immigrant is being
anti-American.
Mr. GREEN of Tennessee. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the
gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Strong).
Mr. STRONG. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 2, the
Secure the Border Act.
This legislation is the culmination of months of hard work and
collaboration of three House committees: Homeland Security, on which I
serve as a member; Judiciary; and Foreign Affairs. It represents what
is possible when we work together for the good of our Nation.
In my very first floor speech as a Member of Congress, I echoed the
concerns and fears I have heard from the constituents that I represent
and what I have seen firsthand at the southern border.
Americans are not safe, and our country is under attack at the
southern border. Illegal immigrants, drug runners, and human smugglers
continue to exploit this administration's open southern border policy
as this administration looks the other way.
This last weekend, in just 72 hours, Border Patrol apprehended over
26,000 migrants, had approximately 7,500 got-aways, and seized 11
pounds of fentanyl, enough to kill 2.5 million Americans. If this is
what operational control looks like to this administration, it is no
wonder why Americans are worried.
Title 42 is set to expire tomorrow, bringing not a surge but an
invasion of illegal immigrants that our communities, hospitals,
schools, and law enforcement officials simply can't handle. This
debacle created by this administration has not seen its worst day.
Just this morning, the administration released a statement outlining
how they plan to deal with this incoming invasion. The Department of
Homeland Security press release says they have finalized a rule to
incentivize the use of lawful immigration pathways. They are choosing
to incentivize illegal immigrants to follow our laws when we should be
punishing those who don't follow our laws. The fact is, President
Trump's border policies worked for America.
Now more than ever, we must pass this legislation and move toward a
lawful, safe, secure, and orderly border. We don't have time to waste.
Among many important provisions, this legislation would grant DHS
authority to suspend entry and gain operational control of the border,
similar to title 42. I am pleased to stand here today with my
colleagues in support of this legislation that begins to address the
massive failure of this administration.
H.R. 2 reflects Republicans' commitment to make America safer. I urge
my colleagues to support this bill. It is up to us to stop this
invasion of America at the southern border because no one else will.
{time} 1945
Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, on February 1, the last
speaker voted against the public health emergency that served as the
legal basis for the use of title 42 at the southwest border.
My colleagues want to have it both ways, which is why, I guess, he
supports H.R. 2, the child deportation act.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr.
Grijalva), the ranking member of the Natural Resources Committee.
Mr. GRIJALVA. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Mississippi for
yielding.
I happen to represent every border community and every port of entry
along the Arizona-Mexico border. It is my home, where I grew up, and
that is where I live. That is where I have lived, in those borderlands.
I don't need a photo op tour for me to understand, to feel, and to
respect the fact that these communities and this area of our Nation
have been left behind not just by policy but by intent.
H.R. 2 is not serious legislation to address our urgent need to fix
our broken immigration system, to respond to the pending humanitarian
crisis on our border, and to combat the deadly flow of fentanyl and
human exploitation by organized crime syndicates. It won't do that.
What H.R. 2 will do?
It will devastate our affordable food supply by eliminating up to
half the
[[Page H2226]]
workforce in agriculture, farming, and ranching.
It will dramatically increase the economic hardship of border
communities and the borderlands.
It will fund the Trump memorial wall, a piece of useless government
waste.
It will demonize children and unaccompanied youth.
It will provide Republicans with fundraising tools, and it will also
provide them with the means to create division, fear, and chaos in
preparation for the 2024 elections.
My Republican colleagues hope that voters will overlook the growing
extremism and their failure to deal with real issues in this Congress,
one of them being immigration.
The lifting of title 42 challenges Republicans in this House to do
more than political posturing. Indeed, it challenges the Biden
administration not to allow the pending humanitarian crisis to become
desperate and punitive.
I want to also take a little historic look and remind the body of the
schizophrenic, anti-immigrant underpinnings of H.R. 2. The echoes of
past immigration debates in this Chamber are with us today, and let me
quote from the Congressional Record.
In 1884, Congressman Henley of California spoke on the floor of the
need to preserve a White man's government from dark and yellow-skinned
people.
In 1924, Congressman Wilson of Louisiana said: ``Two things are
certain. One is that America cannot exist with a large percentage of
mongrel communities with discordant views and aspirations.''
That same year, Representative Robsion of Kentucky said: ``Let us
send out the slackers and undesirables. Let us clean up America and
keep America clean,'' for the real Americans and for the real country.
I mention those historical realities and facts from previous debates
to underline the point that H.R. 2 must not be a means to grow the
worst nativist impulses that we might have in this Congress or to
accept ethnic and racial prejudices.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 1
minute to the gentleman from Arizona.
Mr. GRIJALVA. Mr. Speaker, I thank Mr. Thompson for yielding me time.
All to further hardship and accept ethnic and racial prejudices as
criteria in our immigration laws and policies, bringing to life those
echoes of the past.
The values and the common ground that must be found in order to
effectively deal with the issue of immigration, with the issue of
asylum seekers and refuge seekers, requires real solutions. It requires
humanitarian relief, but it also requires an enforcement focus that
deals with the issues that have been talked about by the other side:
fentanyl, drug running, and human exploitation.
It also requires that all of us in Congress, and particularly those
who represent the borderlands, be included in those discussions to the
point that we can bring the real voices, the real impulses, and the
real needs of those communities.
H.R. 2 must be defeated because it is against our values, and it
promotes a mythology that everything that happens on that southern
border is bad, unhealthy, criminal, and un-American.
That is wrong. Vote ``no'' on H.R. 2.
Mr. GREEN of Tennessee. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the
gentlewoman from Georgia (Ms. Greene).
Ms. GREENE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I remind everyone that
Republicans believe in legal immigration. As a matter of fact, we are
very proud of our former first lady, Melania Trump, who immigrated
legally to the United States. There is a clear difference in policies
when we talk about border security for the United States of America.
I think it is very important to remind my colleagues across the aisle
what our oath of office actually says. We swear an oath that we will
support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all
enemies, foreign and domestic.
That is a very important oath to swear, and it is one to uphold, but
this was not being upheld in the past 2 years under this
administration.
We have seen nearly 5 million people cross our border, and it is
unsustainable. As a matter of fact, on Monday, a record was set for
border apprehensions.
Just yesterday, that record was defeated because they had even more
border apprehensions. Two records, and I don't even know what today is
yet. We don't have the numbers, but soon we will know.
The clear difference between Democrats and Republicans, when we talk
about border security and about these policies, is that Democrats don't
serve Americans. They serve migrants. They serve foreign countries and
their borders, but not Americans, American tax dollars, and America's
border.
As a matter of fact, according to the Border Patrol Chief, five out
of the nine sectors are out of control and in the hands of the cartels.
Yet, the most important thing the Democrats across the aisle are
attacking is the Second Amendment and taking away Americans' guns
because they are claiming that will keep Americans safe from the
cartels. That is insanity.
Democrats serve migrants so much that they are interested in bringing
more into the country. When they talk about hiring more Border Patrol
agents, it is because they want Border Patrol agents to be the
welcoming committee.
H.R. 2, which I strongly support, hires more Border Patrol agents and
gives them bonuses so that they can do the job that they were hired to
do, which is to protect our southern border and, by the way, the lives
of migrants who are dying nearly every single day as they try to cross
our border.
It is really interesting. Unfortunately, this administration and the
Democrats serve migrants so much more than Americans, and it seems that
Biden serves any country that is willing to write him a check as long
as they make it payable to the Biden family LLCs. How about that?
Title 42 lifts tomorrow.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded to refrain from
engaging in personalities toward the President.
Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, if Republicans were serious
about border security, they would have joined Democrats in passing last
year's government funding bill, which paid for an increase of 300
Border Patrol agents, the first increase since the Obama
administration.
Not only did the last speaker not support it, she voted to have 1,400
Border Patrol agents fewer in the field under the extreme MAGA
Republican default on America act.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr.
Thanedar).
Mr. THANEDAR. Mr. Speaker, I thank the ranking member, Mr. Thompson,
for yielding me time.
Mr. Speaker, I stand here today as a symbol of what our immigration
system can achieve. In 1979, at the age of 24, I entered this country
alone with no friends, no family, but I had my American Dream.
At times, I slept in a car or at a homeless shelter that was funded
by a faith-based nonprofit. At times, I got sick and needed to go to
the hospital.
H.R. 2 would cut funding for these nonprofit organizations and remove
reimbursement systems for immigrants to get healthcare.
When my colleagues on the other side of the aisle ask me why I don't
support this bill, my answer is simple. I don't support cutting
programs that helped me and help immigrants like me in times of their
need and their hardship. I stand with countless immigrants who have
contributed greatly to our country and urge opposition to H.R. 2.
When my colleagues and I went down to the southern border, we met
with many nonprofit organizations and saw the important and necessary
work that they do. We met with the border agents and learned that they
are working with a broken immigration system.
Reforming this system is going to be complex, but the Republicans are
proposing an enforcement-only strategy. This is not going to work.
I propose that we expand legal pathways, restore asylum systems, and
work with nonprofit organizations like the ones that housed me and
cared for me when I was just arriving to this country.
Mr. GREEN of Tennessee. Mr. Speaker, as a quick correction for the
record,
[[Page H2227]]
the bill doesn't do anything to take away healthcare services provided
by NGOs, just to clarify that.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr.
Ogles), my friend from my home State.
Mr. OGLES. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 2. I thank all of
those who have worked on this important signature piece of legislation.
I specifically want to point out and thank my friend and colleague
from Tennessee, the chairman, Congressman Mark Green.
Mr. Speaker, Lennox Lake, 6 years old, was killed by an illegal.
Sarah Root, 21, was killed by an illegal. Maris DiGiovanni was killed
by an illegal. Jacqueline Vigil, 55, was murdered by a man who had been
deported on multiple occasions. Retired U.S. Army Lieutenant
Colonel Jerry Wayne Harbour, 75, was killed by an illegal. Joseph
``GT'' Paglia, a retired police officer, 48, was killed by an illegal.
