[Congressional Record Volume 170, Number 84 (Wednesday, May 15, 2024)]
[House]
[Pages H3230-H3236]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




         DETAIN AND DEPORT ILLEGAL ALIENS WHO ASSAULT COPS ACT


                             General Leave

  Mr. VAN DREW. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members 
have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and 
to include extraneous material on H.R. 7343.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from New Jersey?
  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 1227 and rule 
XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the Whole House 
on the state of the Union for the consideration of the bill, H.R. 7343.
  The Chair appoints the gentleman from Idaho (Mr. Fulcher) to preside 
over the Committee of the Whole.

                              {time}  1421


                     In the Committee of the Whole

  Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the 
Whole House on the state of the Union for the consideration of the bill 
(H.R. 7343) to amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to provide for 
the detention of certain aliens who commit assault against law 
enforcement officers, with Mr. Fulcher in the chair.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The CHAIR. Pursuant to the rule, the bill is considered read the 
first time.
  General debate shall be confined to the bill and shall not exceed 1 
hour equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority 
member of the Committee on the Judiciary or their respective designees.
  The gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Van Drew) and the gentlewoman from 
Washington (Ms. Jayapal) each will control 30 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Van Drew).
  Mr. VAN DREW. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chair, my bill, the Detain and Deport Illegal Aliens Who Assault 
Cops Act, sends a simple but clear message: If an illegal alien 
assaults our law enforcement officers, they will be detained and they 
will be deported. This is because these actions must have consequences.
  Now, that seems like a pretty commonsense life lesson that most of us 
have learned at a very early age, but it is a lesson, unfortunately, 
that President Biden and Secretary Mayorkas never have learned.
  In less than 3\1/2\ years, President Biden has released nearly 4.9 
million illegal aliens into the United States. That doesn't include the 
got-aways. That doesn't include a whole lot, and in most cases, we 
don't even know who these people are. We don't even know where they are 
going. We don't even know their intentions once they are here, Mr. 
Chair.
  The Biden administration's policies are reckless, and these policies 
are dangerous. These policies have very real-life consequences, 
particularly for American law enforcement.
  Here are just a couple of examples: In March 2023, an illegal alien 
violently assaulted a U.S. Border Patrol agent as the agent attempted 
to take the alien into custody, injuring the agent's face and his arms.
  In November 2022, the FBI arrested two illegal aliens for pushing, 
dragging, and punching a U.S. Border Patrol agent.
  Now, the chaos at the southwest border is spreading into communities, 
towns, and cities throughout the United States of America, and there is 
no end in sight.
  Take this example just from this past January. It is just one 
example. According to the New York Post: As many as 14 migrants were 
believed to have been involved in a brutal beatdown of two NYPD 
officers in Times Square.
  To make matters worse, because of New York's far-left, extreme soft-
on-crime policies, many of the attackers were freed without bail. 
Everybody heard me right: Freed without bail. Moreover, they were given 
reduced sentences through very weak plea deals.
  Some of the alleged attackers received a taxpayer-funded bus ride 
straight to California. Some of the attackers were arrested again while 
out on bail. The border crisis meets a sanctuary city and a sanctuary 
State. What a bad combination.
  Are we surprised by the results of this completely broken system, Mr. 
Chair?
  I don't think so. These are actions without consequences. This is Joe 
Biden's America. The longer Joe Biden and his administration go without 
taking action and holding these bad actors accountable, the longer our 
American citizens will suffer.
  That is why I introduced this bill. That is why it is so important 
that we pass laws that rein in lawlessness in this country.
  Actions must have consequences. This bill takes an important step in 
ensuring that we have zero tolerance for those in our country who break 
our laws and assault those who are sworn to protect and to serve our 
American communities.

  This bill requires the DHS Secretary to issue a detainer for illegal 
aliens who are charged with, arrested for, convicted of, or have 
admitted to assaulting a law enforcement officer. It also requires DHS 
to quickly take custody of the alien if the alien isn't already 
detained.

