might bring them grief. but there is also a certain point beyond which it is like well, they are 14 now. like when are you going to introduce them to the idea that not everything is perfect outside of your all-white suburb? and so, all of those i think swirled together to create the perfect dumpster fire of mass censorship of books by marginalized people. >> science fiction author, cory -- live sunday noon eastern. discussing his latest book, walk away. his other books include down and out in the magic kingdom, little brother +14 other novels. interact with him by phone, twitter or facebook. our special series in-depth addition with author cory doctorow on c-span2. up next the senate judiciary committee hearing on the trump administration zero-tolerance policy along the us-mexico border. the policy has resulted in

separation of some migrant families seeking asylum in the united states. officials from the immigration and customs enforcement agency help in human services and customs and border patrol talked about efforts to reunify families. [inaudible conversations] >> i want to thank our government witnesses for being here today. and everybody is welcome and

i'm glad that we have a lot of interest in the issue and there has been for several weeks or at least three months, i guess. originally, this hearing was solely going to be focused on our annual oversight in the u.s. immigration and customs enforcement. however, it quickly became evident that more oversight of the administration entire family separation and reunification effort was needed. so i expanded the hearing to provide oversight of that specific issue as well as just ai.c.e. in april of this year, the attorney general, jeff sessions, nasa zero-tolerance policy at the ysouthwest border. this policy directed federal prosecutors to enforce our ce long-standing immigration laws. and prosecute all individuals who cross the border against our laws. after all, when the laws of the

books are in force to protect not only american citizens but those seeking shelter and protection here as well. remember the attorney general implemented this policy after the department of homeland security reported a 203 percent increase in people crossing the border against our laws. and that 203 percent was between march 2017 and march 2018. and a 37 percent increase from february this year through march of this year. the largest month-to-month increase since 2011. the attorney generals policy was well-intentioned and simple. enforce donations border security laws so that people would stop migrating illegally.

we must remember that the border security also affects our national security. well-intentioned policies, these were -- there were unintended consequences as a result of the administrations zero-tolerance policy. more than 2500 undocumented immigrant children were separated from their parents. as of last thursday, 1442 of those children have been reunited directly with their parents and additional 378 have been released to other individuals under appropriate circumstances. however, almost one third of the children, approximately 711 are still in government custody. and are unable to be reunited with their parents.

of the 711, sam were ineligible for reunification with their families for legitimate reasons. according to the administration, 120 were ineligible because their parents waived the right to t reunify. 67 were not released because of what the bureaucracy called red flags. including child abuse and serious felonies that were raised during background checks. of course, some adults were found to have not been related to the children with whom they were traveling. over the last five months. federal authorities saw 314 percent increase in adults and children arriving at the border fraudulently claiming to be a family unit. and of course, this is a dangerous situation.

and any policy we have the perilous s the practice i just described, the policy ought to be resigned immediately. no child should be used as a pawn subjected to sexual assault, extreme heat, or other and also criminal behavior by smugglers or traffickers seeking to make a buck on behalf of the most vulnerable. now, the largest number of the 711, who have not been reunified were ineligible because their parents had already been deported. the administration claims that all of these parents elected to be deported without their children but public reports, these public reports indicate that many of them may have not made an informed choice to leave their children behind.

some of the reports suggest that these parents were not presented information in a language that they could even understand. so we ought to be disturbed and i am disturbed by these allegations. and i hope our witnesses are prepared to give us thorough answers. although the administration has mishandled the family separations, it is also important to remember that this institution, congress also deserves its fair share of blame. for years, congress has failed to take a single simple step, one simple step. that could have prevented the family separations we now decry. that means repealing the renal consent decree. in 1997, as a result of years of litigation, the federal government entered into that

settlement. when the u.s. government first entered into that consent decree, it was a much-needed step towards ensuring the humane and dignified treatment of unaccompanied, undocumented immigrant children. children often thousands of miles from their parents. the provided that undocumented immigrant children without their parents, could only be kept in federal custody for a maximum period of 20 days. he also required the government to treat these children humanely and ensure the type of quality care we would expect for any child. whether that child's documented or otherwise. undocumented or otherwise. we ought to expect them to receive that fair treatment.

no one, democrat or republican, would disagree with that principle, i would hope. however, in 2014, in addition to that a single federal district court in california dramatically expanded the scope of that consent decree by applying it to undocumented immigrant children who arrived with parents, a more -- a move even the previous administration, meaning the obama administration opposed at the time the court case was delivered. under this single interpretation, the federal government faces the choice, enforce the law and separate families by releasing only the children after 20 days, or keep families together by engaging in the past administrations catch and release policy. as senator cruz tells us, and i

wrote an op-ed on sunday, neither of those options are good choices. that is why we believe the best way to ensure this crisis never happens again, is to repeal the agreement but only as it relates to the time limitations governing accompanied, reundocumented immigrant children. some of my colleagues will claim that we would end all protections for minor children. y.and just allow the government to detain families indefinitely. that is not a true interpretation. in fact, nothing could be further from the truth. no one on our side of the aisle wants to end the humane standards of care required, if anything giving news reports recently we are willing to statutorily enhance protections. we also want to see families kept in federal custody -- we

do not want to see families kept in federal custody indefinitely. or even long periods of time. as director mchenry is going to testify, and families are placed on the detained docket, their cases are usually resolved in 40 days. in contrast, families are released into the interior, they are given a notice to appear at a future immigration court hearing with little incentive to attend. that hearing occurs on average, not 40 days but 700 days after the release. assuming they even show up. that is just the first hearing. according to the information provided, to every cell member of this committee during the closed-door briefing, cases can take anywhere from 7 to 10 years to complete. or still, almost 80 percent of the cases are ultimately denied. it just doesn't make sense then

to release families and hope that they will show up in the future court date where they will more than likely be denied the right to remain in this country. but -- and i will say this again, family and children's will be kept in federal custody, they must be kept in facilities where they will be treated humanely and with the basic dignity that all people, atno matter what their immigration status is. unfortunately, recent media reporting, i've seen suggest the federal government is failing miserably in the task that i just described. over the last few months, multiple news reports have surfaced describing how illegal immigrant children and in the case of family units, the mothers, have suffered unimaginable physical, mental and emotional and even sexual

abuse while in federal custody. obviously, that is unacceptable and the american people expect better. we hear from our constituents every weekend we are home. to be clear, this is not a new issue. some of the abuse date back to 2012. several of the most horrific incidents occurred in 2015, 2016. now i do not say that to imply that this is all the obama administrations fault. because it isn't. but clearly, there is a larger systemic issue that needs to be addressed. again, no one, no matter what their immigration status, should have to suffer such abuse. i am a consistent advocate for victims of domestic violence and sexual assault. i'm troubled by these reports.

that is why senator feinstein and i have sent a letter to the inspectors generals of i should say, homeland security and also health and human services. asking them to open an investigation. we've also asked the inspectors general to look into practices, acprocedures and policies that are in place regarding the custody of illegal immigrant families and children and to make recommendations both of, to both of us and the agencies regarding potential improvement in these practices. also, hope that our government witnesses are prepared to answer questions regarding these instances, incidents and describe in detail, steps are being taken to ensure no person suffers more indignant sees

again and none of us on this committee, including this chairman, is going to accept anything less.we have a lot to cover today. i will not turn it over to the ranking member, senator feinstein for her opening remarks. contrary to custom, we are also going to give senator cornyn and senator durbin opportunities for short statements because as their chairman and ranking member of the subcommittee. >> thank you, very much, mr. chairman.we are here today because the trump administration has pursued what i believe is a deeply immoral and haphazard policy. that fundamentally betrays american values. this administration has elected to engage in the systematic separation n of immigrant children from their parents and without any plan to reunite them. even though we are now months

into this crisis, we still do not know the official numbers of children who have been separated from their parents. i hope the administration official is present today finally outlines the official, total number of children separated, where they are, what the facilities are and where they are that they are detained in. what the conditions are in those facilities and the location of their parents. utthe little we have learned, h come out of the case in the southern district of california. overseen by judge dana. according to the joint court filing by the department of justice, and the american civil liberties union from last friday, the numbers are 2551 children age 5 through 17 taken from their parents at some

point. these children were required to be reunited by last friday. july 26. and the government did not meet the deadline. rather, only 1442 of the children were reunited with their parents. 20 children, the government thought they separated from their parents, turned out not to have been unaccompanied from the outset. 431 children remain alone in the united states because the parents have already been deported. shockingly, the government does not even know who or where the parents are for 94 children. this makes clear the government did not track them in the first place. there was no effort to ensure the government knew which children belong to which parents and where they were

located. another 67 children were not reunified with their parents. because of some red flag in their background. however, we don't know whether this flag had anything to do with the safety of their child. and abuse or neglect allegation or rather, some other reason that may be irrelevant to separate and the child from his parents. these are only the children and families that we know about. the new york times reported that the trump administration may be pressuring people by quote - using kids as hostages to get people to give up their asylum claims. they take the children and then tell the parents if they agree to deport on their own, you can see your child at the airport. if not, we will hold you for months.