Michael White, retired U.S. Army officer, was killed by an illegal.
These are just a few of the individuals and countless Americans who
have been murdered at the hands of illegal aliens through a porous
border that has long been a problem.
What once was a trickle is now a flood. This administration that has
overseen it is responsible for 10 consecutive months of over 200,000
apprehensions.
This crisis is the fault of this President so long as he refuses to
enact policies to secure our border.
Our border crisis is literally killing Americans. It is threatening
the safety of communities. It is costing at least $151 billion every
single year in de facto subsidies for those who break our laws.
As we approach the end of title 42, it is imperative that we take
action to secure our border and stop the flood of illegal aliens.
The House Republican bill, the Secure the Border Act of 2023, will
force Biden to restart the construction of the wall. It increases
Border Patrol agents, requires transparency from the DHS, ends the
practice of catch and release, and strengthens the asylum process.
Again, I thank the Homeland Security Committee chairman and my fellow
friend and Tennessean, Congressman Mark Green.
Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 2 squeezes Customs and
Border Patrol officers working at ports of entry by failing to provide
resources to cover the increased workload that will result from the
bill.
If Republicans were serious about border security, they would have
joined Democrats in passing last year's government funding bill, which
appropriated $60 million to hire an additional 125 CBP officers.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from New York (Ms.
Clarke).
{time} 2000
Ms. CLARKE of New York. Mr. Speaker, I thank Ranking Member Thompson
for yielding.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the GOP's extreme and punitive
immigration legislation, H.R. 2, also known as the child deportation
act.
This cruel legislation would force draconian restrictions and
punishments on migrants and asylum seekers and set America's
immigration priorities back years.
At the cost of $6.1 billion, this bill would eliminate the right to
asylum in America, a process millions upon millions have enjoyed over
the generations. Vulnerable, desperate people and families have long
depended on these laws for their safety and future.
Moreover, it would affect the legal status of over 4 million people
who would otherwise be granted parole or asylum.
Instead of fostering immigration that strengthens our economy and
empowers its growth, Republicans would rather throw our economy into a
tailspin.
So let's be clear: Any bill that would allow vulnerable migrant
children to be inhumanely detained by Border Patrol for up to a month,
to be ripped from their families and locked up from the world, is
unacceptable. It is fundamentally un-American. ``Give me your tired,
your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free. . . . `' I
need not remind you, Mr. Speaker, what those words adorn nor what they
represent.
To treat vulnerable people fleeing violence, famine, and persecution,
who are looking for a better life in our Nation with such contempt,
such vitriol, such callousness, is not leadership; it is cowardice.
Though I am the daughter of Jamaican immigrants and know the
struggles and challenges immigrant communities confront every day, my
unique perspective on this issue should be irrelevant.
Every American, no matter how long their families have called this
country their own, should be outraged at a GOP that would codify
migrant child abuse.
Make no mistake: Regardless of H.R. 2's fate, America's immigration
system is massively broken.
The glaring inequities, blatant racism, vicious xenophobia, and civil
rights violations immigrants face, particularly in immigrant
communities of color, will persist beyond any one bill.
As the Federal Government ends its use of title 42 and Democrats work
to increase investments in border safety and personnel, open more
lawful pathways and begin to address root causes of migration--
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 30
seconds to the gentlewoman from New York.
Ms. CLARKE of New York. It is beyond time for Congress to pass
immigration policy that reflects humane, equitable, and a 21st century
immigration system.
We are a Nation of immigrants, founded by immigrants, so we must do
better for immigrants. I will always stand against the limitless
cruelty that has become synonymous with the MAGA movement and the
cruelty they espouse.
Mr. GREEN of Tennessee. Mr. Speaker, again, I am compelled to correct
the Record. The bill very specifically states that family units will be
kept together. There will be no separation of children. It very clearly
is stated in the bill.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr.
Pfluger), my very good friend.
Mr. PFLUGER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for yielding.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of all Texans and all Americans
whose lives have been put at risk by the untenable crisis at our
southern border.
Let's just look at the numbers. In the 2 years that this President
has been in office, there have been over 5 million encounters at the
southern border, 1.4 million got-aways, and countless numbers of people
who matched not only the terrorist watch list, but also criminal
organizations. That totals nearly 6\1/2\ million people.
To put that in perspective, that is bigger than over 33 States in the
United States. Among those 5 million, our Border Patrol have caught
nearly 200 known and suspected terrorists trying to cross into our
country illegally. This should not only concern every American, but it
also outrages Americans who want law and order and safety to be
considered.
What I am even more concerned about is: How many among the 1.4
million got-aways would match that list that we don't know about?
This is something that I have been sounding the alarm bells for my
entire time in Congress. It is something that, unfortunately, my
Democrat colleagues have buried their heads in the sand and refused to
address for the last 2 years.
I could continue talking about the terrible numbers all day, about
the 15,000 criminals arrested, the 14,000 pounds of fentanyl that have
been seized, which, by the way, is enough to kill 3 billion people, and
that is just in the last 6 months.
Instead, I will turn the focus of today's discussion about border
security back to the tragedies, the human tragedies, which are
affecting every district, including mine.
Americans like Elisa Tambunga whose 7-year-old daughter and 71-year-
old grandmother were tragically killed by human traffickers doing 105
miles an hour with 11 illegal immigrants in the back seat who hit their
car and instantly killed them. They are the victims.
Let's talk about the 700 unaccompanied migrant children who have been
[[Page H2228]]
displaced and separated. These 700 unaccompanied migrants were dropped
off in Midland, Texas, trafficked by traffickers away from their
parents, and dropped off in the middle of the night. They are the
victims.
What about fathers like Joe Warnick of Odessa, Texas, who found his
17-year-old son dead after taking a pill laced with fentanyl. He is a
victim, along with 110,000 Americans last year who lost their lives
to fentanyl.
The 53 migrants who died in the sweltering heat in the back of a
tractor trailer south of San Antonio, Texas, last year, they are the
victims. These are real people.
This is not just a border crisis. This is a national security
emergency. Texans demand a solution.
Today, I am proud to join my colleagues in supporting H.R. 2, the
Secure the Border Act.
The timing of this legislation could not be more precise with the
ending of title 42. Our bill will force the administration to restart
construction of the border wall. It will deploy much-needed technology
to the border. It will increase the number of border agents and give
them the well-deserved bonuses that they need to maintain their
services.
Several of my original provisions have been included in this package
to require the administration to own up to the total number of known
got-aways or known and suspected terrorists crossing the border each
month, as well as outlining the costs that are incurred by States like
Texas.
Mr. President, how many more lives will be lost?
How many will it take to take action?
That is why Republicans are not ignoring this crisis. We are taking
action. We are restoring the security of our border.
I am extremely proud to stand here with Chairman Mark Green and his
efforts, and Speaker McCarthy, to pass a bill that will finally secure
the border and do what Americans put us here to do.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded to direct their remarks
to the Chair.
Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 2 does nothing to
combat illicit narcotics like fentanyl. If Republicans were serious
about border security, they would have joined Democrats in passing last
year's government funding bill, which provided $70 million for
intrusive inspection technology at ports of entry where most dangerous
drugs are interdicted.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Oregon (Ms.
Salinas).
Ms. SALINAS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 2.
My dad immigrated to the United States from Mexico when he was just a
child. He picked cotton and tomatoes in the Rio Grande Valley before
eventually earning his U.S. citizenship. Today, his daughter is a
Member of the United States Congress and serves on the Agriculture
Committee, a true testament to the unique power and promise of the
American Dream.
Migrant workers like my dad are the work engine of our agriculture
industry today. That is a fact--maybe an inconvenient one for some of
my colleagues--but a fact, nonetheless.
By some estimates, immigrant farmworkers make up more than 70 percent
of agricultural workers in the U.S. Nearly 175,000 immigrant
farmworkers reside in Oregon alone. Their work is backbreaking,
exhausting, and at times life-threatening. Yet, they show up, rain or
shine, heat dome or ice storm, to do the work, to feed America--not red
States or blue States, but every State.
That is why I am completely stunned by the arrogance and
shortsightedness of the majority.
Are you so blinded by xenophobia that you are willing to endanger not
only our food security but our national security with E-Verify
requirements that even Members of your own party call a mistake?
Democrats did offer an amendment to strike the E-Verify provision,
but the majority defeated that amendment. Oh, my goodness.
I am hoping that you can think beyond spinning your way out of the
reality that this bill will decimate our agriculture industry. The
American people are smarter than that and they will see through these
political games.
Turning employers into enforcers will result in nothing less than the
collapse of our agricultural system and, with it, our ability to feed
our great Nation. It would be a willful error of the highest magnitude,
something the American people will never forgive or forget.
Empty fields, empty tables, empty bellies; that is what H.R. 2 would
do. That is why we must all be a ``no'' vote.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded to direct their remarks
to the Chair.
Mr. GREEN of Tennessee. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire how much time
remains on each side?
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Tennessee has 28\1/4\
minutes. The gentleman from Mississippi has 17\1/2\ minutes.
Mr. GREEN of Tennessee. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Luttrell), the American hero.
Mr. LUTTRELL. Mr. Speaker, I rise to speak in support of H.R. 2, the
Secure the Border Act of 2023.
America is facing a crisis on our northern, southern, and maritime
borders. Our Nation has witnessed a devastating effect of disastrous
open border policies to date. For the past 2 years, over 5 million
people have come into this country. That is more than the population of
Louisiana and Mississippi combined.
In my district, every day I have to face the families that have lost
their babies from fentanyl. A few weeks ago, in San Jacinto County, a
known cartel member who was taken out of the country, ended up
murdering five innocent people in one of my counties.
Now, thankfully, local law enforcement, FBI, State troopers, and
BORTAC caught that bastard. These are the problems that we should not
have.
Mr. Speaker, we are criticized on this side of the aisle for our
immigration policies, about DACA, where the funding is going.
Well, I ask my colleagues on the other side of the aisle: You had 2
years to fix DACA, where were you at?