[[Page H3231]]

  By requiring mandatory detention for illegal aliens who assault cops, 
the bill not only prevents these dangerous criminals from being loose 
on American streets, but it also speeds up the process to remove them 
from the United States of America entirely.
  The time for standing by and doing nothing must end.
  We cannot stand by as the fabric of our American society devolves 
into violence and lawlessness. Americans are tired of it.
  The bill isn't just a commonsense solution to removing illegal aliens 
from our streets and out of the country, it is a call for action and a 
demand for accountability to those who would break our laws, and it is 
a reminder that those who do will face real consequences.
  Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to support this bill, and I reserve 
the balance of my time.
  Ms. JAYAPAL. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this overly broad and 
unnecessary legislation. Supposedly, this bill would subject any 
undocumented immigrant to mandatory immigration detention if they 
commit an assault on a law enforcement officer.
  To be clear, that is already current law.
  However, this bill goes far beyond that. It would subject even those 
individuals with lawful status, like DACA and temporary protected 
status, to mandatory detention if they are merely arrested or charged 
with assault on a law enforcement officer.
  There are no provisions to protect those who are mistakenly arrested 
and are released without charges. In addition, the definition of 
``assault'' varies widely from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. 
Nevertheless, this bill adopts the definition of ``assault'' used in 
the local jurisdiction to subject somebody to mandatory detention.
  That means that conduct that people would not normally think of as an 
assault, like literally touching an officer, could result in an arrest 
and mandatory detention. Furthermore, people are mistakenly arrested 
for assault on a police officer far more often than we would like to 
admit.
  When this bill was introduced, it was clearly in response to an 
incident earlier this year in which some recently arrived migrants 
allegedly assaulted a group of law enforcement officers in Times 
Square.

                              {time}  1430

  That incident sparked outrage across the country, but our Republican 
colleagues directed much of their ire at one particular individual who 
flipped off TV cameras as he left his arraignment. The image was 
plastered all over FOX News and was promoted by former President Trump 
as a symbol of everything that is wrong with the Biden administration's 
approach to immigration.
  There was only one problem, Mr. Chairman. As it turned out, that 
specific individual, who everyone was so quick to demonize and attack, 
had the charges dropped against him. Despite being arrested and 
initially charged, he was not even present when this crime occurred.
  We also see this in protests, where one person gets unruly and the 
police arrest everyone in the crowd.
  Let's be clear: Violence is never the answer and should never be used 
in a political protest. It was wrong for people to assault the police 
right here in the United States Capitol on January 6, just as it is 
wrong for people to assault the police or anyone else during any 
protest, regardless of their politics.
  That is why U.S. law already makes assault a crime. Admitting to or 
being convicted of a serious assault on a law enforcement officer 
already results in immigration consequences under current law, 
including mandatory detention and deportation.
  This bill doesn't change that, doesn't make anybody safer, and 
doesn't fix any problems in the immigration system. Instead, this 
legislation deems everyone guilty until proven innocent.
  It serves only to further the Republican agenda to fearmonger about 
immigrants and keep immigration in the news during an election year 
while, at the same time, bankrolling the private, for-profit prison 
companies.
  This bill is going nowhere fast, just like the very similar bill that 
House Republicans passed last Police Week.
  The American people aren't stupid. They see what House Republicans 
are doing. They want meaningful reforms to the system, and they know 
that bills like this would do absolutely nothing toward that end.
  House Republicans refuse to negotiate on immigration, and the 
majority fails to do anything that would actually solve some of these 
problems we face, only to turn around and complain when those problems 
get worse.
  This is political theater at its worst, and I urge all of my 
colleagues to join with me to oppose this legislation.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. VAN DREW. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chair, I agree with my colleague on the other side of the aisle 
on one thing: The American people are not stupid.
  The American people know, see, hear, and feel what is going on around 
them. The American people know that their streets aren't as safe. The 
American people who live in certain cities know that their kids are 
being moved out of their schools so that we can house illegals. The 
American people know that they are paying lots of taxes, and they are 
paying taxes in so many ways--to pay for transportation, to pay for 
housing, to pay for legal care, to pay for bank cards, to pay for all 
kinds of services to illegals, including, in some cases, education 
subsidies. The American people are not stupid, and they are tired of 
it.
  Additionally, they are really tired of individuals who come from 
other countries illegally. Let me be clear because I never want this to 
be morphed into anything else. We love legal immigration in America. 
Some of our best citizens are legal immigrants. It is illegal 
immigration that creates this problem.
  What we know is that there are illegals who break the law once when 
they come over. Then, they break the law again by committing an illegal 
act by assaulting someone--in some cases, a police officer.
  We had cases here just recently. This was published on May 14: 
``Migrants charged in attack on NYPD cops in Times Square offered plea 
deals.'' They were offered a plea deal, but they can still stay in the 
country. They broke the law when they came here. Then, they came here 
and broke a law again by assaulting someone. Then, they were let out 
again, and they broke the law again.
  This isn't for an election. This is to try to save our country and 
the American people. They are tired of it, and law enforcement is tired 
of it.
  We ask law enforcement, these men and women, to protect this Nation, 
to protect our people, and then we don't back them up. It is wrong. It 
is un-American.
  I want to address something else because we are the United States of 
America. On top of it all, this is probably the only country in the 
world where you can come here illegally because we have open borders. 
Other countries don't allow this. No country can prevail with it.
  Currently, we allow it, unfortunately. They come here. We allow them 
here. They break the law here, and we still give them due process.
  Yes, they should be detained. I will tell you something else. Do you 
know why they need to be detained? They need to be detained. I hope 
everybody sits down with the inspector general for Homeland Security, 
like I did, for 1\1/2\ hours. He would tell you they check the names, 
addresses, and locations where you are supposed to find those illegals 
when they are allowed in the country. They are vacant lots. They are 
vacant storefronts. They are nonexistent addresses. Once they are in, 
we can't find them anymore, and that is the truth. Additionally, they 
are breaking the law sometimes, and that is the truth.
  When they are here and break the law, they have to be detained so we 
know where they are. Then, they will go through due process and will 
come before a judge. If a mistake has been made and something is wrong, 
it will be dealt with the way that it is dealt with always in the 
United States of America.
  If they have broken the law once, twice, three times, four times, 
they should be detained, and then they 