we do not know when you see your child. so it is not an exaggeration to say that the policies of president trump and attorney general, jeff sessions, may essentially orphan hundreds of immigrant children. in addition, the "washington post" reported over the weekend that customs and border protection was reso unprepared grapple with this crisis, president trump created that called the separated families quote - deleted family units. when the customs and border patrol sent health and hhuman services information about these deleted families, hhs had no way to track the children. in the end, 12,000 case files had to be sorted by hand to

determine which children had been separated and which children arrived in the united states without their parents. even worse, are the stories we heard about the separations. and the bad conditions in which they were held. my staff, visited a facility in california. were children did not have sufficient food or water and were forced to sleep on the cold concrete floor without a cot or blanket. unfortunately, despite the public outcry and the rebuke by the court, the administration has demonstrated it cannot be trusted to put the welfare of children above its own hardline views on immigration. therefore, we, the congress, have a constitutional and moral obligation to intervene. i have been working with

senator cruz, tillis and senator durbin on a narrow bill that prohibits the separation of children from their families, requires an ongoing reporting by the administration -- excuse me, and public reporting about what has occurred. the bill would also provide additional judges, lawyers and resources to ensure that these families are treated humanely and not left ignored and facilities without proper sanitary conditions, food, water, cots and blankets to sleep on. the bill is straightforward and limited to address the current crisis. i am hopeful that we are close to an agreement and that the bill could enjoy broad bipartisan support. mr. chairman, thank you for holding this hearing. hei hope the administration officials are ready today to

give us the official figures on reunified children and how it plans to ensure that no further infringements occur on the constitutional rights of the parent and the child to be together. i look forward to hearing and to the witnesses and working with my colleagues to get legislation enacted quickly. thank you very much. >> thank you. senator cornyn. >> thank you, mr. chairman, for holding this hearing to discuss this important matter. one that directly impacts my state, perhaps the most of any in the country. and of course, all of our concern about separation of families. it is ironic to me that last year alone, there were 41,500 unaccompanied children tcwho ca across the border. we have not heard and outcry from our democratic colleagues about that. even though "the new york times" had reported about 1500

of them who had been placed with sponsors are unaccounted for. under the current regime or pre-existing regime, i should say. i recently traveled to brownsville to get an idea of what the facts were on the ground since i think many of our colleagues are relying on what i would characterize as incorrect media reports about circumstances on the ground. at the same time, i spoke with a number of federal and imlocal officials who were responsible for implementing government policy. including the rio grande valley sector chief, manny padilla who is my personal expert on this topic. border patrol and all of our professionals at the border have been invaluable help me understand exactly what's going on and i look forward to hearing additional testimony today. i toured two of the facilities myself that housed teenagers as

well as younger children. i found that these facilities were well managed with caseworkers, mental health professionals and teachers. 24/7 access to fresh food and water. daily education classes for s,school age children. obviously, a stark contrast with what has stbeen portrayed some of our friends across the aisle in the media. one of the things i learned in my time is there are a few things more complicated than immigration. often rhetoric is high and the facts are mingled. that the fundamental concept of the rule of law and the imperative that the united states government and force its own immigration laws and regulate who can come into the country and under what circumstances. those seem ctto go fall by the wayside. the fact that some disagree with the laws and even have gone so far as called for the

abolition of the principal law enforcement agency at the border and in the interior, i.c.e., it does not alter the fact that these are the laws of the land. that our law enforcement officials are enforcing. and they have been passed by congress and signed by the president. they reflect the will of the american people. i was even while many people have been critical of hethe status quo at the border even as we work together to try to unify these families, the critics offer no plausible and workable alternative solutions at all. i will talk about that in a moment. family separation at the border is not a new issue. nor is the adoption of the so-called zero-tolerance policy. i guess zero-tolerance policy comeans that you are enforcing the law that congress has written and that the president has signed. president bush adopted a similar policy, president obama expanded the program to more

locations along the border. because they realize that the system of catch and release was an incentive for future illegal immigration into the country. families were separated under the obama administration because that's what the law required in certain circumstances. we've seen more than a 300 percent increase in adults appearing at the border with small children. climbing to be the parents when in fact -- claiming to be the parents when they in fact are not. they do that to beat the system and that's why. despite the political differences, we all agree that the same standard of care and housing that apply to unaccompanied minors, should apply to parents and unaccompanied minors when they cross the border illegally. thankfully, we do have a solution. i'm glad to hear what senator feinstein said about the bill

that senator tillis and senator cruz have proposed. hope they continue to work on that. we could pass that legislation today. it would allow parents and fe children to stay in a safe facility while they await their court proceedings. and then move them to the front of the line for them to present their case before an immigration judge if they are entitled to an immigration benefit and that would be awarded at the hearing. vabut as senator grassley has said, the vast majority y of th are released, told to reappear in the future and escape in the great american landscape never to be heard from again. so, unfortunately, we try to bring up this bill in the past previously, it was blocked. which is effectively a vote for catch and release. the cartels keep winning. this is their business model. they figured a way to exploit the vulnerabilities in our immigration laws and their making millions of dollars on the backs of migrants as a result.

that's what the status quo offers. and it ought to be unacceptable to all of us. i look forward to hear from the witnesses today about the progress that's been made and how the administration is screening individuals to make sure we do not put children in additional harm's way. i hope that maybe, just maybe, the effort to come up with a solution are not dead and that we will be able to come up with a compassionate tosolution to t problem which is to keep families together and and force the laws. that it can be passed and signed by the president without further delay. thank you, mr. chairman. >> -- >> thank you for expanding this year to address the trump administration family separation policy. this policy shows sthe extremes the administration will go to to punish families fleeing horrific gang and sexual violence and seeking refuge in the united states. the white house chief of staff,

john kelly, bragged that forcibly separated children from their parents is quote - a tough deterrent. but the president of the american academy of pediatric physician called us what is is. government sanctioned child abuse. incredibly, homeland security secretary kirstjen nielsen claimed and i quote - we do not have a policy of separating families at the border. period. but it was on her watch, and under her leadership, that nearly 2700 children were separated from their parents and within 700 children still have not been reunited with their families. including more than 400 his parents were apparently deported and more than 90 whose parents cannot be located at all. what will become of these children and their parents?

who border agents sadly called quote - deleted family units. in the name of these deleted family units, 711 lost children and common decency, i am today calling on the architect of the humanitarian disaster, department of homeland security secretary, kirstjen nielsen, to step down. the family separation policy is more than a bureaucratic lapse in judgment. it is and was a cool policy inconsistent with the bedrock values of this nation. someone in this administration has to accept responsibility. we can have border security without bullying. we can be safe without treating toddlers of terrorists. and those who say the blame is on congress, let me rerun them,

this is a policy which a judge, thank goodness for his leadership on this, a policy which he characterized as a chaotic circumstance of the governments own making. every time there's a conversation with the other ngside of the aisle, the first may want to eliminate is the standard which for 19 years has guided the nation through administrations of both political parties for the humanitarian treatment of unaccompanied children. it is the first thing that those on the other side ask us to get rid of. it is the last thing we should get rid of. medical experts tell us that even short-term separation and detention can do permanent damage to a child. two weeks ago, congress received a letter from two of the department of homeland security medical consultants. these medical doctors investigated the i.c.e. family detention centers and here's what they concluded. quote they pose a high risk of harm to children and their

families. these whistleblowers have told us what they sought in the i.c.e. facilities. the trump administration claims that they are concerned about what they divisively call, catch and release. comparing catching children to catching fish. but t there are alternatives to detention that are more secure, more humane and use far less taxpayer money. it is not too late for this committee to rise up, stepped into the situation and except our legislative responsibility of oversight. and we can change the situation very dramatically. past the keep families together act which prohibits family separation. pass the court for kids act which provides unaccompanied children with legal representation and deportation proceedings.how embarrassing

is it to our nation to think that there are court orders with infant children, toddlers and preteens standing before judges with no knowledge of what it actually is happening to them, their families and their lives. that is not what america is all about. we need to also pass the humane treatment of migrant children at which i have introduced. requiring i.c.e. to prioritize the detention of those who actually pose a threat to pnational security or public safety. increasing the funding for alternatives to detention. atwe do not need internment cam again in america's history. two return children and families and deftly because we will not act if congress does not act at all. we need to have the merit-based hiring of new immigration judges and the bill for oelegal representation of minors. i hope today's hearing is the start of a bipartisan effort to confront the administration in this crisis.