You had 2 years to fund our ports of entry, where were you at?
You spent the money elsewhere.
We are criticized and criticized about this bill, which is a step in
the right direction, which starts to move and solve the problem.
My colleagues on the other side, I ask you: Where have you been?
We showed up. We came here to Congress in order to fix this problem.
We pushed this legislation across, and all you can do is criticize.
That is unacceptable.
Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, while the imposition of a
nationwide E-Verify on all businesses found in this bill is not part of
the Homeland Security division, it still affects me as a Member of
Congress from a rural part of the country.
I cannot overstate how damaging this language is to the agriculture
labor in my district. Many of my rural Republican colleagues know this,
too. To put it bluntly, if enacted, this bill will force American
farmers to go out of business.
Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record letters of opposition against
the child deportation act from the AFL-CIO; SEIU, Service Employees
International Union; and the Agriculture Workforce Coalition.
AFL-CIO,
Washington, DC, May 8, 2023.
Dear Representative, I am writing on behalf of the AFL-CIO
to urge you to oppose H.R. 2, the Secure the Border Act of
2023. This bill advances a divisive agenda that would
increase risks to the lives and livelihoods of workers,
children, and families. Rather than punitive, enforcement-
only approaches, we urge Members to pursue meaningful reforms
that expand rights and protections for all.
Successive waves of immigrants and refugees have always
helped to build, serve and feed our nation. Today is no
different. Far from posing a threat, newly arriving migrants
can make valuable contributions to our society when afforded
the proper supports to allow them to effectively integrate
into our communities. The labor movement is committed to
welcoming more refugees, asylum seekers and other forced
migrants and helping them to integrate into the workforce
with good union jobs.
H.R. 2 fails to provide the effective and humane policy
solutions needed to address the flaws and injustices in our
immigration system. This bill would implement unbalanced
[[Page H2229]]
policies focused on deterrence, detention, and removal that
violate key principles of human and worker rights. Among many
concerns, the bill seeks to severely restrict asylum, reduce
protections for children, limit relief options for the
administration, erode due process, expend taxpayer resources
on a border wall, strip funding for humanitarian programs,
and promote detention and deportation of immigrants and
families.
Any serious attempt to use immigration policy to lift wages
and standards must start with a broad and inclusive pathway
to citizenship, not the costly expansion of a flawed
mechanisms that fail to ensure basic worker protections.
Unfortunately, the workforce provisions in H.R. 2 move us
further in the wrong direction. The bill would mandate the
use of E-Verify, which has often been used by employers as a
tool to bust unions and chill the exercise of workplace
rights. It would also cause significant harm to the workforce
by limiting the ability of asylum seekers to obtain work
authorization and stripping rules that were designed to lift
standards and wages for agricultural workers in the H-2A
program.
As a nation, we must uphold our humanitarian obligations
and insist on strong protections and rights for all workers,
children and families, regardless of immigration status.
Amidst escalating displacement and exploitation, we urge you
to vote NO on the Secure the Border Act.
Sincerely,
William Samuel,
Director, Government Affairs.
____
SEIU,
Washington, DC, May 10, 2023.
Dear Representative: On behalf of the 2 million members of
the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), I urge you
to vote no on H.R. 2, the Secure the Border Act of 2023.
SEIU opposes this bill in its entirety because it is built
on a false and small-minded premise that immigrants are a
menace to be feared, fought against, and punished. If we let
unfounded fear guide our immigration policies, we will
squander the powerful social and economic benefits that
immigrants provide. Immigrants today, like those of the past,
are a source of tremendous pride, productivity, and promise,
who make our nation stronger.
Our laws should therefore be designed to promote their
orderly integration and thus to maximize the benefits they
provide. H.R. 2 takes the opposite approach. It offers no
solution to the real global challenges that are uprooting an
unprecedented number of persons worldwide, and it ranks among
the most extreme and unworkable immigration bills that have
ever received a vote in Congress.
Among its many harmful provisions, H.R. 2 would endanger
children by mandating their incarceration with family members
and eliminating legal protections for unaccompanied children.
It would eliminate meaningful access to the asylum system for
many persons fleeing persecution, and deny work authorization
to individuals seeking asylum. It would criminalize visa
overstays of as little as 10 days, no matter how innocent the
explanation. It would expedite construction of Trump's
worthless and expensive wall at any cost. It would make E-
Verify mandatory for all businesses after a short phase-in,
despite evidence that doing so would merely encourage the
growth of the black-market underground economy and that it
would impose a burden on small businesses. And it would limit
federal partnerships with nonprofit and faith-based groups,
and punish them financially for fulfilling their humanitarian
mission. Instead of proposing solutions, H.R. 2 would
actually encourage lawlessness by blocking lawful paths for
migrants fleeing nations in crisis, and denying work
authorization while applications are pending.
Like most Americans, SEIU is frustrated by the lack of
progress towards the immigration reform that our nation
desperately needs. Such reform would legalize undocumented
immigrants, reform legal immigration pathways, and put
balanced procedures in place at the border that ensure order
and security as well as humane treatment. The toxic,
divisive, and mean-spirited measures that make up H.R. 2
would not do any of that, and SEIU urges you to vote no on
the bill. SEIU may include votes on this bill in our
congressional scorecard.
Sincerely,
Rebecca Wasserman,
Government Relations Director.
____
Agriculture Workforce Coalition,
April 19, 2023.
Hon. Jim Jordan, Chairman
Hon. Jerrold Nadler, Ranking Member,
House Committee on the Judiciary,
Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Jordan and Ranking Member Nadler: We, the
Agriculture Workforce Coalition (AWC), are writing in
opposition to the consideration of the Border Security and
Enforcement Act of 2023 (H.R. 2640) without concurrent,
meaningful legislation to address the labor crisis faced by
America's farmers, ranchers and growers. As organizations
serving as the unified voice of agriculture in the effort to
ensure that America's farmers, ranchers and growers have
access to a stable and secure workforce now and in the
future, we believe that the reforms envisioned in H.R. 2640
relative to mandatory E-Verify, on their own, would cause
agricultural production to fall by $60 billion dollars, and
food prices to increase by 5-6 percent. This would be
crushing to an already struggling and vulnerable industry.
Mandatory E-Verify without workable solutions for both the
domestic workforce and our H-2A employers puts these American
jobs, and the economies of communities across the country, in
jeopardy. As we have repeatedly stated, agriculture faces
unprecedented challenges from rapidly rising costs, many of
which are imposed by the federal government, as well as
competition from imported agricultural products typically
produced at a lower cost. American agriculture relies heavily
on foreign-born workers due to the extremely limited supply
of domestic farm labor. Continued inaction by Congress in
light of these realities will mean more fields lying fallow,
more farmers losing their livelihoods and fewer of the foods
we eat being grown in America.
The economic impacts of this will spread far beyond the
farm gate as Americans working in industry sectors both
upstream and downstream of the farm will see their jobs
threatened. Studies have shown that each hired farm employee
supports 2 to 3 full-time American jobs in the food
processing, transportation, farm equipment, marketing, retail
and other sectors.
The path forward is clear--Congress should pass a solution
that addresses both our current agricultural workforce and
modernizes our guest worker program to meet future needs.
Only then can we support the implementation of a mandatory E-
Verify policy. The AWC remains committed to working with the
House Judiciary Committee members and others to develop
legislation that addresses agriculture's labor needs.
Sincerely,
American Farm Bureau Federation, AmericanHort, Florida
Fruit & Vegetable Association, International Fresh Produce
Association, National Council of Agricultural Employers,
National Council of Farmer Cooperatives, National Farmers
Union, National Milk Producers Federation, National Pork
Producers Council, National Potato Council, USA Farmers, U.S.
Apple Association, Western Growers Association.
{time} 2015
Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Sorensen).
Mr. SORENSEN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to H.R. 2.
For years and years, politicians have kicked immigration reform down
the road over and over and over again for future generations, they will
have to address it. Unfortunately, the bill that we have today that we
are considering just continues the trend.
Our border must be secure. Make no mistake, we have to do everything
that we can to prevent harmful drugs like fentanyl from destroying the
lives of our kids and our families.
We need real solutions. Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle want to
solve our border crisis, but the bill in front of us today would only
make our border less secure.
The bill in front of us today does nothing to address the root causes
of our system's backlog and only serves to gut our asylum ability,
denying the protections to the people who need it the most.
Gutting the few remaining pathways to claim asylum and kicking
Dreamers out of the only country that they have ever known, it just
accelerates the chaos and extremism and, in the end, all it does is
harm our neighbors and our communities.
Like many of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle, I support
smart, targeted investments in border security and providing law
enforcement the resources that they need to end the flow of weapons and
fentanyl into our country.
Speaker McCarthy just spoke about the dangerous people that were just
caught this year, but I proposed an amendment that would have hired an
additional 500 Customs and Border Protection officers at ports of entry
to screen more people at the border.
Another amendment that I provided would allow $50 million to expand a
task force to go after fentanyl distributors.
You know what? Speaker McCarthy and every Republican refused to
consider these amendments in committee, ideas that have bipartisan
support.
Listen, the story of America, it is a story of immigrants,
opportunity, and hard work. We have to push back against legislation
that sows division and chaos. Let's come together to create an
immigration system that works, that protects our Dreamers, and treats
migrants humanely, ensuring that our hometowns are safe from drugs and
crime.
Mr. GREEN of Tennessee. Mr. Speaker, I hear from my colleagues across
[[Page H2230]]
the aisle the accusations that the legislation that is before us today
is somehow xenophobic. I will remind my colleagues that the number of
countries of people who are appearing at our southern border, breaking
our laws are from over 140 countries, every single race, every single
religion, almost all the nationalities of the world. This bill is about
law and order. It is not xenophobic.
I recall when I was there on the border, maybe it was three trips
ago, some folks from Russia and Ukraine. This isn't xenophobic. This is
about law and order.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr.
Miller).