[[Page H3232]]

should be deported. They don't belong in the United States of America.

  That is not what immigration is about. Immigration is about coming 
here, loving this country, pledging to the flag, loving America.
  If you asked in my world what it would be, if you break the law and 
come here illegally, you should be detained and sent back, period. You 
don't even have to assault anybody.
  At a very minimum, for God's sake, let's get this done. Enough is 
enough.
  The American people are smart, and the American people are tired. 
They are tired of it. They are tired of being unsafe and tired of it 
costing them so much money in tax dollars. They are tired of not being 
able to take care of their kids, not being able to pay their grocery 
bills, and worrying about their Social Security and Medicare because we 
are spending money on all of this other stuff. It is enough. They have 
had it. I have had it. I believe the majority of this Congress has had 
it.
  Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. JAYAPAL. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time to 
close.
  Mr. Chairman, assaulting a law enforcement officer is a serious 
offense that deserves both criminal and immigration consequences. That 
is why serious assaults on law enforcement officers are already 
immigration violations that require detention and deportation.
  The bill before us today would do absolutely nothing to change that. 
This legislation instead would dramatically expand the type of conduct 
that would subject somebody to mandatory detention, to include people 
who may not have even committed a crime at all.
  That is not a good use of our limited law enforcement resources. 
Instead of wasting our time on these bills that do nothing to fix our 
immigration system and stand no chance of becoming law, we should be 
talking about how to create a workable immigration system that allows 
Americans to reunite with their families and allows American businesses 
and universities to attract the best and the brightest, essentially 
creating a workable process so that people wouldn't be forced to go to 
the border as the only way to come to the United States.
  We should be talking about the fact that immigrants are good for the 
country and good for our economy. One in four American doctors were 
born abroad, and roughly 45 percent of Fortune 500 companies were 
founded by immigrants or the children of immigrants. Seventy percent of 
agricultural workers are immigrants.
  Immigrants feed us, heal us, and help ensure that this country 
remains an economic powerhouse. We could be embracing the positive 
impacts of immigrants rather than demonizing them.
  The Congressional Budget Office recently announced that new 
immigrants will add $1 trillion in previously unexpected revenue to our 
country's GDP between 2023 and 2024. Similarly, the Department of 
Health and Human Services found that, over a 15-year period, asylees 
and refugees contributed nearly $124 billion more in revenue than they 
received in services from the government. Documented and undocumented 
immigrants paid tens of billions of dollars in taxes each year.
  The majority insists on scapegoating and fearmongering immigrants. It 
is true that the immigration system has deep problems, but they cannot 
be solved through an enforcement-only approach. We have been trying 
that approach for 30 years, and it has failed.
  The truth is that the immigration system is all connected. People are 
coming to the border because the legal immigration system has not been 
updated in over 30 years, and they cannot find any other pathway to 
come in.
  The majority often talks about legal immigrants. Let me say that the 
wait time for some permanent residents to bring their families into 
this country is over a century-long--a century for legal permanent 
residents to bring their family members into the country.
  Employers are begging us to modernize the employment-based 
immigration system because the limits on high-tech visas were set when 
floppy disks were the height of technology. These companies cannot hire 
the people who they need.
  Additionally, the small number of immigration judges that we have are 
absolutely crushed under a massive backlog of asylum cases so extensive 
that it is now taking people over 8 years to even get a hearing.
  Why doesn't the majority just help us put more money into immigration 
judges so we can resolve that backlog? Why not open legal pathways for 
people who are trying to come here legally?
  I know this, Mr. Chairman, because I came here, and it took me 17 
years to navigate the immigration system and become a U.S. citizen, but 
that was several decades ago. Now, you can't even get through the 
process.
  I hope that one day we can get back to actually governing, to passing 
real bills that can make a difference in the lives of the American 
people. I fear, Mr. Chairman, that today is not that day.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge Members to oppose this bill, and I yield back 
the balance of my time.
  Mr. VAN DREW. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time to 
close.
  Mr. Chairman, I said I agreed with the gentlewoman on one issue. I am 
going to agree with her on a second one, that immigration is a good 
thing, but let's not morph this. Let's be really clear. Legal 
immigration is good. Illegal immigration is not.
  Let's talk about legal immigration for a minute. I always like to 
tell this story because it is a real story. It is a true story. I have 
a whole bunch of them.
  I have, in my district, many legal immigrants who came here, who work 
hard, who are taking care of their families, who love the United States 
of America so much.
  I had this friend of mine who bought a small store and gas station. 
He lived above it, did it beautifully, reconstructed the whole thing. 
His kids did well in school. His wife worked hard along his side, and 
we talked about the issues of the day. I would always stop by there. 
That is a true story.