it is the least we can do for these endeleted families and lo children. >> senator feinstein, i want to introduce into the record, letters of opposition to family separation. from doctor ellen and doctor mcpherson. also, number two, amnesty international, number three, los angeles unified school district. number four, church world service, number five, the episcopal church and number six, chris polansky and don abbott for question services. without obstruction those we put in the record. i will now introduce our witnesses and then after introduce them i will ask for you to stand because this is an oversight hearing and we will swear each of the witnesses,

and 2016 -- was elected as deputy chief of the u.s. border patrol. she entered on duty with the u.s. border patrol january 8 1995. 2013 she bee cave chief patrol agent where she led 1200 employees in 2015, she became deputy assistant commissioner, office of professional responsibility. mr. matthew -- was appointed executive associate director for enforcement and removal operations for i.c.e. , february 2017. he began his career as a special agent with a former u.s. immigration and

naturalization service. -- for those who present a danger to national security or risk to public safety as well as those who entered the united states without documentation or otherwise determined or otherwise undermine the laws and border patrol efforts. jonathan white, commander, is his title. appointed deputy director of children's programs in the office of refugees resettlement. january 2017. in that capacity he manages the unaccompanied alien children program which provides care and custody to over 100,000 young people annually who are apprehended by the department of homeland security without an

accompanied parent. commander white advises the director of or i, the assistant secretary of children and families and secretary of hhs regarding unaccompanied children issues. director james mchenry was named director of the executive office for immigration review. january of this year. judge mchenry served as the deputy associate attorney general working on a variety of immigration related matters and overseeing multiple component reporting to the associate attorney general. from 2014 to 2016 he served as alj for office of disability adjudication and social security administration. prior to that he was, he worked for i.c.e. office of principal

legal advisor. lastly, ms. higgins, jennifer higgins is associate director for refugee asylum and international operations director. she served in the federal government for over 15 years focusing her career on balancing the united states long-standing humanitarian tradition with its national security mandate, most recently, she has served as chief of staff for the deputy secretary advising dhs leadership on refugee immigration national security issues while managing daily operations of the office of deputy secretary. would you folks please stand and like so. do you affirm that the testimony you are about to give before the committee will be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help

you god? all have said affirmative. you folks have five minutes in your entire statement will be put in record. for the benefit of the committee since we have a vote at 1215, will try to keep going and rotate chairmanship with either republican n or democrat whoever is present so we can finish but i would ask that we have extended the time for ut questions 5 to 7 minutes. so that we can move along and not have people go beyond the seven minutes. for you folks with five minutes each, would you proceed? >> yes, thank you. chairman grasso, ranking member feinstein and distinguished members of the committee. thank you for the opportunity to appear before today on behalf of u.s. customs and border protection. as america's unified border agency, cbp is responsible for

securing america's orders against all threats to deploying a multilayer risk-based approach to enhance border security while facilitating the lawful flow of people and goods entering the united states. as the committee is aware, the u.s. department of justice instituted the zero-tolerance prosecution initiative in 2018. a reinforcer border patrol is known for many years. consequences are most effective when delivered consistently and without delay. on may 5 2018 border patrol became increase referrals for prosecution of all adults for violations of eight usc 1325 a under this initiative. the law is not ambiguous. any alien enters or attempts to enter the united states anyplace other than a designated port of entry has committed a violation. throughout several decades, the u.s. border patrol has

implement various enforcement operations and prosecution initiatives as a means to address illegal immigration between the ports of entry. while zero-tolerance increased the volume of cases referred for prosecution, we have always had a law enforcement mission a responsibility to enforce the law. i want to dispel the myth of prosecuting illegal border crossings for separating adults from children in custody is unique to zero-tolerance or to this administration. to be clear, we have prosecuted adults who have crossed the border illegally with their children under prior administrations. as with any other law enforcement agency in this country, a parent who is prosecuted for violation of law cannot bring their children with them into criminal custody. on june 20, 2018 immediately following the presidents executive order, cbp suspended

usc 1325a prosecution of adults and family units and maintain family unity. following issuance of the executive orders, cbp reunified over 500 children in our custody with parents. although parents are no longer being referred for prosecution under zero-tolerance, cbp will continue to prioritize the welfare of the children, separation may be required if the adult poses a danger to the child, if they have a serious criminal history or if they have a communicable disease. going forward, the implementation of the zero-tolerance initiative will focus on prosecution of single adult aliens who cross the border illegally. before taking questions or would like to take a moment to clarify how cbp fits into the agency process that we will be discussing today. cbp conducts initial processing of illegal aliens and facilities designed to hold individuals for less than 72 hours. these are not long-term detention facilities like those

operated by our partners at immigration and customs enforcement and the department of health and human services. as such, we work closely with i.c.e. and hhs to transfer individuals to their custody as expeditiously as possible. it is important to note the short term holding facilities we operate meet the standards of the cbp transport escort search policy and the cbp composite legal threquirements the resettlement agreement. our commitment to consistent and fair enforcement of the law is demonstrated on a daily basis by the integrity, unbiased professionalism and compassion that the men and women of cbp exhibit towards aliens we encounter. particularly towards the most vulnerable. we do not leave our humanity behind when we report for duty. as acting chief of the u.s. border patrol, could not be prouder to represent the men and women who dedicate their lives in support of the

mission. i am honored to work alongside them. ultimately, border security is national security. enforcement of immigration law is the foundation of a secure border and a secure nation and i look forward to continuing to work with the committee towards this goal. thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today and i look forward to your questions. >> chairman grassley, ranking member feinstein and distinguished members of the committee. thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today to discuss the critical mission of i.c.e. to protect the homeland and ensure the integrity of our nations immigration system to enforcement of the countries immigration laws and in particular, its role in family reunification efforts. our nations immigration laws are extremely complex. in many cases, outdated and full of loopholes. this also makes it difficult for people to understand all i.c.e. does to protect people of this great country. nowhere is this more evident

than the recent events surrounding the zero-tolerance policy and the reality of illegal immigration crisis. today i would like to discuss the impact of the policy that says has had on operations and the tremendous effort and successes on the part of the dedicated men and women of the bureau perform their duties with professionalism, dignity and compassion. despite the false allegations and misinformation that are propagated daily by those who do not support the enforcement of immigration laws passed by congress. i.c.e. immigration enforcement efforts are led by more than 7700 proud, dedicated law enforcement officers and support personnel. to ensure the safety of the nine states i.c.e. executes immigration laws in such a way that limited resource will have the greatest impact on public safety and border security. during fiscal year 2017, i.c.e. arrested more than 127,000 aliens with criminal convictions or criminal charges. in real terms, it means that we

moved d almost 11,000 more criminals from the communities they were victimized and then in fiscal year 2016. his aliens were responsible for following criminal conditions or pending criminal charges be more than 76,000 dangerous drug offenses. where the 48,000 assault offenses. more than 11,000 weapon offenses. more than 5000 sexual assault offenses. more than 2000 kidnapping offenses and more the 1800 homicide offenses. in fact, in fiscal year 2017, nand again in fiscal year 2018, nearly 9 out of every 10 aliens arrested by the bureau came to our attention after the arrested for a local, state or federal criminal violation. with the vast majority of those convicted criminal aliens. the attorney general announced policy usc 1325a improper entry by alien in which customs and border protections will refer aliens arrested for illegally entering the country to u.s. attorneys offices along the

southwest border for criminal prosecution. in accordance with the standard practice who arrest individuals for these crimes the transfer these two u.s. marshals service pending prosecution. when this occurred these adults became unavailable to provide care and necessity to the children with whom they were traveling. a child with an available parent or guardian fell into unaccompanied child definition provided under federal law. and requires they be charged to hhs in 72 hours. the i.c.e. role in this is limited to transportation from custody to hhs. on june 26, 2018, u.s. district court for the southern district of california had a class action notice insisting parents have been or will be detained in custody was children were separated from them at the border and are detained in hhs custody with some exclusions per the court further ordered

that if a parent is unfit or dangerous the child they must affirmatively knowingly and voluntarily decline reunification. minors under five years old under custody in the custody of dhs have a court order. of the 103 children under five years old, 57 children were reunified with parents of the remaining children were ineligible for reunification under criteria or cannot .be reunified because the parent was in criminal custody or already removed. as of july 2018 joint status report filed with u.s. district court southern district of california, 1442 of the 2551 children ages five and above his parents were identified as members were reunified with parents and i.c.e. custody. none of these families have been removed. the court order to reunite the families under this timeframe

required i.c.e. to prioritize reunions over other pressing operational needs including the removal of individuals determined to have no lawful right to remain in the united states. reunification timeframe also required unprecedented level of coordination between hhs and eye to include temporary assignment of i.c.e. personnel to hhs special operations centers. additionally the three i.c.e. field offices operated 24/7 to effectuate reification of children with parents. it is important to note the current law court rulings effectively -- into communities across united states. this practice is not only led to aliens failing to haappear f court hearings and failing to comply with removal orders but also forcing children into hands of strangers so that they can cross the border. amending these laws and judicial rulings wouldn't enable dhs to have family unity throughout the hearings. additionally, these

individuals are removed, which most are, it would allow for execution of orders as fopposed to simply adding to an already overwhelming docket of more than 540,000. specific legislative changes outlined in my written testimony. while dhs and i.c.e. are continuing to examine the issues with ongoing litigation and recent court decisions, decision from congress is essential. -- while providing i.c.e. with lawful authority and funding to ensure families can be kept together throughout the course of their immigration proceedings.thank you again and i welcome your questions. >> chairman grassley, ranking member feinstein, members of the committee, it is my honor to appear here today on behalf of the u.s. department of health and human services. i am jonathan white. i'm a clinical social worker aand a career officer in the u.s. public health -- i have

served in hhs under three presence. and presently assigned to the office of the assistant secretary for preparedness and response. previously served as deputy director of the office of refugee resettlement.for the unaccompanied alien children's program as a senior career official over the program. i believe there's a need for clarity on the services hhs provides everyday of unaccompanied children in his care. the quality .of care provided b hhs for children is excellent. the agency takes and reports to the contrary seriously and investigates them appropriately. all children in our over 100 facilities receive medical, dental and mental health care. because most of these facilities are monitored at both the state and federal level a high standard of care and the same for american children and licensed residential care settings.