Mr. MILLER of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, treating migrants humanely, humanely
as to where a young child will have to make a 300-mile journey, in
which they have no idea what is ahead of them; they have to go with
coyotes and drug traffickers, who, when they drop children across the
border wall that does work, that is the nice things that they do to
those children, and everyone here knows it, which is very upsetting.
So treating them humanely would be responsible, and that is what this
piece of legislation, H.R. 2, is.
The southern border is in crisis. About 5 million people have
illegally crossed into our country under President Biden's watch.
The cartels have smuggled in 14,000 pounds of fentanyl.
Border agents arrested 98 people, 98 people on the terror watch list
in FY22.
This crisis is the direct result of the Biden administration's failed
policies, and every American knows it.
Under President Trump, we had a secure border. All President Biden
had to do was nothing. All he had to do was sit there and do nothing,
but he couldn't even do that.
Instead, he took 94 executive actions to reverse the progress made
under Republican leadership. Unbelievable.
Republicans are once again acting to protect our Nation from the
gangs, drug cartels, and terrorists that exploit this crisis to hurt
the American people.
H.R. 2 resumes construction of the border wall. It pays our border
agents what they need and what they deserve and hires them the help
that they desperately need in terms of assets.
Biden's border crisis has raged far too long. Enough is enough. I
urge my colleagues to vote for this bill and to secure our southern
border.
Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, the Congressional Budget
Office estimates that the child deportation act provision requiring DHS
to negotiate with El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras to return
unaccompanied children will result in 550,000 children being deported
back to the violence they fled from over a 10-year period.
Mr. Speaker, H.R. 2 is an anti-immigrant and un-Christian bill, just
as legislation previously introduced by Representative Roy was. That is
why nearly 150 community and religious groups oppose it.
Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record letters in opposition from 136
community and religious groups, including Bethany Christian Services,
Catholic Charities, and Union for Reform Judaism, Sojourners, U.S.
Conference of Catholic Bishops, and the Jesuit Conference.
May 8, 2023.
House of Representatives,
Washington, DC.
Vote Recommendation Opposing H.R. 2 Secure the Border Act of 2023
Dear Representative: The undersigned state, local, and
national immigration, civil rights, public health, education,
religious, labor, climate justice, and other organizations
write to respectfully request that you VOTE NO on H.R. 2, the
Secure the Border Act of 2023, set to receive a vote on the
House floor on May 11. The bill would dismantle the asylum
system and cause immeasurable harm to immigrant communities.
The newly elected majority is driving an intentionally
divisive agenda to amplify anti-immigrant animus without
moral and effective policy solutions. We ask you to oppose
this anti-immigrant bill that would:
1. Deport Unaccompanied Children. The bill would end Health
& Human Services funding for legal representation of
unaccompanied children in immigration proceedings, depriving
children of the attorneys their safety depends upon. It would
also provide only a cursory screening process for children at
the border, risking children's summary return to human
trafficking and other dangers. The bill subjects all
unaccompanied children to an accelerated removal process
worse than what currently exists, and allows for detention of
unaccompanied children in jail-like border facilities for up
to 30 days--ten times longer than permitted under current
law.
2. End Asylum. The bill would effectively shut down our
current asylum system by adding dozens of new restrictions on
asylum, including eliminating the right to seek asylum for
those who cross the border between ports of entry and barring
asylum for those who transit through a third country. It
would make it nearly impossible for migrants to seek asylum
in the U.S. and significantly easier to deport asylum
seekers, including families and children, into harm's way.
This will only sow chaos at the border, rather than
ameliorating it.
3. Restart `Remain in Mexico'. The bill would restart the
failed and dangerous Remain in Mexico program for all
migrants, including unaccompanied children who were
previously exempted under the Trump administration. Seeking
to unilaterally return asylum seekers to other countries
without consulting the receiving country nor the migrant
results in refoulement of the migrant to danger and
problematic foreign policy implications.
4. Jail Immigrant Families. The bill would require family
detention for any families attempting to enter the U.S. to
seek asylum, as well as any families who previously entered
the U.S. without visas. Like all immigration detention,
family detention centers have a well-documented history of
abusive conditions, including inadequate medical care and
mental health deterioration for asylum seekers, survivors of
trauma, and children.
5. Mandate E-Verify. The bill would require E-Verify for
all employers in the U.S., severely damaging our economy,
harming American workers, and resulting in billions of
dollars in lost government revenue. National implementation
of E-Verify raises concerns about efficiency, due process,
and racial profiling and decreased employment among Latinos.
6. Gut Programs that Work: The bill would strip funding for
the Alternative To Detention Case Management Pilot Program,
Office of Immigration Detention Ombudsman, and the vital
Shelter and Services Program, which has helped communities
around the country receive reimbursement for costs related to
humanitarian responses to migration. These programs have been
effective at providing services crucial to preventing more
deaths under CBP custody and immigrant detention and have
reduced impacts on receiving communities.
7. Burden our Local Communities by Making it Impossible for
Employers to Hire Asylum Seekers with Work Authorization.
This bill eliminates work authorization for asylum seekers
who cross between ports of entry and requires six month
renewal periods for asylum-based employment authorization.
Combined with USCIS processing time, this would effectively
make it impossible for businesses, even in the face oflabor
shortages, to employ asylum seekers. These provisions will
exponentially increase the backlogs at users and make it even
more difficult for USCIS to timely process applications. This
runs counter to bipartisan efforts to improve the employment
authorization process for asylum seekers and will create an
unnecessary burden on local communities.
8. Undermine Essential Partnerships with Humanitarian
Organizations. The bill would bar any and all DHS funding for
NGOs, including faith-based NGOs, that provide shelter,
transportation, food or legal assistance to vulnerable
immigrants, including those who arrive on a visa and later
become ``inadmissible.'' Congress should be investing more in
non-profit organizations providing respite care, legal
service providers, trauma-informed care and community-based
service providers, not subjecting them to the punitive
measures in this legislation. This measure would impact NGOs
across the country that receive DHS funding, including
organizations working with FEMA during an emergency-it's
``show me your papers'' for the Red Cross.
9. Resume Building Trump's Border Wall. The bill would
restart the construction of the border wall, a harmful waste
of taxpayer resources. It would allow DHS to exempt all
border infrastructure construction, development, operation,
and maintenance from any law except the Constitution, thereby
reducing the rule of law at our borders. The bill would also
restrict the ability for landowners, local communities and
tribes to assert legal challenges opposing the construction
of the wall, and thus pave the way for irreparable and
unchecked harms to the borderlands. We have already seen the
negative consequences from the Trump Administration era
resulting in: bulldozed Native American burial sites;
dynamited pristine mountain wilderness; segments of the wall
being constructed in flood plains; and the unjust seizing of
private ranches and farmlands.
10. Eliminate Parole Authority. The bill would decimate the
parole power that presidents historically have used to parole
individuals in response to humanitarian emergencies or in
furtherance of foreign policy objectives. It also precludes
the President's recent parole programs for Ukrainians,
Afghans, Cubans, Haitians, Nicaragruans, and Venezuelans, and
cuts work authorization for parolees.
11. Jail Any Person who Overstays a Visa. The bill would
jail and penalize immigrants who have violated any condition
of their visa or overstayed by 10 days or more, even for
violations that occur due to circumstances beyond the
individuals' control such as a medical emergency. This
provision would even make it a crime for anyone on a visa to
apply for asylum, given they would not have
[[Page H2231]]
left once their visa expired. Congress should focus on
solutions that regularize the status of long-term residents
and fix our broken immigration system.
12. Balloon Border Agents. The bill would require Border
Patrol to hire enough agents to reach 22,000 on board
(currently there are roughly 19,500) and restrict Border
Patrol agents from performing ``duties of processing
coordinators.'' Processing coordinators currently perform
duties such as transporting and processing migrants and
carrying out mandatory welfare checks. With only around 1,000
processing coordinators currently in the field, this
restriction would seriously hinder Border Patrol's efforts to
fairly and efficiently process asylum seekers and carry out
their law enforcement mission. CBP is overfunded with funding
streams that push resources towards enforcement and wasteful
surveillance, while humanitarian needs go underfunded.
We urge you to vote in ways that protect immigrants and
VOTE NO against H.R. 2, the Secure the Border Act of 2023 in
the upcoming floor vote. We must oppose racist, xenophobic,
unconstructive proposals that add fuel to hate and present no
constructive and moral solutions. Thank you for your time and
attention.
Sincerely,
National Organizations:
#WelcomeWithDignity Campaign, African Communities Together,
Alianza Americas, America's Voice, American Civil Liberties
Union, American Federation of Teachers, American Immigration
Council, American Immigration Lawyers Association, American
Psychological Association, American-Arab Anti-Discrimination
Committee (ADC), Asian Americans Advancing Justice
AAJC, Asian Pacific Institute on Gender-Based Violence,
ASISTA.
Asylum Seeker Advocacy Project (ASAP), Bend the Arc: Jewish
Action, Bethany Christian Services, Bridges Faith Initiative,
Center for Gender & Refugee Studies, Center for Law and
Social Policy, Center for Popular Democracy (CPD), Center for
Victims of Torture, Children's Defense Fund, Chispa LCV,
Church World Service, Coalition on Human Needs, Communities
United for Status & Protection (CUSP), Community Change
Action, Detention Watch Network.
Esperanza United (formerly Casa de Esperanza: National
Latin@ Network), Freedom for Immigrants, Freedom Network USA,
Friends Committee on National Legislation, Futures Without
Violence, Human Rights Campaign, Human Rights First, Human
Rights Watch, ILRC, Immigration Equality Action Fund,
Immigration Hub, Immigration Law & Justice Network,
Indivisible, Jesuit Refugee Service/USA, Kino Border
Initiative.
Latin America Working Group, Lawyers for Good Government,
League of Conservation Voters, Maryknoll Office for Global
Concerns, MoveOn, MPower Change Action Fund, National Council
of Jewish Women, National Education Association, National
Employment Law Project, National Immigrant Justice Center,
National Immigration Law Center, National Immigration Project
(NIPNLG), National Korean American Service & Education
Consortium (NAKASEC), National Lawyers Guild San Francisco
Bay Area Chapter, National Network for Arab American
Communities (NNAAC).