  One day, I went by, and he was there. By the way, he was somebody who 
believes in American values, and I guess that is the point I am going 
to make. I go by, and I am talking to him. He starts to tear up, for 
real. He is a big guy. He is a tough guy. He has gone through a lot in 
his life. I asked what was wrong.
  He said: This was a big day for me yesterday.
  I asked what happened. I thought maybe he lost a family member. I 
didn't know what happened to him.
  He said: I became a United States citizen, an American citizen. I am 
so proud.
  This is real.
  He said: I am proud to defend this country. I would fight for this 
country. I love this country. I will stand up against any foe of this 
country. This is the greatest country ever on the face of the Earth.
  That is a good thing.
  Illegal aliens who come here and flip off the cameras when they are 
walking out of court because they have been released, illegal aliens 
who commit crime after crime and keep getting released because of 
prosecutors that are ultraleft, illegal aliens who get all kinds of 
benefits but don't want to work hard in America--and that is not all of 
them, but there are some--illegal aliens who don't even love the United 
States of America but come here because they want to reap financial 
benefits, that is not a good thing.
  Don't let anyone ever say that because you oppose illegal aliens, you 
oppose immigration. That is not true.

                              {time}  1445

  It is a sad state of affairs that we are in that this bill is even 
needed, but given the abandoned southwest border and the violence of 
the Biden border crisis that it has unleashed on our communities and 
every community in this great country, the Detain and Deport Illegal 
Aliens Who Assault Cops Act is another necessary piece of legislation.
  It is important. It means something. Actions do have consequences. 
Mr. Chair, what you do has consequences, what I do has consequences. 
The actions that these individuals, these criminals take have 
consequences.
  If you assault a law enforcement officer and you are in this country 
illegally, you will be detained. If it is true, you should be deported. 
Period. No questions asked.

[[Page H3233]]

  I urge my colleagues to support this bill. It is common sense. It is 
the right thing to do. It is the American thing to do.
  Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIR. All time for general debate has expired.
  Pursuant to the rule, the bill shall be considered for amendment 
under the 5-minute rule.
  The amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the 
Committee on the Judiciary, printed in the bill, shall be considered as 
adopted. The bill, as amended, shall be considered as read.
  The text of the bill, as amended, is as follows:

                               H.R. 7343

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Detain and Deport Illegal 
     Aliens Who Assault Cops Act''.

     SEC. 2. DETENTION OF CERTAIN ALIENS WHO COMMIT ASSAULT 
                   AGAINST LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS.