we provide all children including education, recreational activities including outdoor sports, arts and crafts, appropriate entertainment, physical activity. children the facilities receive three meals a day, as well as snacks and at all times, hhs knows the names and location of all children that are in the care. in the last two months, hhs has provided nearly 85 members of the house and senate in more than 50 media outlets with tours of the facility. after touring the facilities, both members and staff have commented on the quality care that we provide. another has been some frustration of late over some members of congress ability to access any facility at any time. our top parties the children in our care and effort to minimize the strain on resources and disruption to the children. we continue the policy that began in the lesson

ministration to require any visitors to coordinate their visits with us in advance. we thank this committee for ncyour assistance in coordinati of the many facility visits in the past few weeks. these children are concerned, the unfortunate reality is this, the children that we serve every day in the program have in many cases, been targeted by gangs, they have been smuggled, and they have been trafficked. smugglers and traffickers often arrange fraudulent claims to allow someone to enter the united states more easily. the e children we serve are at high risk for victimization and human trafficking in their home country. on the journey here to the u.s. and here in the country. in fact we have investigated this led by senator portman they help to uncover how in 2014 and number of children were placed in the hands of human traffickers, force them to work nearly every day for 12

hours a day. these children were threatened with death if they did not work. it is important to us. making sure we never repeat the mistakes of the past. that is why our number one priority is protecting the children. understandably, public attention has recently been focused primarily on separated children. in 2017, we have 40,810 children in our care from dhs. the average length of stay that there in our care is 41 days. as of this morning have 11,316 minors in our care. our sponsors are typically parents or close relatives. in in2017, 49 percent of those children were released to a parent. a sibling and aunt, uncle or grandparent. ... ed to a more distant

relative like a cousin or family friend. since the president's executive order, the secretary of hhs has directed hhs to take all reasonable actions to comply with court orders including we requiring reunification with parents with whom they were separated by the department of homeland security and prioritize child safety and well-being when doing so. on june 22 of this year, hhs secretary directed office of the assistant secretary for preparedness and response to help work orr with dhs and its operating divisions to reunified children with class members. the key steps in the coordinated plan for unifying custody include number one, identifying the parent's location. number two, confirming no cause to doubt parentage. number three, reviewing results of criminal backgrounds and case management records to make sure >> to make sure there are no concerns about the child safety

and number four interviewing the parent to confirm they want to be reunified with the child. if those checks establish ultimately then we transport the parent for beautification. this effort requires stand up a 35 member incident management team that led in washington and contractors to early morning to other responses. hhs has now completed the beautification process for the parents in ice detention for eligible for beautification however we know our work is not over and we continue to make all efforts in cooperation with partners to beautify parent and child whenever possibler and wee not possible to work to identify another relative or permit sponsor who can quickly andnd safely secure the child. we are undertaking the challenge of separated children consistent with the best interest of the child centered and that our mission since 2002 when we inherited responsibly i want

them to care for children and their dedication that these children and many of whom games in severe poverty in their countries and many have suffered trauma to guarantee they get safety. thank you for letting me speak today. >> mr. chairman, ranking member feinstein and other distinct memories of the committee. thank you for the opportunity to speak with you today regarding the current situation related to family reification.mi this is an important sensitive subject and welcome this opportunity to address it from the department's perspective. the mission statementoror is to enforce the law and defend the interests of the night states according to the law to ensure public safety against threats, foreign and domestic, and to provide federal leadership with controlling crime and to seek

just punishment and to ensure fair and impartial demonstration for justice for all americans. through the us attorney's office in connection with the us marshals service in the bureau of prisons department plays a crucial role in enforcing these laws and see punishment for those guilty of unlawful behavior. the department will applies to know less to immigration than it does to other categories of crimes. section 13 of executive order 13767 ducted the attorney general to sell guidelinesppli d allocate resources to ensure the board of prosecution and enforcing the laws passed by congress are high priority over the department . on april 11, 2017 the attorney general issued a memorandum to all federal prosecutors

outlining certain immigration related offenses including improper entry under eight, usc 1325 as high priorities. on april 6, 2018 the attorney general issued another memorandum entitled zero-tolerance for offenses under eight usc 1325 a. this memorandum directed federal prosecutors along the southern border to adopt a zero-tolerance policy te for all offenses refed to prosecution under section 1325 day by the department of homeland security. the three generals memoofof is n force today among other immigration crimes remains a prosecution priority of the department. furthermore, the president stated the prioritization of executive order 13841 which also reiterated that the current policy is to rigorously enforce the immigration laws passed by congress. the department of justice does not dictate what cases are referred to the prosecution by the department of lament security, in order to maintain a

general attention from criminal prosecution for parents. the department has operational or logistical in either the care or processing of aliens for removal regardless of whether they are adults or children. accordingly, it also does not play an operational or logistical role in the relocation process. no proceedings are separate from civil integration proceedings and prosecutions for illegal entry under the offices of the zero-tolerance policy does not necessarily foreclose an alien's ability to make a claim to remain in the united states. consequently depending on the particular circumstances of an alien falling prosecution he or she may make such a claim or alternatively elect to be removed from or voluntarily depart the united states., ma if an adult alien subject next line removal makes claim to remain in the united states the claim is directed to the department of homeland security. as the claim progresses and may eventually be reviewed by

immigration judge in the executive office for review which is the second role played by the department in the current situation. unaccompanied alien children pursuant to law will also have their cases heard by an immigration judge. the issue of family separation has reached the federal courts and department of justice has a third role as a litigator for those agencies that provide care for alien subject to removal.f i may be limited my ability to speak to certain issues because of they arend currently in litigation or because they're probably directed to another agency. nevertheless, the apartment of justice recognizes the seriousness of the situation and properly advising the homeland security and health and human services if they continue to abide by any orders for federal courts on these matters but current immigration system faces numerous logistical challenges added to these challenges is the current situation regarding family separations and relocations. nevertheless, as the formal title of executive order 13841

indicates which is affording congress an opportunity to address family separation the department of justice stands ready to work with congress to answer the challenges interpret existing laws to avoid a reoccurrence of the president's situation. i look forward to entering the committee's questions today. taking. >> thank you. chairman grassley, ranking member feinstein and distinct members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to testify today alongside my colleagues from dhsbe much apartment of justicece and hhs. my name is jennifer higgins i'm the associate director of the refugee asylum and international operations director at us citizenship and immigration services. my test money today will focus on the role of us cis and expedited removal process which is the primary framework in which we encounter families arriving at the southwest border. the immigration act generally requires that expedited removal

of individuals arriving in the united states without proper document tatian and in 2004 dhs expanded expedited removal to individuals apprehended within 100 miles of the westland border and within 40 days of illegal entry. all individuals placed in proceedings are subject to mandatory detention and prompt return to their country of origin. however, as a single adult or family unit indicate to cbp or ice that they have a fear of persecution, torture or it the law requires that these individuals be referred to us cis for an assessment of their protection concern. it's commonly referred to as a credible beer screening. credible fear interviews are conducted by specially trained us cis officers. these officers comprise our dedicated full-time to the adjudication and screening of protection claims. they have diverse educational and employment backgrounds.