National Network for Immigrant and Refugee Rights (NNIRR),
National Partnership for New Americans, NETWORK Lobby for
Catholic Social Justice, Nextgen America, Oxfam America,
People's Action, Prevention Institute, RAICES, Reconstructing
Judaism, Reconstructionist Rabbinical Association, Restaurant
Opportunities Centers United, Save the Children, Service
Employees International Union (SEIU), Sisters of Mercy of the
Americas Justice Team, Sojourners, Southern Border
Communities Coalition, T'ruah: The Rabbinic Call for Human
Rights.
UnidosUS, Union for Reform Judaism, Unitarian Universalist
Association, Unitarian Universalists for Social Justice,
United Church of Christ Justice and Local Church Ministries,
United We Dream, Washington Office on Latin America (WOLA),
WE ACT for Environmental Justice, Witness at the Border,
Women's Refugee Commission, Young Center for Immigrant
Children's Rights.
State and Local Organizations:
ACLU People Power Fairfax, Adhikaar, Al Otro Lado, Alliance
of Californians for Community Empowerment (ACCE), Alliance
San Diego, Americans for Immigrant Justice, Asian Americans
Advancing Justice-Atlanta, AVAN Immigrant Services, Border
Compassion Nonprofit, Border Patrol Victims Network,
California Immigrant Policy Center, California Rural Legal
Assistance Foundation (CRLA Foundation), Carolina Jews for
Justice, Central American Resource Center of Northern CA--
CARECEN SF, Chispa Arizona, CLUE-Clergy and Laity United for
Economic Justice.
Coalicion de Derechos Humanos, Coalition for Humane
Immigrant Rights (CHIRLA), Diocesan Migrant and Refugee Svcs
inc, Dorothy Day Catholic Worker, Washington DC, Fellowship
Southwest, Florence Immigrant & Refugee Rights Project,
Florida Immigrant Coalition, Fresh Start Refugee Assistance
Center, Houston Immigration Legal Services Collaborative,
Immigrant Legal Advocacy Project, Interfaith Movement for
Human Integrity, Jewish Alliance for Law and Social Action,
Journey to Asylum, Just Neighbors Ministry, Las Americas
Immigrant Advocacy Center, Louisiana Organization for
Refugees and Immigrants.
Make the Road CT, Make the Road NV, Make the Road
Pennsylvania, Massachusetts Immigrant and Refugee Advocacy
Coalition, Michigan Immigrant Rights Center, Oasis Legal
Services, Samaritans, SEIU CA, SEiU United Service Workers
West, St. Mark's Presbyterian Church, St. Michael's
University Church, Tennessee Justice for Our Neighbors, Texas
Civil Rights Project, The Advocates for Human Rights, The
Green Valley/Sahuarita Samaritans, The Resurrection Project,
Tucson Samaritans, Wind of the Spirit Immigrant Resource
Center.
____
Catholic Charities USA,
May 8, 2023.
Hon. Kevin McCarthy,
Speaker, House of Representatives,
Washington, DC.
Hon. Hakeem Jeffries,
Minority Leader, House of Representatives,
Washington, DC.
Dear Speaker McCarthy and Minority Leader Jeffries: As
President of Catholic Charities USA (CCUSA), I wish to
express our strong opposition to the Secure the Border Act of
2023 (H.R. 2). If adopted, this legislation would severely
restrict vulnerable people's access to asylum, detain more
families including children, undermine U.S. efforts to
effectively manage immigration, and dismantle the public-
private infrastructure currently in place to manage the
humanitarian crisis at the southern border and its impact
throughout the country.
The gospel calls us to provide shelter for those who are
homeless, feed the hungry, and ``welcome the stranger.'' The
work of Catholic Charities is humanitarian not political.
While we do not oppose all the provisions in H.R. 2, several
of them, if enacted, would severely hinder the government and
nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) from aiding migrants who
need services, care, and assistance.
The proposed legislation would reverse many protections for
migrants and restrict asylum access, including long-standing
protections that promote the best interest and safety of
unaccompanied children who arrive in the United States. H.R.
2 would defund Alternatives to Detention (ATD) programs that
provide participants access to basic services such as
housing, medical care, and legal representation.
Additionally, H.R. 2 would prohibit funding to the Department
of Homeland Security (DHS) for disbursement to faith-based
organizations and other NGOs, effectively cancelling the
cooperation of these organizations with federal, state, and
local governments in receiving newcomers, combatting human
trafficking, addressing homelessness, and responding to
natural disasters and other emergencies. The end result would
be the dismantling of a system to help migrants and local
communities rather than its improvement to meet the
challenges of the moment.
No one can deny our immigration system is broken. Moreover,
the situation at the southern border is dire and needs a
compassionate, humane, and orderly response. However, many of
the provisions in H.R. 2 are contrary to these values and
will threaten the lives of vulnerable persons seeking refuge,
burden state and local communities, and disrupt our nation's
ability to respond to disasters.
While we strongly oppose this legislation, we continue to
call on Congress and the administration to work together to
reform our immigration system and to support policies that
are just, humane and well-coordinated. We look forward to
continuing to work with you to find solutions that uphold
human dignity and promote the common good.
Sincerely,
Sister Donna Markham, OP, PhD,
President & CEO,
Catholic Charities USA.
____
[From Sojourners, May 8, 2023]
Safety and Compassion Can Exist Without Extreme Measures. Sojourners
Urges Representatives to Vote no on H.R. 2., the Secure the Border Act
of 2023
Washington, D.C.--In response to H.R. 2, the Secure the
Border Act of 2023, Sojourners released the following
statement:
On May 11, 2023, the U.S. House of Representatives is set
to vote on H.R. 2, the Secure the Border Act of 2023. If
passed, the bill will harm millions of migrants fleeing
violence from their home countries by effectively dismantling
the asylum system. The bill would also have a negative
economic impact on local communities by denying work
authorization to asylum seekers who traveled through a third
country or who cross between ports of entry. Unaccompanied
minors will be at risk of further danger as the bill seeks to
end the Department of Health and Human Services' funding for
legal representation.
At Sojourners we have long embraced a consistent ethic of
life, seeking to protect the dignity and sanctity of life;
our migrant family around the globe must be included in this
commitment. Ending asylum will mean certain death for many of
our most vulnerable siblings seeking protection; including
women and children who have already faced a traumatic journey
as they seek safety in the U.S. We urge representatives to
oppose H.R. 2, the Secure the Border Act of 2023, as it is an
assault on the inherent dignity and worth of human beings
seeking refuge and it violates current U.S. immigration law
and international treaties.
``We take the word of God seriously, so when Jesus' words
in Matthew 25 tell us to `welcome the stranger,' we cannot
sit idly by
[[Page H2232]]
as Christians and allow injustice in our nation by ending
asylum and denying welcome to our migrant family,'' said Rev.
Adam Russell Taylor, President of Sojourners.
``As someone who has accompanied and become legal guardian
of unaccompanied minors fleeing for their lives, the negative
impact this bill will have would not only endanger the
physical lives of migrants but also risk the soul of our
nation--it is up to us as followers of Jesus to embody his
teachings and speak up and take action against this inhumane
bill,'' said Vanessa Martinez Soltero, Immigration Narrative
and Power-Building Organizer at Sojourners.
``To seek asylum is a human right guaranteed by U.S.
immigration laws and enshrined in the U.N. declaration of
Human Rights and the Refugee Convention of 1951. Decades of
humanitarian migration give witness to the horrors that
people seeking asylum experience. The U.S. inspection
protocols, thorough background checks, and rigorous
screenings have consistently proven that safety and
compassion can go hand in hand. Instead, leaders of the
Republican Party are instilling fear and capitalizing on the
end of Title 42, the health policy that prevented asylum
seekers from presenting themselves at the border, to wield an
anti-immigrant agenda through the introduction of H.R. 2.''
said Sandra Ovalle, Director of Campaigns and Mobilizing,
Sojourners.
____
United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, Committee
on Migration,
Washington DC, May 5, 2023.
Dear Representative: I write on behalf of the U.S.
Conference of Catholic Bishops' (USCCB) Committee on
Migration to express our strong opposition to H.R. 2, the
``Secure the Border Act of 2023.'' If enacted, this measure
would fundamentally weaken our nation's decades-long
commitment to humanitarian protection. Provisions of this
bill would endanger unaccompanied children and inflict harm
on other vulnerable persons, decimate access to asylum,
mandate damaging detention and removal practices, restrict
access to legal employment, limit--and potentially
eliminate--federal partnerships with faith-based and other
nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), undermine the rule of
law, and more.
We do not question the good intentions of lawmakers who
seek to enact legislation that would secure our nation's
borders. Indeed, we join in the call to enact effective and
humane border management as part of a framework of
comprehensive immigration reforms. As stated previously, we
also do not discount the challenges at our border with
Mexico, nor the right of nations to maintain their borders.
We have continuously acknowledged the right of sovereign
states to impose certain juridical conditions on immigration
for the sake of the common good, consistent with Catholic
teaching. However, our faith also compels us to be ``vigilant
advocate[s], defending against any unjust restriction [on]
the natural right of individual persons to move freely within
their own nation and from one nation to another'' and to call
attention ``to the rights of migrants and their families and
to respect for their human dignity, even in cases of non-
legal immigration.''
Pope Francis has stated that ``safe, orderly, regular and
sustainable migration is in the interest of all countries.''
Undoubtedly, effective border management is necessary to
achieve that. However, H.R. 2 would not humanely secure our
border with Mexico or help to alleviate increased migration
throughout the Western Hemisphere.
We understand that there may well be a number of provisions
in this bill that you support. However, this legislation
contains such a combination of harmful measures that we
believe its passage, on the whole, is beyond justification.