       Section 236(c) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 
     U.S.C. 1226(c)) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1)--
       (A) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A), by striking 
     ``Attorney General'' and inserting ``Secretary of Homeland 
     Security'';
       (B) in subparagraph (C), by striking ``, or'' and inserting 
     a comma;
       (C) in subparagraph (D), by adding ``or'' at the end; and
       (D) by inserting after subparagraph (D) the following:
       ``(E)(i) is inadmissible under section 212(a)(6)(A) or (C) 
     or under section 212(a)(7); and
       ``(ii) is charged with, is arrested for, is convicted of, 
     admits having committed, or admits committing acts which 
     constitute the essential elements of any offense involving 
     assault of a law enforcement officer,'';
       (2) by redesignating paragraph (2) as paragraph (4); and
       (3) by inserting after paragraph (1) the following:
       ``(2) Circumstances.--
       ``(A) In general.--The circumstances referred to in 
     paragraph (1)(E) are that the law enforcement officer was 
     assaulted--
       ``(i) while he or she was engaged in the performance of his 
     or her official duties;
       ``(ii) because of the performance of his or her official 
     duties; or
       ``(iii) because of his or her status as a law enforcement 
     officer.
       ``(B) Definitions.--For purposes of paragraph (1)(E)--
       ``(i) the term `assault' has the meaning given that term in 
     the jurisdiction where the acts occurred; and
       ``(ii) the term `law enforcement officer' is a person 
     authorized by law--

       ``(I) to engage in or supervise the prevention, detention, 
     investigation, or prosecution, or the incarceration of any 
     person for any criminal violation of law;
       ``(II) to apprehend, arrest, or prosecute an individual for 
     any criminal violation of law; or
       ``(III) to be a firefighter or other first responder.

       ``(3) Detainer.--The Secretary of Homeland Security shall 
     issue a detainer for an alien described in paragraph (1)(E) 
     and, if the alien is not otherwise detained by Federal, 
     State, or local officials, shall effectively and 
     expeditiously take custody of the alien.''.

  The CHAIR. No further amendment to the bill, as amended, shall be in 
order except those printed in Part A of House Report 118-511. Each such 
further amendment may be offered only in the order printed in the 
report, by the Member designated in the report, shall be considered as 
read, shall be debatable for the time specified in the report equally 
divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, shall not be 
subject to amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand for division 
of the question.


                Amendment No. 1 Offered by Mr. Molinaro

  The CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 1 printed in 
part A of House Report 118-511.
  Mr. MOLINARO. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Add, at the end of the bill, the following:

     SEC. 3. GAO STUDY.

       Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this 
     Act, the Comptroller General of the United States shall 
     complete a study and submit a report to Congress on the 
     number of aliens present in the United States who are 
     inadmissible under section 212(a)(6)(A) or (C) or under 
     section 212(a)(7) of the Immigration and Nationality Act who 
     were detained, during the 5 year period preceding the date of 
     the report, for committing an assault against a law 
     enforcement officer.

  The CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 1227, the gentleman from New 
York (Mr. Molinaro) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New York.
  Mr. MOLINARO. Mr. Chair, as we pause this week to recognize the men 
and women in law enforcement who sacrifice and serve our communities 
across America, it is important that we take additional steps to 
provide for their safety, for the protection of their colleagues, and 
to enhance public safety in communities across our country.
  I listened intently to the debate that ensued regarding the base 
bill. I, for one, am interested in governing. Governing is terrifically 
important. I might remind my colleagues across the aisle that the 
Congress legislates. We adopt laws that then the executive, as part of 
governing, must actually enforce. What we have seen systemically over 
the last 4 years is this administration and this President have 
surrendered the southern border to drug cartels.
  This administration and this President have made it easier for 
individuals, nearly 12 million after 4 years, to enter into our country 
unchecked, unvetted, and, in many cases, allowed to avoid the law.
  Now, add to that, if we are to govern in this country, we not only 
need the President, but we need States like New York and Governors like 
Kathy Hochul to actually enforce the law, and yet this administration 
and the administration in New York are making it consistently harder 
for law enforcement to do their job.
  New York State alone is now seeing over 200,000 undocumented 
individuals, and that is in New York City alone. Why? Because New York 
State and New York City declared themselves sanctuary cities.
  If we are to govern in this country and actually enforce the law, you 
would need States like New York and cities like New York to actually 
enforce the law, but in New York, they don't allow for the deportation 
of undocumented individuals even after they assault police officers. We 
saw this in New York City only weeks ago. Why? Because it is illegal in 
New York for law enforcement to interact with Federal law enforcement, 
ICE.
  Consistently, the State of New York has been allowed to make it 
easier and easier for individuals not only to enter into our country 
illegally, but to commit crimes. New York has cashless bail.
  This is a consistent effort to put people back on the streets without 
any intervention, without any enforcement of law, and because of it, we 
consistently see an increase in assaults against law enforcement and 
American citizens.
  Eighty percent of those who are transported from the border to other 
cities and States across the country aren't being transported by other 
States, they are being transported by the President and the Federal 
Government.
  Again, if we are to govern, the President needs to follow the law. My 
amendment requires a report to Congress to speak on the number of 
migrants who were detained for assaulting a police officer over the 
past 5 years. We can't actually enforce the rules if we don't have the 
data.
  This amendment wouldn't be necessary at all if the Biden 
administration took actions to secure the border and States like New 
York didn't flaunt the law and create their own to avoid the law and 
make communities like mine less safe.
  Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to adopt this amendment, and I 
reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. JAYAPAL. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition to the 
amendment, even though I am not opposed to it.
  The CHAIR. Without objection, the gentlewoman from Washington is 
recognized for 5 minutes.
  There was no objection.
  Ms. JAYAPAL. Mr. Chair, this amendment requires the Government 
Accountability Office to conduct a study and report to Congress on the 
number of undocumented immigrants detained for committing an assault 
against a law enforcement officer over the past 5 years.
  It is important for us to take a step back and remind ourselves what 
the underlying legislation is about. This bill would subject even those 
individuals with a lawful status like DACA or temporary protected 
status to mandatory detention if they are merely arrested or charged 
with an assault on a law enforcement officer. There are no