from military veterans peace corps volunteers, former i.c.e. pilot phase two former nonprofit location attorney, from prior bond was meant officers to former social workers, despite fotheir diverse background they are all driven by the mission to provide this country's protection to those who are eligible while remaining fully focused on ensuring the integrity of the mission of protecting our country against those who seek to do us harm. all officers conducting credible screenings are extensively trained in early issues, country conditions, interview techniques, credibility determination, fraud detection anded refugee asylum law. during the credible fear interviews these officers question individuals about their identity and their fear of torture and whether there are circumstances that may come in eligible for asylum. us cis tax biometric tax and

coordinates with i.c.e. and other law-enforcement that there is any reason to believe that an individual may have engaged in criminal activity or poses a security threat. under us law and individual establishes can appear when they demonstrate there's a significant possibility that they could establish eligibility for asylum or withholding of removal or releaseis under the convention approach. if the individual establishes the credible fear us cis places the individual into removal proceedings where he or she can seek asylum or other forms of relief before an immigration judge. therefore a positive, credible fear of screening does not confer any immigration status. it simply a screening process employed to identify individuals who may potentially merit protection. the decision on asylum eligibility or other forms of

relief for such cases rests with immigration judge. if us cis determined that an individual does not have a credible fear he or she is subject to removal unless the individual request an immigration judge review the screening determination. our role is limited but it is an important one to screen in those qualify screen out those who don't protect the integrity of the process. us cis has more than 100 officers conducting screening interviews around the country conducting on average 300-four to 50 interviews each day. in response to the executive order leave employed our staff to ten major facilities across the border. since fiscal year 2013 our dedicated workforce has completed over 30085000 credible fear cases underth the extremely short time frames demanded by

the expedited removal process. our officers have devastated and continue to demonstrate that ordinary commitment to the missions and us immigration law working tirelessly alongside i.c.e. to keep the increasing volumes of credible fear request operating high-quality decisions. thank you again for the opportunity to explain the role in the expedited removal process. i be happy to answer your questions back i've already said will have seven minute rounds and i won't i hope members. at the end of seven minutes but you folks can answer the question if the seven minutes has been out. i will start your family residential services referred to as places to keep children and bars and the significant seems to be in contrast to the law and the standards -- what they require. i.c.e. family residential centers, to my understanding,

are actually communities with family residence recreation and medical and dental offices, cafeterias, commentaries and i even a hearing room for judges or lawyers to get full attention to claims of residence and i'm also concerned about recent reports of abuse within your time claimed that migrant women were being sexually abused by guards while in custody and if true that unacceptable and as i said in my opening statement what steps does i.c.e. take to investigate and respond to all allegations of abuse at the centers and what steps does i.c.e. take to protect or prevent such abuse and punish offenders? let me add this question -- what steps are being taken i.c.e. to ensure that no undocumented immigrant families suffer from forms of physical or mental

abuse while in i.c.e. custody? >> thank you for your question. our family residential centers, as with all detention facilities, they undergo a rigorous inspection process and oversight process. any allegations of abuse or wrongdoing that occurs in any detention facility to include the frc's is automatically reported to our joint intake center. that is reporting of allegations that go directly to dhs and inspector general. they have the ability to take any of those allegations and will dol so if they feel theres evidence to warrant such an investigation. those issues that investigate could be invested in them byin professional responsibly which is a 32 conduct investigation. in addition, the normal oversight process that we have include the civil rights crc l

and we have the office of detention oversight within i.c.e. and professional response ability and we are required to be inspected and meet licensing standards and we haveds detentin service monitors the work for i.c.e. that go to these facilities on a daily basis and we have officers in the facilities on a daily basis with regard to the frc's. i think the best way to describe them is to be more like a summer camp. individuals have access to 247 food and water and they have educational opportunities and they have recreational opportunities for structured as well as unstructured and their special cords and exercise classes in soccer fields we put t in there and they have extense medical, dental and mental health opportunities in fact, many individuals% they seen a dentist is only come to our frc.

there are when they leave and frc they lead with seven sets of etclothing and while they are there they have all access to pro bonove legal opportunities d their able to avail themselves of that. many ngos with the work in the facilities on art daily basis to provide them assistance and support with the release backvio the community so i'm comfortable with the level of service and protection has been provided in the frc's and i believe there is video on the website where one can go on and see the conditions of those frc. >> i thank you have given a a thorough answer that like you had to commit to have your agency provided detailed report on what steps are being taken to end any alleged abuse practices and protects undocumented immigrant families and i hope you will say yes to that. >> yes, sir.

>> i think your description would be what is required by federal law and if you have not described things required by federal law or your own internal policies give me an answer on that but i think you have described that, having you? >> much of what i described is under federal law. i.c.e. actually has some of the most rigorous detention standards in the country and includes other federal and state agencies. some are rooted in law andys policy. >> attorneys i hope are allowed to confer with residents and residents are allowed to make phone calls about their immigration cases can. >> yes, that's correct. >> okay. still continuing you mentioned to use the many parents elect to be removed and leave the children behind and this is a difficult concept for me to understand as a parent and grandparent but the reality is

many undocumented migrants leave their children behind on some of my colleagues will say that i.c.e. is coercing these parents into leaving their children behindir and a recent political article states that as many as 75% of the parents deported without the children do not give informed consent for that action and i like to better understand how unification options are explained so are i.c.e. officers coercing parents to be deported and to leave their children behind as political suggested? >> no, there is long-standing i.c.e. policy which dictates how reunification may occur for an individual being detained and going through an immigration process. if the adult is being detained in the adult facility the child

atnnot be kept in the same facility. there are times during the course of the immigrant process in which the adult may be bonded out whether by a judge or medical reason where they will have the ability it's on it out to proceed to sponsor their child out of a just to the normal process and procedures they have. if that individual is held in custody during the process and at the end of the process is order to be removed by a judge that individual will have the opportunity to request their child be removed with them to their home countries that we work closely with officials and attorneys that the individuals may have to help facilitate that. but, a great many of the individuals do not wish to have the child returned home with them. the reason they've come here ini the first place is to get their children to the united states. many of the individuals have spent 5000 or $10000, life-saving, to have them into the united states. they paid smugglers and criminal trade and they subjected there

and themselves to it high risk but once hema got to tell here many times to another parent that is here in the country illegally or other relatives a lot of times they will not take the child back with them and risk having to make the journey again. they've succeeded by getting the child hereei and as we have seen with these individuals arrested many of them during the zero tolerance program many are repeat offenders. they been deported previously in a criminal history here in your state and they were caught and arrested and removed and is easier for them to leave their child here to go back to the home country and try to reenter the country illegally again as an adult as with a child. senator feinstein and iut will step out one minute. senator hatch will be after senator feinstein. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i like to have a conversation with you, commander, my history and this goes back to the year

2000 when i happen to be watching television and i saw a young chinese girl, maybe 12 years old, before an immigration judge in seattle. she was manacled hand and foot and could not understand the judge and the tears were pouring down her face and that was in the days when people were coming in and containers and some died in some survived and she was a survivor. we did a bill called the unaccompanied alien child protection act of 2000 which took children out of i.c.e. and put them in hhs. the bill also provided throughgh some pro bono and legal help which did not make it into the final bill which i'm now told was the homeland security act of 2002. senator hirono has picked up and done that part of the bill probably better than i did it

and happy to be her cosponsor. there is a long and emotional history. i was so struck this morning by the fact that there are 11000, 360 minors in care of hhs today. it's clear that we have a huge problem. my understanding those numbers meare down somewhat, too. how did all of this happened? it appears to me that when border patrol agents were separating the families at the border they did not adequately document the family units sold to your knowledge with the children you have what kind of documentationn do they bring wih them when they are arrested or crossed the border or go through

a port of entry, wherever it is that is helpful to you? >> thank you, senator. tiso, the mechanism for referrig a child into the care of or are by dhs agency typically cbp but it also cases but they have limited access to the it system that is used by the portal and have the ability to refer into that portal and can in the cases of cbp make referral starting with their system. there isn't -- . >> say it like it is, don't worry about it much. >> this is a novel situation. there have always been some minors who have been separated

and typically because of serious criminal charges faced by the parents or other concerns. a let me interrupt it in briefing that senator grassley arranged for some of us in senator durbin was there and senator leahy we were briefed and i thought the number was 1 15%-20% at the highest of the children. >> that is approximately the recent numbers. it's been 15-20%. prior to her recent reunification. it's a smaller portion now. >> thank you. continue. so, the majority of children aren't in that category? >> correct. even the point where we launched relocation effort, 80% of the minors in care are traditional unaccompanied alien children. that is to say, those who entered the united states without a parent or legal guardian and apprehended without a parent or legal guardian separate from those apprehended with a parent or legal guardian.

>> so -- how do you identify them and how do you connect them with the. seems to me the system is unworkable or we were not be where we are today? >> the systems were not set up to have referrals include parent information. in some cases when the referral from cbp was made it was noted that the minor was separated and have had parent information such as a name and alien number. but we've done in this event as we had a data team look at i.c.e., cbp and hhs data and scrub those systems against one another to identify the matching of parent to child. >> stop for a minute. that in a number when it comes with the child, holds as a child have to be to have an alien number? how do they carry it with them?