Such provisions include those that would:
Endanger Unaccompanied Children
We are deeply concerned about the impact this bill would
have on unaccompanied children (UC). The measure would
override many of the fundamental protections put in place by
the William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection
Reauthorization Act of 2008 and the Flores Settlement
Agreement. For example, it would eliminate protections for
young children and children with intellectual disabilities by
removing the requirement that Department of Homeland Security
(DHS) officials ascertain whether a child is able to make an
independent decision to withdraw his or her application for
admission to the United States prior to possible removal. It
would also subject every UC to expedited screening and, for
those deemed eligible at that time, appearance before an
immigration judge within 14 days, without any meaningful
access to legal counsel or a child advocate. This is coupled
with a provision that would abolish all existing government-
funded legal representation programs for UC. Furthermore, the
bill would eliminate the current requirement that UC be
transferred to the custody of the Department of Health and
Human Services (HHS) within 72 hours of being encountered by
DHS, and those deemed ineligible for relief by Customs and
Border Protection (CBP) could be detained indefinitely by
DHS. Detention facilities operated by DHS are notoriously
inadequate places for children to spend any length of time.
Collectively, these and other changes made by the bill would
intolerably alter how our country responds to these
vulnerable children, many of whom suffer severe trauma before
even reaching our border.
Decimate Access to Asylum
As conveyed earlier in the 118th Congress, we oppose
efforts to inhibit meaningful access to our nation's asylum
process, which this bill would do in several ways. For
instance, it would eliminate asylum as an option for anyone
who enters the United States in between ports of entry with
no exceptions for highly vulnerable individuals, including
unaccompanied children. However, under this bill, even the
ability to seek asylum at a port of entry could effectively
be blocked in favor of ``operational control'' for any person
without a visa, as well as those who transited a third
country before seeking asylum in the United States. This is
coupled with provisions that, among other things, bar asylum
for anyone who makes a claim based on resistance to
recruitment or coercion by criminal or terrorist
organizations, effectively requiring that persecution be
carried out by the state, even in situations where the state
is unwilling or unable to intervene in persecution committed
by non-state actors. Such limitations are inconsistent with
international agreements acceded to by the United States and
longstanding precedent. They also demonstrate a concerning
disregard for the prominence and impunity enjoyed by criminal
and terrorist organizations in many countries. Furthermore,
the bill would require a fee of ``not less than $50'' for
each asylum application filed without the possibility of a
waiver. The right to seek asylum should never hinge entirely
on one's ability to pay for it. It is already difficult to
qualify for asylum under existing law, and further limiting
asylum eligibility in these ways will merely increase
obstacles to potential relief for those with bona fide
claims.
Mandate Damaging Detention and Removal Practices
As mentioned, the bill would subject unaccompanied children
to indefinite detention by DHS. This would also be extended
to families with children on a mandatory basis and seems to
apply retroactively, meaning families already awaiting the
completion of their immigration proceedings for any length of
time before enactment of the bill would be required to be
remanded to immigration detention. Moreover, suggesting a
disregard for accountability and the wellbeing of persons
placed in immigration detention, the bill would defund the
Office of the Immigration Detention Ombudsman, curtailing
oversight at the same time it maximizes detention for all
individuals, families, and unaccompanied children. Likewise,
the bill would eliminate funding for the Case Management
Pilot Program, a more humane and cost-effective alternative
to detention specifically designed to facilitate compliance
with immigration proceedings, even for those ultimately
deemed ineligible for relief in the United States. For asylum
seekers who enter the United States from Canada or Mexico
(whether at or between ports of entry) who cannot be detained
or removed, the bill requires that they be returned to the
contiguous country from which they arrived and remain there
for the duration of their immigration proceedings. In seeking
to revive an expanded version of the immoral and unlawful
Migrant Protection Protocols, the bill dismisses the need for
diplomatic negotiations and creates significant
constitutional questions.
Restrict Legal Employment Access
Eligibility for employment authorization is already limited
under existing law for those seeking asylum. However, this
bill would go even further by requiring that eligible asylum
seekers (those whose cases have been pending for at least 180
days) reapply for employment authorization every six months.
These applications to renew work authorization will compound
the existing backlog for immigration benefits adjudicated by
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), further
delaying all manner of benefits under the agency's purview.
Because USCIS processing times already exceed six months for
many seeking employment authorization, it could be impossible
for an asylum seeker to attain lawful employment at all under
the terms of this bill, regardless of how long his or her
case is pending. The measure would also prevent most people
granted humanitarian parole from seeking employment
authorization. These changes would only encourage asylum
seekers and parolees to pursue employment without
authorization or else leave them with no choice but to rely
on social services, charity, and emergency care to meet their
basic needs.
Limit Federal Partnerships with NGOs
Multiple provisions of this bill target NGOs that partner
with DHS to provide a myriad of services to citizens and
noncitizens alike. Ostensibly, these provisions would prevent
the disbursement of DHS funding to NGOs that ``facilitate or
encourage unlawful activity, including unlawful entry,'' as
well as those that ``provide, or facilitate the provision of,
transportation, lodging, or immigration legal services to
inadmissible aliens.'' In both cases, this language is overly
broad, ambiguous, and unworkable. Given their vast expertise
and the trust they've earned from American communities, many
Catholic and other faith-based organizations have long
partnered with DHS to provide a range of services, including
disaster relief, assistance for lawful immigrants
[[Page H2233]]
seeking to naturalize as U.S. citizens, humanitarian relief,
services for victims of trafficking, and more. The phrase
``inadmissible aliens'' would be difficult, if not
impossible, for NGOs to apply, since admissibility of
noncitizens is not always readily apparent and, indeed, is
often a matter to be adjudicated by the government. Contrary
to the same subsection's heading, ``inadmissibility'' is also
not an indicator of unlawful entry into, or unlawful presence
in, the United States. As drafted, these provisions could
even be interpreted to prevent schools, houses of worship,
and other organizations from qualifying for the Nonprofit
Security Grant Program amid a rise in violent attacks on
those places. Equally concerning is that the same section of
the bill would prevent any funds from being appropriated to
DHS for the purpose of processing into the United States any
persons arriving between ports of entry, calling into
question DHS' ability to rescue persons encountered in the
desert in life-threatening circumstances and process
unaccompanied children, victims of trafficking, victims of
torture, and others who-even under the bill's own terms-would
warrant such processing.
Diminish the Humanitarian Parole Authority
Humanitarian parole has been used by every administration,
whether Republican or Democrat, since President Dwight D.
Eisenhower, who directed the Attorney General to parole into
the United States 15,000 Hungarian refugees fleeing the
Hungarian Revolution of 1956. The use of parole has often
been necessitated by emergencies emanating from war and other
conflicts--situations in which such a streamlined mechanism
proved vital to save lives. Even when Congress enacted the
Refugee Act of 1980, largely due to dissatisfaction with the
executive branch's use of parole, it chose to preserve this
discretionary authority, acknowledging the need to ``avoid
crippling the [United States'] ability to respond to [such]
emergencies.'' This bill, however, would abandon that
realistic understanding by severely limiting the use of
parole in such situations. It would also restrict the use of
parole for those seeking asylum, such that it would
effectively be unavailable, furthering the unnecessary and
inhumane use of detention.
Expedite Border Wall Construction at Any Cost
We have long opposed the construction of a wall spanning
the entire U.S.-Mexico border, especially with the dangers it
poses to human life and the environment. However, this bill
would establish unprecedented authorities to advance border
wall construction, which include the ability of the Secretary
of Homeland Security to waive ``all legal requirements
necessary'' to ensure the wall's expeditious design, testing,
construction, and maintenance. This is combined with a
prohibition on consultation with local leaders and property
owners, among others, that exceeds seven days, with the
purpose of such consultation being to ``minimize the impact
on natural resources, commerce, and sites of historical or
cultural significance for the communities and residents''
(removing existing references to ``quality of life'') located
near the border. The bill would effectively undermine
constitutional property rights and further abrogate the
rights of those living near the border by prioritizing
federal land acquisition above such rights.
This is by no means an exhaustive explanation of the
objectionable provisions contained within H.R. 2, given, for
example, its criminalization of visa overstays for the first
time in our country's history (even if inadvertent or based
on a pending adjustment of status) and its E-Verify mandate
for all employers, among other issues. Nevertheless, the
provisions discussed underscore the extreme nature of this
bill, its incompatibility with Catholic social teaching, and
its inconsistency with our nation's broadly bipartisan
commitment to humanitarian protection.
We take this opportunity to reiterate that ``[n]o
combination of legal pathways or harsh enforcement measures
will suffice to meet the complex challenge of forced
migration facing our country and hemisphere. Only through a
long-term commitment to addressing root causes and promoting
integral human development throughout the Americas, combined
with an overhaul of our immigration system, will we be able
to achieve the conditions necessary to sustainably reduce
irregular migration.''
For these reasons, we urge you to oppose the passage of
H.R. 2 and to support the drafting of bipartisan legislation
that is more in keeping with our nation's rich tradition of
welcome. We remain committed to working with you and the
Administration to address the complex issue of migration,
including the need for humane border management that respects
the God-given dignity of migrants. Thank you for considering
our views and for your work in service of the common good.
Sincerely,
Most Reverend Mark J. Seitz,
Bishop of El Paso,
Chairman, USCCB Committee on Migration.
____
Jesuit Conference,
Office of Justice and Ecology,
Washington, DC, May 9, 2023.
House of Representatives,
Washington, DC.
Dear Representative: On behalf of the Jesuit Conference
Office of Justice and Ecology, I write to express our strong
opposition to HR 2, the Secure the Border Act, which would
drastically limit the ability to seek asylum in the U.S. The
bill fails to treat our migrant brothers and sisters with the
dignity we all share as beloved children of God.
Every day, our neighbors arrive at the border asking for
help, many fleeing violence and persecution. Yet since the
beginning of the pandemic, most of those arriving at our
southern border have been expelled without even an
opportunity to present their case for asylum.