[[Page H3234]]

provisions to protect those who are mistakenly arrested and are 
released without charges. This is an unnecessary expansion of the law, 
which already subjects people to mandatory detention and deportation if 
they admit to or are convicted of such assault.
  In fact, I imagine that this report would demonstrate that the 
underlying legislation is wholly unnecessary because it would show that 
under current law people who commit assaults on law enforcement are 
already subject to detention. Therefore, I see no reason to oppose this 
amendment.
  Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. MOLINARO. Mr. Chair, I appreciate the support from my colleague 
across the aisle. I might remind her some moments ago she encouraged 
that we ought to be governing.
  The problem is that Congress has adopted legislation that should be 
enforced at the border. Congress has established rules, as have States, 
to ensure that law enforcement is protected, yet States are permitted 
to avoid that law. Presidents like this one are permitted, apparently, 
to simply ignore the law.
  The base legislation is necessary because we continue to see an 
escalation in violence against law enforcement officials, while at the 
same time, there is an abandonment of security at our border and the 
allowance of States like New York to simply avoid any responsibility 
for bringing criminals to justice.
  The base bill is necessary. The amendment is necessary. I appreciate 
the support for the amendment.
  Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. JAYAPAL. Mr. Chair, this legislation has absolutely nothing to do 
with the border. It doesn't do anything to secure our border. It 
doesn't do anything to fix the broken immigration system. I don't 
oppose this amendment because I actually think it is going to make my 
point at the end of the day with the report. I don't oppose this 
amendment.
  Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman 
from New York (Mr. Molinaro).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                 Amendment No. 2 Offered by Mr. Norman

  The CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 2 printed in 
part A of House Report 118-511.
  Mr. NORMAN. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:
       Page 5, line 8, strike ``or'' at the end.
       Page 5, line 10, strike the period at the end and insert 
     ``; or''.
       Page 5, insert after line 10 the following:

       ``(IV) to be a campus police officer or a school resource 
     officer.''.