>> every minor that is offered to us is referred with their own in a number. it's the unique identifier of any person in the immigration law-enforcement. >> what about a baby? >> a baby referred was would also have an alien number. >> where that alien number be?? >> it would not be on the baby but it would be in the electronic referralhi to our ca. >> how do they connect? >> i'm sorry -- >> how does the electronic referral connect with the child let's say eight months old? >> the referrals made to our 247365 intake staff and or art which identifies the best bed nationwide based on their age and need. that information on the location that has beenma conveyed back to cbp and typically in the case of most border apprehensions been i.c.e. ero the bring the child to location that we designated

to receive the child. >> is go to the 11316 minors in care today. >> yes men. >> how many are under the age of five? >> i don't have that number with me. >> could you get that definitive number to us? >> definitely. absolute. i'm sure i have the numbers from the joint filing by aclu and doj and i want to be quick, just tell mee and children in care with o rr, parent wave reunification -- adult red flag in adult red flag from case i'll review 46 in adult leased to the interior, and the nine children, adults outside the us, 349 and these are likely parents

supported and adult location under case file review 94 and is this filing cracked? i can give you a copy of that if you want. >> that reflects numbers at the time of the finding. >> are the correct? >> they were correct at the time of filing. the numbers have changed subsequent leverage their correct as of the date of timel. >> i like to get the changes. the giver much. >> senator hatch. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i think this is an important sthearing and i think we can age that the last several months have been a challenging time for immigration enforcement and the family separation crisis at the southern border has revealed some significant problems with our immigration laws in the ways they are administrated. the present to the right thing this month when he signed an executive order to put a halt to

the separation of parents and children who enter our country unlawfully. i have a letter to the attorney general [inaudible] i will be following up this week with another letter requesting information about the ministrations unification efforts and the barriers that remain to reuniting children were separated from their parents. i hope we can avoid the urge to make this a political football. there are strong feelings on all sides of this debate as there should be in these are extremely important issues. the timing of productive way forward makes a willingness to economize in cool heads. i worked with different senators with efforts on this front and i hope discussions will continue so we canea find a solution that

is fair to families, responsive to humanitarian needs and consistent with our rule of law. let me make this question for the whole panel. in fact this is a question for whoever happens to have information on hand and if you don't have ann exact number of taken estimate. a percentage of individuals who enter our country unlawfully and families with children? >> thank you for the question. right now approximately 25% of the individuals that we apprehend are part of a family unit. another 50% of our total apprehensions are unaccompanied children. - how is that percentage changed? the percentage has increased what in your view is the cause of the increase? >> the numbers have been

increasing over the last few years and started in 2014 and when we saw ahe large spike in both areas>>. we started to theorize in 2010 and in 2013 the biggest bike was in 2014. there are many push and pull factors that lead to this issue and i would say that as discussed earlier the fact that family units in children cannot be detained or do not make it to court within 20 days is certainly a pull factor that is leading to the increase in the numbers. >> without new legislation does the administration have any esoice but to resume so-called tension release policies entering our country unlawfully? to have any other choice? >> if you're talking about dating family units or detaining

children. the agreement those individuals cannot be detained for a period longer than 20 days. as the chief mentioned it's virtually impossible to have an individual's immigration hearing and the entire process which may include credible peer review bep completed within 20 days. as a result, we know choice but to release these individuals out to the community and they then go to the docket which would be years down the road before they might have a hearing. >> my understanding is part of the problem here is the central district of california has ruled that the consent applies to accompanied and unaccompanied children. anyone can answer this but in your view, as i like all of you to take a crack, in your view is that the best reading of the degree and that is do you think

california got right and is the ministration of any available avenues for review? i understand the ninth circuit in the central district if the government searched and if there is not is there an avenue which the government might be able to seek [inaudible]? the interrelation of the consent decree is not a difficult subject for supreme court review but it's a question of pretty significant nationwide importance so if anyone could take that i'd appreciate it. >> as we know the president's executive order in june or earlier this year among other things directedde to seek modification of the floors degree in the department did file something the judge rejected that and we're still debating or discussing internally what our next steps are and what options we should

take. >> we have to move forward on that. let me ask one of your questions. we've heard all turn it is an allegedly high success rate for the percentage of disciplines for removal proceedings and moere are reasons to think if we expand for the participants who remove will remain the same and other reasons to think that percentage would decrease and how are participants selected for these programs? >> proven to be a fairly successfulap program where they appear for interviews with i.c.e. and appeared to us. however, the ultimate goal of the immigration enforcement continuum is the execution of the judge's order at the end of those immigration proceedings whether their granted benefit or

get the green cardd or as in mot cases when the judge ordersov ty be removed that we are able to affect that removal. it's proven to be woefully unsuccessful in leading to removals and fiscal year 2017 there was $183 million assigned to the program and that led to 2430 removals. only $75000 for removal. in contrast a removal an forvidual held in detention the average length of stay for 30-40 days cost $1600 but if you process which at the end of it the judge's order means nothing because the individual does not appear after she received our work continues to file frivolous appeals or we can't locate him we've not encompassed anything except spend taxpayer money. >> my time is up. >> senator lakey.

>> stranger and stranger as we hear this but i know the present policy is systematically separating infants and toddlers from their families seems to me both profoundly betrayal of american values and i have not seen whether the administration's public for public and or democrat and is why so many in this country stood up and said that should change. now were trying to pick up the pieces after the cost of mistakes. 700 children separated from their families so the chief provost prior to being directed to separate families under the zero tolerance policy what instructions to the white house or secretary of homeland

security provide your agency to ensure that every single separated child be reunited with their parents and answers because early 2017 the administration began concerning this and april of 2018 attorney general sessions announced the zero-tolerance policy and early a month later dhs secretary proved to instructec you just fr one 100% parents for prosecution. what guidance did you have? >> thank you for your question, sir. under zero-tolerance guidance was, just to be clear, one 100% prosecution for all amenable adults but is not focused on any one demographic. let me tell you during the timeframe of the 45 days between may 5 and june 20 that we referred to approximately four

apprehended approximately 42000 individuals. >> to the guidelines to follow? you been giving islands from the ag office or -- >> in alignment with the zero-tolerance that came out from doj then the secretary did on but out a memorandum and we began working with their partners at the department of justice to prosecute. >> with their specific guidance of what to do? >> of what to do? in relation to -- >> does on an area that cbp deals with and we refer those individuals and we deal with the prosecution as the commander said earlier we have a system of record that we import all the information into to include the alien individual number and juvenile coordinators who work hand-in-hand with the staff at

hhs. >> i've heard of the stories -- >> and with i.c.e. >> indians before the judges and it's almost -- you pick them up and they are removed from the parents but that has to be a system so that they can be matched to the parents. >> this is where were working closerer and the initiative was prosecution initiative in our focus is -- >> i was a prosecutor and i've never known a zero-tolerance who wanted a zero-tolerance on anything because it doesn't work and there's not one-size-fits-all. here is an easy way. here's a really easy way to do it.

chucky cheese uses things like this to check parents and their children when they are there. there wasn't anything like this? >> we provide information on all family members through a system of record to hhs individuals. if you have a child and they have a specific alien registration number that is given to them so did the family members and in our system we do track family members of any, whether -- >> might we have separated children that can find their parents? >> i would defer to my partners and my focus on border security and apprehensions we have short-term holding facilities. >> anyone want to tell us why? >> no time at no time do we know

of any adults in i.c.e. custody were. however, once an individualwitos no longer within i.c.e. custody we do not track that individual weather they were released on bond or whether they were deported to a foreign country. >> if you have children then you have children and you don't know where the parents are and they could go years or maybe forever before their reunited? is a correct? >> commander. >> the system that we are required by law to follow in hhs is that governed by the trafficking victims protection reauthorization act. until the judge ordered us to affect reunification's with parents in i.c.e. detention all those peers in i.c.e. detention while they were detained ineligible by law to serve as sponsors. so to be clear, we always have a system in hhs to find sponsors generally with parents request

family members for all those in our care. >> to have any children now in custody where we don't know where the parents are? >> there remain a few and we don't know the location of the parents particularly with those have been removed or voluntarily departed the united states. with a large number of those. >> let me ask you another question. i.c.e. has a homeland security tip line and they been traditionally focused on tipsit major crimes like human trafficking and terrorism which we all would agree with. the tip line is changed and you could call and you have options. number one, report unsuspected

documented immigrants and maybe your neighbor or somebody is working on the street. you go all the way down to number four and report terrorism. go all the way down number six, reporting crimes against children. to number way down eightt and report gang activity. does that seem like a great ordering of priorities? >> as you know, senator, i.c.e. is divided into two operational components, homeland security invitations and enforcement removal operations. i oversee er o they canan speako what hhs does but we can take it back to the record and get you information. >> just answer the question. does it seem to you like a great priority, number one report your neighbor, if they might be illegal immigrant. number eight gang activity or number four terrorism.

just on the face of it does that seem like the priorities are set straight? >> i can't speak to.st i don't think the button they have to press has the new with the relevancy of information they're trying to report. i believe they get over 100,000 tips a year and it's way they can categorize the steps so they know where to farm them out. >> senator cornyn. >> thank you all for being here. i want to thank you for your service to our country and not only you but the people you represent. i know you do your best to enforce the laws congress writes in that are passed into law and that's what you are doing today and that's what the people who work with you do. it's not your fault that congress has been unable to come up with a more sensible system of enforcing our immigration

laws and is our responsibility, not yours. please, convey that our gratitude to the peoplee that yu are here representing. chief, let me ask you are the organization's that smuggle drugs, weapons, traffic women and children for sex enforce laborte in his smuggle economic migrants -- are those one in the same organization or are these different organizations? >> as you know, senator, there are numerous different transnational criminal organizations. however only seen over the last three years as they spread out into doing more than just one thing. we have organizations who smuggle drugs and also smuggle illegal aliens across the t border.