HR 2 would drastically limit the ability to seek asylum in
this country, require the detention of families, and make it
much more likely that migrants seeking safety are deported
into dangerous situations. Furthermore, it would cause chaos
at the border and significantly undermine the ability of
humanitarian organizations to provide essential services.
While the United States has a responsibility to protect its
borders, it also has an obligation to provide protection to
those fleeing violence and persecution in their own
countries. This legislation falls well short of that
obligation, violating central tenets of the Christian faith
that call us to welcome the stranger and love our neighbors
as ourselves.
As people of the Gospel, we ask you to oppose these efforts
and help keep our country a place where those fleeing
persecution can find safe haven.
Sincerely,
Rev. Ted Penton, SJ,
Secretary of Justice and Ecology.
Mr. Thompson of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my
time.
Mr. GREEN of Tennessee. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Cloud).
Mr. CLOUD. Mr. Speaker, Ronald Reagan once said that it isn't that
our liberal friends are ignorant; it is just that there is so much they
know that isn't so.
As you hear the talking points coming from the left concerning this
bill, with all the Chicken Little arguments that they are presenting
about how the world is going to collapse, farmers won't be able to grow
things, and our economy will crumble if we secure our border, it is
just plain ridiculous.
I live in south Texas in what they call the ``fatal funnel,'' in
between two highways that lead from the border into Houston, which has
become known as the human trafficking capital of the United States.
I visited facilities where 50 percent of the young women there, of
hundreds of young women, will admit to being assaulted along the
journey. I have visited the border and seen the families that have had
their lives destroyed by what is going on at the border. Of course we
know about the fentanyl deaths, hundreds of thousands of them.
To hear the talking points coming from the left that securing our
border is un-Christian is absolutely ridiculous. I am both a Christian
and the husband of an immigrant. I can tell you; I was there when my
wife put her hand on her heart and said the Pledge of Allegiance for
the first time as an American, and it really meant something. That is
the right way to do it.
We have a legal process, and we have an illegal process that the left
continues to fund and continues to partner with the cartels and
continues to allow them to profit to the tune of billions and billions
of dollars, to advance an illegal process when we need to enforce the
legal process. We have a right way to do it, and we can do it.
This bill secures our border. The fact of the matter is that the
Democrats just don't seem to really care. They don't care about the
lives that are being destroyed. They don't care about the people that
are dying. They don't care about the young girls being sold into the
sex trade.
This administration has lost tens of thousands of kids and so for all
the tears that were happening under the Trump administration as he
worked to secure the border, where is the outcry for the tens of
thousands of kids this administration cannot track?
They are willing to fund the border in other countries. They just
funded a bill in December. We passed an omnibus bill where they were
willing to fund border security in Libya, Lebanon, Pakistan, Nepal, and
Turkey. But here in the United States of America, securing our border
is not something the Democrats want to do.
Of course, yeah, we will get around to it. We just won't vote for
anything that will do it. They had the chance to do it. They did not do
it.
This bill will help secure our border. We need to pass it. I
encourage a ``yes'' vote.
[[Page H2234]]
Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, the Congressional Budget
Office estimates that the bill would ``affect the legal status of about
4.4 million people who would be granted parole or asylum under current
law.''
Parolees fleeing war in Ukraine and the Taliban in Afghanistan, as
well as those from Haiti and other failed countries in this hemisphere
would be required to leave the United States, and CBO anticipates that
``half would reside unlawfully in the United States.''
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. GREEN of Tennessee. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Babin).
Mr. BABIN. Mr. Speaker, I am up here in my capacity as not only a
United States Congressman, but also one of the co-chairs of the House
Border Security Caucus.
On a monthly basis, we have had dozens of speakers come to speak to
our Caucus. Normally, there are probably 30 who are present, but we
have an enrollment in our Caucus of about 60 to 70, quite frankly.
It is amazing to me to hear our colleagues and friends on the other
side of the aisle talk about humanity and humane treatment because I
remember in the previous administration, when we had these so-called
kids in cages.
I took a congressional delegation down to the Rio Grande Valley, we
went to Donna, Texas, to see one of the detention facilities. After
that, we went out to Carrizo Springs to the HHS facility there. Then we
went, at a later time, to Fort Bliss out in El Paso. At each one of
those, we saw these so-called kids in cages.
Then we went back after the change of administration and
dramatically, there was nothing really different, except the enormous
numbers of detainees in pods that were equipped to hold maybe 25 or 30,
and they had a couple hundred people packed in these little pods.
I remember being told by the facilities there that the
administration, the Biden administration, at the time that these
unaccompanied children were coming in--and we are talking about 13,000
per month of unaccompanied children coming in now--that they were being
so well cared for, and they were being reunited with their families and
their loved ones.
I remember asking the folks who were in charge of these facilities,
okay, if they are being taken care of, let me ask you a question
because I have 17 grandkids. Kids mean a lot to me. My wife and I have
been married 50 years. We have 5 children and now 17 grandkids. Kids
need to be cared for, without question.
I said, are you doing any vetting of these so-called families?
Are you doing background checks?
Are you doing criminal history checks on them?
Oh, well, we don't have the resources to do that.
Are you doing DNA testing?
Well, we don't have DNA. We don't have the resources to do DNA
testing, as well. Although during the Trump administration they were
doing some DNA testing.
So now we come to the point where there are 85,000 unaccounted for
children, UACs, under this administration's watch.
Where are these kids?
They are supposed to be followed up on by the authorities and the
administration where these children are being sent. There are 85,000
that are unaccounted for.
We have seen a skyrocketing of violations of child labor laws. We
know that there are some real shady deals going on in this country and
that human trafficking, sex slavery, et cetera, is rampant.
{time} 2030
Is this part of that deal? I am not up here pointing fingers in an
accusatory way. But if you can't keep up with 85,000 UACs, we have got
some real problems in this administration.
We have also had conversations with Alejandro Mayorkas, who is the
DHS Secretary. I actually led that meeting. Of course, he is not under
oath talking to our caucus.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Molinaro). The time of the gentleman has
expired.
Mr. GREEN of Tennessee. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 1 minute
to the gentleman from Texas.
Mr. BABIN. Mr. Speaker, we are being told that Mr. Mayorkas says that
he has operational control over the border. We are being told that his
policies are actually being successful. We are told that we have a
secure border.
Let me tell you something: We have anything but a secure border when
you have 5 million people who come across our border, all of them
getting a free education.
I am 300 miles away from the border. My district is Houston over to
Louisiana. We have a school district there that is growing faster than
just about any district in the country, and it is because of the influx
of illegal aliens. We are mandated to not only provide them with
healthcare but also with an education.
This is an enormous burden on our people, the local governments, and
the school districts that we have. This bill needs to be passed. I urge
my colleagues very strongly to vote ``yes'' on this.
Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as
I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, Republicans claim that the Biden administration's
policies have led to open borders, but nothing could be further from
the truth.
President Biden has, with little help from Congress, worked to
dissuade migrants from taking the dangerous journey northward. The
Biden administration is surging resources to the border. Even as it
ramps down title 42 removals, it is using title 8 authorities to
promptly remove and bar reentry from certain crossers.
At the same time, the Biden administration is working to make the
asylum process more orderly through the CBP One app.
It has also stood up a parole process for certain Venezuelan,
Nicaraguan, Cuban, and Haitian migrants that in March were credited
with a drop of 72 percent in the 7-day average from a high of 1,231 in
January.
H.R. 2 would take those tools away from DHS.
Mr. Speaker, in the unlikely event that this cruel, extreme, and
unworkable bill makes it to the President's desk, he has promised to
veto it.
To quote the Statement of Administration Policy: ``H.R. 2 does
nothing to address the root causes of migration, reduces humanitarian
protections, and restricts unlawful pathways, which are critical
alternatives to unlawful entry.'' It goes on to say: ``This bill would
make things worse, not better.''
Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record the administration's statement.
Statement of Administration Policy
H.R. 2--SECURE THE BORDER ACT OF 2023--REP. DIAZ-BALART, R-FL, AND 15
COSPONSORS
The Administration strongly supports productive efforts to
reform the Nation's immigration system but opposes H.R. 2,
the Secure the Border Act of 2023, which makes elements of
our immigration system worse. A successful border management
strategy must include robust enforcement at the border of
illegal crossings, deterrence to discourage illegal
immigration, and legal pathways to ensure that those in need
of protection are not turned away to face death or serious
harm.
The Biden-Harris Administration's approach to border
management is grounded in this strategy--expanding legal
pathways while increasing consequences for illegal pathways,
which helps maintain safe, orderly, and humane border
processing. However, the Administration is limited in what it
can achieve by an outdated statutory framework and inadequate
resources, particularly in this time of unprecedented global
movement. H.R. 2 does nothing to address the root causes of
migration, reduces humanitarian protections, and restricts
lawful pathways, which are critical alternatives to unlawful
entry.
The bill would cut off nearly all access to humanitarian
protections in ways that are inconsistent with our Nation's
values and international obligations. In addition, the bill
would make processing less efficient by prohibiting the use
of the CBP One mobile application to process noncitizens and
restricting DHS's parole authority, such that successful
programs, like ``Uniting for Ukraine,'' would be prohibited.
The bill would also reduce authorized funding for essential
programs including the Shelter and Services Program that
provides a critical source of funds for state and local
governments and reduces pressure at the border.
While we welcome Congress' engagement on meaningful steps
to address immigration and the challenges at the border, this
bill would make things worse, not better. Because this bill
does very little to actually increase border security while
doing a great deal to trample on the Nation's core values and
international obligations, it should be rejected.
[[Page H2235]]
If the President were presented with H.R. 2, he would veto
it.
Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my
time.
Mr. GREEN of Tennessee. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I
may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to take an opportunity to correct the
record on a couple of things.
We often hear from our colleagues across the aisle that 90 percent of
the fentanyl is seized at the ports of entry. Well, if you make the
statement that 90 percent of the fentanyl that is seized is seized at
the ports of entry, that is correct. But oftentimes, what we hear from
the left, is that 90 percent of fentanyl coming into the country is
seized. We know for a fact that that math is absolutely wrong.