  The CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 1227, the gentleman from 
South Carolina (Mr. Norman) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from South Carolina.
  Mr. NORMAN. Mr. Chair, I applaud Congressman Van Drew and his 
leadership on this issue and am proud to support his legislation to 
detain illegal immigrants who assault law enforcement.
  My amendment is really straightforward and I believe in line with the 
goals of the underlying bill.
  My amendment simply ensures that campus police officers and school 
resource officers are considered law enforcement officers for the 
purpose of the bill's provisions.
  In light of the increase in violent protests on college campuses, it 
is especially important that we show these brave campus police officers 
that we have their back.
  Under President Biden's watch, nearly 4.7 million illegals have been 
released, and more than 1.8 million known illegal alien got-aways have 
escaped into the United States.
  In South Carolina alone, we have over 175,000 illegal aliens in my 
home State. These include dangerous individuals who violate our laws 
and then assault the law enforcement officers who put their lives on 
the line to protect our communities.
  It is imperative that we fight back against the Biden 
administration's radical open-borders policy by mandating immigration 
detention for illegal aliens who assault law enforcement officers.
  I urge my colleagues to support my amendment to explicitly ensure 
that our hardworking campus police officers and resource officers are 
afforded the same protections as other law enforcement officers under 
this legislation.
  Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. JAYAPAL. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition to the 
amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Moylan). The gentlewoman from Washington is 
recognized for 5 minutes.
  Ms. JAYAPAL. Mr. Chair, this amendment would expand the scope of this 
already bad bill to include campus police and school resource officers 
under the term ``law enforcement officers.''
  Unfortunately, this amendment makes a bad bill even worse while 
highlighting one of the many flaws in the bill.
  First, the fact that Mr. Norman felt the need to file this amendment 
to begin with just highlights the lack of clarity around this bill. As 
we have discussed, this bill will subject any inadmissible immigrant to 
mandatory immigration detention for merely being arrested or charged 
with assault on a law enforcement officer or first responder, but the 
bill lacks any definition for what is considered a first responder. Mr. 
Norman was clearly concerned with this as well and felt the need to 
make sure that campus police and school resource officers were 
included.
  Unfortunately, Mr. Norman's amendment does not bring any additional 
clarity to the definition of first responder, and it even adds another 
undefined term, ``school resource officer.''
  Now, Mr. Norman could easily have remedied this by choosing the 
definition that exists in title 34 of the U.S. Code, but for some 
reason he did not. States all over the country use different 
definitions for school resource officers. They have different duties 
and functions depending on the State, so this amendment raises far more 
questions than it begins to answer.
  On top of the poor drafting, this amendment expands an already bad 
bill and makes the bill worse. As I discussed during general debate, it 
is quite common during protests for law enforcement to arrest an entire 
group of people after one person in the crowd gets unruly.
  After the largely peaceful protests that we have seen on college 
campuses over the last month, protests made up largely of young people 
and teenagers, it would be a mistake to extend this definition to 
include campus police.
  Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment, and I 
reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. NORMAN. Mr. Chair, I think we have all seen the college campuses. 
The protests that you are talking about, many include breaking windows, 
knocking down doors. That is not protest. That is destruction of 
property. This has no place on the college campuses. To have the 
presidents and the tenured professors be quiet on this and to have 
students scared to go to class and to cancel exams, that is not what 
they paid money for. That is not what the taxpayers deserve.
  This is very simple. If you are a resource officer, your job is to 
protect the students and the facilities. If you are in law enforcement 
on the campuses hired by the individual school, you are there to 
protect the campus and protect the students.
  I am sick and tired of these liberals who keep saying peaceful 
protest. It is like the 50 cities that were burned a couple of years 
ago. That was not a peaceful protest. That is destruction of property 
and that has consequences.
  All we are saying is: Give these officers the protection that law 
enforcement has. It shouldn't even have to be said for me to have to 
bring this amendment. It is a shame that we have reached this point in 
this country that we are having to define what a resource officer is.

                              {time}  1500

  I would ask all those who may be questioning this, you go out and 
volunteer to be a resource officer or sign up to be a resource officer. 
You go out and sign up to protect the campus, and let's see how the 
tables will turn.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

[[Page H3235]]

  

  Ms. JAYAPAL. Mr. Chairman, none of us are condoning violence on 
campuses. All I said is that the vast majority of protesters on 
campuses have been peaceful. What happens when one person does 
something and the entire group is arrested is relevant for this 
amendment. I don't think anybody believes that that should be the case.
  I am not really sure why the gentleman felt the need to clarify 
exactly what the definition was in this underlying legislation except 
that it wasn't clear, which is the point that I have been making all 
along. The problem is that the amendment actually makes other terms 
unclear, as well.
  Mr. Chairman, as I said, I oppose this amendment, and I yield back 
the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Norman).
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Chair understands that amendment No. 3 will not 
be offered.