they treat individuals like a commodity, not like people. it is of great concern to us to the dangers of crossing the border, i believe you know very well it's a dangerous border and this year alone we have rescued over 2800 individuals and tragically we lost at least 180 and that is not include the individuals that perish on the dangerous route through mexico. >> so, the cartels and criminal organizations are commodity agnostic -- would that be a fair characterization? >> i was a so. >> right now they're making millions of dollars under the status quo and if they can effectively circumvent our immigration enforcement or make exploit vulnerabilities in a law and successfully placed illegal immigrants into the united states and reap thousands of dollars for each one they do that they are benefiting tremendously economically under

the status quo, would you agree? >> yes, sir. >> what if we just decided to abolish i.c.e.? what would be the impact on our country? in terms of public safety? >> the public safety impact would be huge. in addition to the immigration enforcement that we do which arrested 127,000 individuals with criminal arrest last year and done in a tremendous work with regard to drugs and narcotics and child predators and cybercrime and i would also say that you cannot have strong border security with a void in the interior. if an individual knows that they can come to the country and try and try and eventually get past the border patrol and that there is no chance of any enforcement being taken against them you

will never have border security. you're in fact saying you're getting rid of enforcement that you're saying you want border security they want them to make people theretop but once they get by the border let them go. in fact you're not against illegal entry but attempted with the entries made you don't want us to do anything on the inside. >> if i.c.e. was no longer in existence and no longer enforced our laws in the interior of the united states with the primary victims of that be the minority communities in which many of those people operate?f >> they are the primary victims now because these individuals are involved in gang activity and, to be internally commit the crimes against those in the same committees in which they reside. >> so, if our primary goal is family unification which we all share why not just keep the child with the adult and enforce

the law? >> senator, as was said earlier the issue there is that under the settlement agreement and determination that was made by the courts in 2015 we can no longer detain individuals longer than 20 days. no child, not just any company but also those accompanied. >> so that means that if someone violates our immigration laws by entering the country illegally if they bring a child with them you can't detain them? longer than 20 days, correct? >> that's correct. >> you must release them and rely on their promise to reappear at some future date for a court hearing if they claim some immigration benefit like asylum, correct? >> that's correct. what the settlement agreement is basically done is effectively imposed judicial mandated catch and release for individuals that have us and family --

>> and that the us status quo unless was asked? >> yes. >> let me ask about human smuggling and drug smiling as we all know the opioid crisis is freaking terrible habit on americans, both prescription drugs and heroin, which is the next drug of choice if you can't get prescription drugs because .t's cheaper and more available da said 16000 americans died of heroin overdoses in 2017 and 90% of that heroin comes from mexico according to the dea. so, according to some information that i received the drug smugglers actually use the fact that border patrol and other law enforcement are tied up in administrating and seeing into the needs of these minor

children and family units as a way to distract border patrol from smuggling of heroin and other illegal drugs interview and it takes you back is that correct and been your experience? >> yes, sir. it's been my personal experience in the expense my men and women have to deal with today. >> once again, in addition to the huge fees charged by these cartels to smuggle people in the united states they are also profiting by the poison that is being exported to places like mexico into the united states that is killing americans as you speak, correct? >> yes, sir. >> senator durbin. >> thank you, mr. chairman. on june 26, judge appointed by republican president george w. bush ordered the reunification of separated families and concluded that i have this quote here the practice of separating

the families was implemented without any effective system or procedure or tracking the children after they were separated from their parents and enabling communication between the parents and their children after separation or reuniting parents and children and commander whites, your expertise is public health. were you consulted and was her agency consulted before the zero tolerance policy was put into effect so that you could address the issues that the judge raised? >> senator, to be clear, my last day at oh rr was march 15th so about three weeks prior to the announcement. as of that date neither i nor to my knowledge any of the staff who reported to me-t were advisd of the impending zero-tolerance policy. >> real where the fact that the

zero-tolerance policy was going to be proposed or implement? >> i was aware because i'd been in discussions for, at that point, more than a year of discussions of policies which could result in the separation of children from family units in the referral but however those were only policy discussions and as proposals many proposals are discussed in agencies that never become policy and as of my last day in the role when i would ask questions about family separations i was advised that is not the policy of unit six. >> and he left when? >> march 15, 2018. >> in this policy started in april? >> that's my understanding. >> mine, too.. so two weeks before this policy was in for minute you are told this is not policy and from what i hear from you you're not aware of any efforts to consult with public health professionals about the disposition of these childrenth in the treatment of

these children under this polic- >> i can't speak to where there were or weren't but i can only say there were none with me. >> i think the judge observation is accurate resent what you told us here. it's hard to imagine, isn't it, that the united states says will start separating kids forcibly from the parents but were not in a set up a system to track the skids we can find them or mash them back up with her parents. we will just separated them. 2700 children were separated and as senator leahy and others said there's basic ways which we could have kept track of the children and the parents in age of computers but plastic braces and they do not do it. let me ask you aboutch the pares in this situation. last thursday the administration stated in a court filing the parents of 431 separated children at each adjust custody

are not in the united states and the parents of more than 90 cannot be located at all. on friday this federal judge again quoted, the government is at fault for losing several hundred parentss in the process. according to peter nielsen of the department of homeland security said quote, all of these adults who left without the kids left based on the decision to leave their childr children. you made a similar claim in our last briefing. however, last week and administration official told politico that as many as 350 of the 431 parents may have been to part without given the option to take their children with them. do you stand by your statement and do you have the application showing that each parent made an informed decision to leave behind their children? >> as indicated previouslyy it's

been long-standing i.c.e. policy for parents who are being removed from his country that have a child here to have the child go with them should they choose to do so. it's a process that's been followed for many years. w as part of that removal process we can remove an individual to their home country without a travel document. if that parent wishes to take a child with them we would also work with the consular officer to help facilitateof the issuane of a document. additionally in order to get a travel document for that adult those adults will be the consular officer. once they ask -- >> cut to the chase. is there a piece of paper when eight parent abandons the child and leave them behind there clearly must be a piece paper signed by that. before our government would let that happen. >> right now the form we are utilizing for the decision is an

aclu developed form approved by the court -- >> i know you can get to yes, sir no and that's what i'm trying. >> which are using a form from aclu you to document the decision. >> when it that start? >> i don't have the exact date. i want to say that form itself was july 6th but i don't know the date. prior to that we had additional forms we developed that utilize for that purpose. >> you can produce for a segmentation showing that these parents number 431 parents, abandon the children voluntarily. >> we can go into each file and see the records there. whatever paper records that are there as well as our electronic system where we make notes that the parent declined relocation. >> the premier case under this also woman from congo who i have met personally. her starter was separated from her by 2000 miles and she was

bargained into giving up her rights to even claim asylum in this country if she ever wanted to see her daughter again. that was what she faced and that is why her case continues to the state. let me ask one less thing. there's a man who had a job on the i.c.e. in the obama initiation made an observation which i like to quote to you. it relates to your testimony about the diversion of resources from i.c.e. to this effort of redefining children. here is what he said, the beneficiaries of drums policy are drug smugglers, coyotes, gang members and were burning our resources on this family effort. i was at the customs and border patrol with their agents at o'hare as they are sifting through millions of packages coming in tonight states trying to stop the flow of narcotics and attentional and other things in which is your number one need and he said more peopleun. f my guess is most americans would say to you and your agency stop the drugs from coming in and

stop the fentanyl and stop separating kids from their families and spending your resources for personal on that effort, what you agree? >> we have two operational components. homeland security which does federal investigations and human trafficking but they're not about to suffer. i would further note that the reason it put these additional resources to this effort was a result of the judge's order. >> no, it was a result of accretion by the sparkly vice president. zero-tolerance policy was upgraded by this judge. the separation of 2700 parents from the children is not the judge's decision. it was your agency's decision in the administration's decision. blame other people, if you wish, but it started with someone in the white house with the bright idea that turned out tosi be a disaster. >> i can tell you i.c.e. has long same policy for their unification of children and

parents at time of removal.. what has changed as a result of this judge's order is that we needed to create aas new process to facilitate that reification now and release those parents from custody who otherwise would of been attained during the removal proceedings. that's what was different. >> senator from south going to. >> let's see if we can organize our thoughts here. the current state of loss in the states is as follows. if you're an unaccompanied minor in your apprehended by the us government you can only be held 20 days, is that correct? >> no, sir. senator, and on a company minor apprehended must be referred by dhs within 72 hours to the office of refugee resettlement and there is no time limit on how long that minor remains in the care. orr high over is a child welfare agency, not one person. >> what happens to the kids when the referred 72 hours?