If you put the amount seized at the ports of entry as the numerator
and the total amount seized as the denominator, yes, that is 90 percent
of what is seized. On the denominator would be 90 percent plus 10
percent, right? But what is missing in that denominator is all of the
fentanyl that gets into our country that we have no idea is seized, so
you can't technically say we are seizing 90 percent of the fentanyl
that is coming into the country. That is factually incorrect. It makes
no mathematical sense.
In fact, the Border Patrol itself is saying that we are actually
catching about 5 to 10 percent of the fentanyl. So if it is 90 percent
of what is seized at the ports of entry, which I agree that statement
is correct, it is 90 percent of 5 to 10 percent of the total. That is
an important point of distinction.
I would also like to talk a little bit about this CBP One app that my
colleague from Mississippi mentioned and all of the other efforts that
have been elaborated on by this administration, their efforts to
maintain control of our border.
When they came into office, the budget didn't increase suddenly. The
number of border patrol agents didn't decrease suddenly. There was no
new legislation that was written.
What happened was 89 effective policies of two administrations were
completely undone by executive orders, and it resulted in an immediate
incentive to come to the United States. They did away with all of the
disincentives, the pull factors, of people coming into our country.
What happened is, people came, they tested the system, and they were
immediately released into the country. Deportations were ordered to be
halted. Over a million people with deportation orders that a legal
process had determined they were supposed to be returned, we are just
not going to deport. Phone calls went home, and people poured across
our southern border.
This incentive then was seized on by the drug cartels. They saw a
huge opportunity, and so they flooded the crossing sites with people,
interestingly enough, paying coyotes to bring them there.
That is sort of at the strategic level. They neutralized the Border
Patrol at the border crossing sites, and then the fentanyl and other
things come around between the ports of entry. That is the fentanyl we
are seizing. By the way, that is the fentanyl that has resulted in the
street price of fentanyl in Tennessee going from $95 in January of 2021
to $28 just recently, according to the sheriffs of Tennessee. That
supply-demand means more fentanyl is pouring into this country.
If you talk about 90 percent of it being seized; that is a false
statement. If you talk about the policies that supposedly are
attempting to gain or are getting border control, that is incorrect.
The incentives have allowed and empowered the drug cartels to take
advantage, neutralizing the Border Patrol at the crossing sites.
Back to the tactical level, on one of my visits in Arizona, we
actually saw a scout from the cartels. And the Border Patrol agents and
the law enforcement in that area informed us that those scouts have
military-grade encrypted radios. They have military-grade optics that
they are using and from their vantage point are observing Border
Patrol. They then notify someone else with this encrypted radio. They
send 20 to 30 people to basically overwhelm that Border Patrol agent on
the border. While that individual is tied up, they send the fentanyl.
That is when the carpet-shoe-wearing, backpack fentanyl carriers result
in drop sites just inside the border where I saw hundreds of empty
backpacks and carpet shoes, where the drugs are then placed into the
hands of the courier in the back of a truck and transported to cities
all across America, resulting in that supply.
Make no mistake about it: The actions of this administration to
remove those policies have resulted in this crisis. One of the other
policies that they so effectively have taken care of--title 42, that
will end tomorrow and will result in a catastrophe of epic
proportions--is already breaking records, and we see them massing
throughout Central America to come into the United States.
You can have good intentions of wanting to help every person on the
planet. That is great. But by making that something that taxpayers have
to do, you are basically determining what someone else should be doing
with their charity.
Maybe somebody in Tennessee, our taxpayers, wants to do something for
Gold Star families. Maybe they want to give to a different charity.
Maybe they want to give to one of the NGOs that want to do something.
But they should be the ones getting to decide, not the Federal
Government telling them how their charity should be given. That is not
freedom.
I will tell you, the policies that have been canceled that have
resulted in this crisis, that have resulted in the cartels taking over
five of our sectors of our southwest border, all on Joe Biden and
Alejandro Mayorkas. Title 42 being canceled and what is about to
happen, states of emergency in cities all across the southern border,
coming across and making every State a border State, is on Joe Biden
and Alejandro Mayorkas. I think it is really important we correct the
record on some of this stuff.
I will make one other point, and I want to warn my colleagues across
the aisle. President Biden promised to veto the D.C. crime bill.
Remember that? He said: We are going to veto that bill. The Senate
said: We are not going to vote for that. You know what our Democrat
colleagues did here in the House? They all voted ``no.''
Then the furor happened in America, and the President realized, boy,
that would be a mistake. The Senate said: Oh, my gosh, we are not going
to do that either. So the Senate voted for the D.C. crime bill.
Now, the Democrat colleagues here in the House are going to have to
go back and explain why they voted ``no'' when their party on the other
side of the aisle voted ``yes,'' and their President changed his mind
and signed that bill into law.
Now, you watch the next couple of days as the border gets worse and
worse and Americans become more and more and more aware. We are going
to pass this bill. You can vote ``no'' on it, but as those Senators get
more and more aware of this crisis and the President has to look at
what is happening to El Paso and Brownsville, he just might change his
mind again. Guess who is going to be left holding the bag?
You don't want to vote ``no'' on this bill. This bill will secure our
southern border. This isn't an immigration bill. We never set out to
handle immigration with this. That is coming. This bill secures the
border so that we can deal with the immigration issues.
What we can't do is create even more incentive with an open border.
That just does what Mr. Mayorkas and Mr. Biden have done, create more
incentive that brings more people in and overwhelms our social
services, overwhelms our schools and hospitals.
As this thing unfolds over the next few days, don't be surprised if
the President changes his mind again and you are left holding the bag.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance
of my time for closing.
Mr. Speaker, it is remarkable that Republicans are getting behind the
child deportation act, a bill that would blow a $6.1 billion hole in
our Federal budget at the same time that they are feigning concern
about the Federal deficit.
Today, the other side has said a lot about how the Biden
administration is
[[Page H2236]]
handling the ending of title 42, but remarkably, not one of them
acknowledged that they voted to lift it in February.
Enactment of H.R. 2 would do nothing to keep fentanyl out of our
communities or protect unaccompanied children.
{time} 2045
Just for the record, in our section of the bill, fentanyl is not even
mentioned. I would hope at some point the other two discussions
tomorrow might talk a little more directly about fentanyl if it is in
there. It is not in our section at this point.
For the record, the information that we have about 90 percent of the
fentanyl coming into the country comes from the Chief of the Border
Patrol. It is his information. We can only take him at his word.
Those five ports of entry that the chair talked about, that was not
what he said. He said it was in Mexico, not in the U.S., in terms of
being controlled by the cartels. I think we all will admit the cartels
do not control the border within the boundaries of the United States.
It is a play on words, but at least we can be accurate with that.
In terms of how we determine who comes, who is captured, and how the
fentanyl is collected, I suggest that you talk to the FBI, Homeland
Security Investigations, or DEA. They are the persons who interview the
people who are caught at our ports of entry.
More importantly, most of the people who we catch at our ports of
entry are American citizens. They are not, for the most part,
immigrants or aliens, or whatever you want to call them, trying to come
into this country illegally. They are American citizens.
In terms of guns, the cartels are a violent operation. There is no
question about it. We need to do everything that we can to stop them.
We can't keep American guns from going to Mexico unless we come up with
an enhanced policy to do that.
We have to acknowledge that the majority of the guns that the cartels
are using are coming from the United States. As the record will
reflect, there is only one gun store in the entire country of Mexico.
It takes months for an individual to even get cleared to buy a gun. We
just want the record to reflect the truth.
Enactment of H.R. 2, as I said, would do nothing to keep fentanyl out
of our communities or protect unaccompanied children. What it will do
is penalize communities and religious organizations that care for
vulnerable people.
Section 115(b) is so broad that a nonprofit hospital that admits an
undocumented migrant would be deemed as facilitating unlawful
activities. Cartels and smugglers are champing at the bit to see this
bill enacted into law.
H.R. 2 would create conditions where desperate people will be left
with few options but to try to enter the U.S. illegally between ports
of entry. It would be a boon for smugglers' illicit business.
We should be coming together to enact sensible border and immigration
policies that support our communities and economy. We can do better
than the child deportation act.
Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``no'' vote on this extreme MAGA bill, and I
yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. GREEN of Tennessee. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my
time.
Mr. Speaker, the American people cannot wait any longer for secure
borders and safe communities. Securing the border should not be a
partisan issue. It is an American issue. It is the Federal Government's
responsibility to do so. When they fail, Congress, a coequal branch of
government, should step in and hold them accountable. That is what we
are doing here today.
The Biden administration produced the catastrophic humanitarian
tragedy we are seeing today, dismantling all semblance of law and order
and sending a clear message to the cartels that our border is open.
We have all seen what has been happening in the past few days as
title 42 comes to an end. It is a fact that the border is in shambles.
Frontline law enforcement personnel are overwhelmed and overworked as
they are stretched physically and mentally amid this crisis. State and
local resources are quickly depleting as they attempt to do the job
that this administration has not done since its first day in charge:
secure the borders and enforce the law.
The current situation at the border is unsustainable. Yet, over the
past 2-plus years, my colleagues across the aisle have refused to hold
the Biden administration accountable for its ineffective policies, have
watched the border fall into the hands of violent cartels, and have
completely ignored the disaster that has only gotten worse by the day.
That must end today. The American people are fed up with inaction.
The Biden-Mayorkas border crisis is a national security threat that
must be addressed immediately. I encourage my colleagues to join House
Republicans in passing this very important legislation.
Mr. Speaker, I will close by addressing the patriots serving on the
front lines of this crisis with no support or appreciation from this
administration. Many of us have visited the border on several
occasions, across multiple sectors, and have seen firsthand the work
our Customs and Border Protection officers and agents do every single
day to risk their lives for this great country.
To the officers and agents on the ground dealing with this crisis, on
behalf of the American people, we appreciate you. We support you, and
we have your back.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 2, and I yield back
the balance of my time.
____________________