                 Amendment No. 4 Offered by Mr. LaLota

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 4 
printed in part A of House Report 118-511.
  Mr. LaLOTA. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:
       Page 5, line 15, insert after ``alien.'' the following:
       ``(4) Annual report of the secretary of homeland 
     security.--The Secretary of Homeland Security shall on an 
     annual basis report to the Committee on the Judiciary of the 
     Senate and the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of 
     Representatives the number of aliens described in paragraph 
     (1)(E) who were detained in the custody of the Department of 
     Homeland Security in the preceding year pursuant to such 
     section.''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 1227, the gentleman 
from New York (Mr. LaLota) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New York.
  Mr. LaLOTA. Mr. Chairman, President Biden's open border policies, 
notably the mass parole of unvetted migrants, have essentially turned 
every State into a border State and have made every community less 
safe.
  In good faith, the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Van Drew), my good 
friend, has proposed an effective bill that mandates the swift 
identification, detention, and deportation of illegal immigrants who 
commit violent acts against law enforcement. This legislation serves as 
a necessary corrective to the current administration's perilously lax 
border security.
  Mr. Chairman, I am proposing an amendment to Congressman Van Drew's 
bill that would further strengthen our national security framework. 
This amendment will compel the Secretary of Homeland Security to 
systematically collect and report to Congress data on illegal migrants 
detained for charges or convictions of assaulting law enforcement 
officers.
  This measure will prevent the avoidance of accountability by ensuring 
that Secretary Mayorkas and other officials can no longer disregard 
this critical data. Furthermore, it eliminates the need to depend 
solely on media reports to understand the full scope of violent crime 
linked to current border policies.
  Consider, Mr. Chairman, a recent incident in Times Square, widely 
seen on social media, where illegal migrants violently attacked NYPD 
officers. Despite their arrest, these individuals were quickly 
released, and one was soon re-arrested for another crime. Yet, they 
were not deported. Instead, they received plea deals from Manhattan 
District Attorney Alvin Bragg.
  This pattern, where the safety of our law enforcement officers is 
sidelined, is becoming distressingly common. In this fiscal year alone, 
Mr. Chairman, Customs and Border Protection apprehended over 18,000 
illegal migrants with criminal backgrounds, including 248 known gang 
members, 35 of whom were affiliated with MS-13.
  Mr. Chair, supporting this amendment is the least we can do to 
bolster the safety of those who risk their lives for us every day. It 
is about ensuring that our approach to public safety is proactive and 
grounded in reality, not just wishful thinking.
  As we mark National Police Week, I call on my colleagues to stand 
with our law enforcement officers by backing this amendment and the 
crucial bill introduced by Mr. Van Drew. Let us commit to a policy that 
upholds the rule of law and ensures the safety of every American 
community. We should not put our heads in the sand and think that ``see 
no evil, hear no evil'' is an effective policy to keep our heroes safe.
  During National Police Week especially, I urge all of my colleagues 
to support law enforcement by supporting my amendment to Congressman 
Van Drew's vital underlying bill.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. JAYAPAL. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition, although I 
am not opposed to it.
  The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the gentlewoman from Washington 
is recognized for 5 minutes.
  There was no objection.
  Ms. JAYAPAL. Mr. Chairman, this amendment requires that the 
Department of Homeland Security provide an annual report to the 
Judiciary Committee of the House and the Senate containing the number 
of immigrants the Department detained as a result of this bill in that 
year.
  Under this bill, that report would include people being detained even 
if a person is merely arrested and never charged or after the charges 
against them were dropped. It is important to remember that this bill 
does not include any waivers or provisions to exempt people who were 
mistakenly arrested or found not guilty.
  I really hope that this report, if requested, will contain a 
breakdown of the number of people detained by category so that we could 
see how many innocent people were subject to mandatory detention under 
this bill. Right now, the amendment doesn't get into that level of 
detail, but I hope my colleagues across the aisle will work with me to 
make sure that we get all of the data that is provided, including that 
breakdown.
  Nevertheless, while this amendment does nothing to improve the 
underlying legislation, it doesn't do anything to make it worse, and so 
I therefore see no reason to oppose it.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. LaLOTA. Mr. Chairman, I would welcome another amendment that 
would be more specific to Congress' endeavor to ensure that we have the 
clarity of the size and scope of this issue. My amendment is something 
along that path, and if the gentlewoman wants more, the gentlewoman 
understands that she can submit her own amendment on that issue.
  Nevertheless, on this amendment, Mr. Chairman, I urge all of my 
colleagues to support this commonsense amendment, and I yield back the 
balance of my time.
  Ms. JAYAPAL. Mr. Chairman, I am not opposed to the amendment. I yield 
back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from New York (Mr. LaLota).
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The Acting CHAIR. There being no further amendments, under the rule, 
the committee rises.
  Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr. 
LaLota) having assumed the chair, Mr. Moylan, Acting Chair of the 
Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union, reported that 
that Committee, having had under consideration the bill (H.R. 7343) to 
amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to provide for the detention 
of certain aliens who commit assault against law enforcement officers, 
and, pursuant to House Resolution 1227, he reported the bill back to 
the House with sundry amendments adopted in the Committee of the Whole.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the rule, the previous question is 
ordered.
  Is a separate vote demanded on any amendment reported from the 
Committee of the Whole? If not, the Chair will put them en gros.
  The amendments were agreed to.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the engrossment and third 
reading of the bill.
  The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was 
read the third time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on passage of the bill.

[[Page H3236]]

  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mr. VAN DREW. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further 
proceedings on this question will be postponed.

                          ____________________