Detain and Deport Illegal Aliens Who Assault Cops Act

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

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.

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. 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 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.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

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.

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.

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.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. JAYAPAL. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition to the amendment, even though I am not opposed to it.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

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 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.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

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.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. JAYAPAL. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition to the amendment.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

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.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

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.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. JAYAPAL. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition, although I am not opposed to it.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

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.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. JAYAPAL. Mr. Chairman, I am not opposed to the amendment. I yield back the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source