>> they receive services and care and each child is provided a clinician in case manager a at -- >> to the ever go back to the home country? >> some do. >> what percentage? >> i don't have that that seems to be importantis. is there a difference between a policy regarding mexico inn canada and if you bacon on a comedy minor at the canadian border is saying if you pick them up at the mexico border? >> if i may, center, if we apprehend a juvenile and unaccompanied juvenile from either mexico or canada dependent upon the juveniles ability and if they are old enough and have the ability to make a determination they can be returned to mexico and or cana canada. for any other audit committee children they have to be put into proceedings. >> if you are a parent living in a bad spot you could get your

child into the? united states ad chances are they would stay here? >> yes, to your prior question into the commander, i don't have the exact number but we can get it but the last time i saw you looking at 1.5-2% of all uac are ever returned to their countries and that's once they've reached out and are now adults. >> okay. so if you can get your kid here you got a 90% chance they'll stay in america, that's pretty much the number -- >> unless they get involved in some criminal activity and they come to our attention, general generally, yes. >> to get family coming here to apply for asylum and we say i'm sorry we can accept your application may come in illegally and is at the law of the united states and they can be held over 20 days? >> yes, a family unit cannot be held longer than 20 days. >> so if you live in a bad spot and is in your kid here by themselves chances are they will stay here.

if you come as a family you can only be held for 20 days, is that correct? >> i would defer to my colleague in relation to what all i.c.e. .as the ability to do but yes >> the maximum time will hold is 20 days. >> what percentage of the people let out after 20 days actually show up to the hearing? >> i don't have the number of enemy -- >> how do we not have that number? >> it's a small's percentage. >> is a less than 10%? >> again, i have to get back to you. >> does anyone know?ul >> at the immigration course we don't track divisions or decisions made by dhss . >> timeout. you bring your family and you get caught at the border 20 days under the current law and you have to be released to somebody and you get out, right? is that the law?

>> children who are with their parents can't be held in a dhs fit -- >> what about the parents? >> the decision does not require that. >> what happens to the parents? >> if the parent is going to be held in i.c.e. custody they would have to go to an adult detention facility in the child would have to go over to hhs. >> the chair parents have to be let out in 20 days? be back only if the weather child. >> so the best thing you can do and this is bizarre, you come here as a family unit and the adults can be held until they are hearing and they're not required to be let out -- what would your background with you about the skin. >> of us have the authority to

hold the family as a family unit during the proceedings and at the conclusion of those proceedings if they are granted integration benefit they are released and go on to pursue that benefit. if they are removed we detain them until time of removal and remove them. >> that might deter people from bringing their children here, do agree that? >> yes, sir, i would say that it would. >> with the main reason we have 11 million illegal immigrants in america? what brings them here and what are they what the main magnet? >> senator, there are numerous push and post -- >> i said the main. >> i cannot say specifically to make the main reason is to find a job. that makes sense. you areth the experts. >> for the children we see -- >> i'm not talking much older but adults.he does anyone disagree with that that the main magnet is economic

opportunity in america versus where they came from? if we don't know that how we solve the problem? anyway, i think that's the main .eason if you abolished i.c.e. would be the biggest winner? >> smugglers. >> if you do not have e-verify do you thank you can ever fix this? >> no, sir. >> you can build the wall up 10o under it, over it or around it as long as they can get a job here in america, do you agree? >> i would say there are many aspects to border security and many vectors push and pull factors that impacted. >> okay. >> senator whitehouse. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i thank you are probably in the

closed-door briefing that we had when i asked the previous panel of witnesses what went wrong and not one was able to answer one thing that i gone wrong in this calamity into our witnesses were witnesses in that same proceedings so like to ask the question now the people but a chance to think abouter a longer and let's go right across the tline. what went wrong here? >> we were directed to do one 100% prosecutions on amenable adults on the mast geordie that we prosecuted, 85% were single adult. >> is that a response to my question? what went wrong? >> sir, it's our response ability to make the apprehensions and turn subjects over to our partners at i.c.e.r

or hhs. >> as far as you're concerned that they were wrong -- >> i'm not saying that but i don't -- >> not seen but the obvious solution is nothing wrong t then -- >> our response ability is border security aspect of it and when individuals violate the law enforcing the law. >> what went wrong? >> yes senator. as he spoke was time as indicated both i.c.e. and hhs along same policies and procedures and some governed by law and they dictated how reification started the individual -- >> it's been a calamity and what went wrong? >> i'm answering. if an individual is not in custody there's a standard parts they follow in order to sponsor the child out of hhs. if the individual is in custody there's a standard practice that is followed with regard to unification procedure at time of removal. as indicated -- >> what went wrong?

>> the children were separated from their parents and were were referred as unaccompanied alien children were in fact accompanied. >> what went wrong? >> @defer to the responses given by my college. >> doesn't the doj have an interest in the consequences of the decision deal jay made? >> as i alluded to we don't play an operational or logistical role. the policy was based on prosecutions and have to divert mcauley's responses is there on the front line. >> you wash your hands of the sort? >> i don't know that i discovered that if it were advised that -- revising them appropriately in litigation. >> ms. higgins, what went wrongc >> as noted, our role in the process is a narrow one. although it is important but our role is to provide protection screening to individuals seeking asylum in this country so i'd have to defer to my colleagues and the policies in place today.

>> is the judge following the law in the orders that are being given to solve the reification problem? >> as a matter of litigation ongoing it would not be appropriate for me to answer that. >> you can't even tell me if the judge is following the law in his decisions? >> we are abiding by the orders to revise our clients to abide by the judge's orders. any further comment on it would not be appropriate because litigation is ongoing. >> is there anything that would've prevented your organizations from going through the process that the judge has been forced to undertake to prepare for this? you did it "after words" when the judge told you and couldn't you have done beforehand if there'd been any limitation. >> senator, we were able to affect the reunification of

large numbers of minors with their parents in i.c.e. detention and all the eligible wood partnership with i.c.e. because the judge ordered us to not follow the trafficking victims and protecting act. we cannot have done it without him ordering us to do that. it would have been prevented by statute. >> it was not foreseeable? >> was what foreseeable? >> the consequences of following that act -- >> the uac program exists to provide care to children and to reunify them the sponsors in this country. unification with i.c.e. detention is not consistent until we received the order from the judge. >> when was the first date you heard of attorney general sessions wto april 6 decision to require a zero-tolerance? >> senator, personally i first

became aware on april 6. >> when did you become aware of the april 6 decision? >> i would sayay on or about the date. >> mr. white, you said march 26 was your last day in you know the time -- >> no, sir, i left it on the 15th of march and i became aware of the announcement of the policy when was on television on the sixth of april. >> i assume you knew because you work with the attorney general that it would take place before april 6? >> we're assaulted and advised in case it had operational yoeffectiveness. >> when we personified that the decision will be taken? >> only a few days before came out so on or about april 6pr. >> mexican, when did you find out about the decision? >> i found out when the decision was announced but i would note that our director had indicated that he was asked to make a

recommendation once the decision was made to prosecute illegal border crossings and how to implement that. >> mr. white, could i ask you and i just have a few seconds left how many cases are you aware of of separated children pursuant to this policy in which it turned out that there were fraudulent claims of parentage and there was in fact no family relation between the child and the person claiming parentage or family relation. what is the number? >> i don't have that number wits me but we are aware of a number of those cases. as a reminder, the total number that we've identified of the brain minors we both separated prior to and subsequent to the edges judge's order does not much between them. [inaudible]] that did occur and

indeed that is an endemic risk that all agencies were to prevent. >> can i get the number when you have a chance? i know you don't have now but can you get it to me as a question for the record for sure. >> chairman, is a good enough answer? >> well, i'm not sure. i just asked a question and a hearing and told that if i go back and put in writing to someone else who's not at the hearing i might get an answer. i like to have a commitment here to get an answer. i think that's appropriate in a senate hearing. >> i might ask the same question ifappreciative by sherman you respond to each person separately. >> you will get me the answer, thank you. >> senator. >> thank you all for being here in the hard work you do. i got to try to figure out if i got the numbers normalize because i've heard some numbers

to a few and a few thousand quoted here and accepting the best answer that to the narrative. can you explain to me again one, the number of children who have not been yet reunified with their parents? >> yes, sir. so -- >> then i want to talk about the reasons why. >> of the 2551 children in oh rr care at the time of the judges decisions were determined to have been separated or we had indications of separation based on our analysis 1961, accident, 1962 of those of the state are no longer in or care and 559

remain in oh rr care. >> again, 559 are the number of children who may be able to be redefined with events based on the information you have that have not yet. >> no, sir, that would include yeth hose who we have not reunified but may be eligible for relocation such as the remaining minors might have parents who been released into the interior or maybe minors who have parents who have returned to home country but it also will include some minors who remain in oh rr care were determined not to be eligible to be redefined with events. >> because of the circumstanceso with their pants. >> to billy, it would be based on either we have not yet we had reason to doubt that they were the parents and were in the process of determining that by objective standards but more often it would be do to an identified safety risk to the child and i'll be specific so this would be based on ices

summary that they provided of mc i think brent back projects. for example, specific bands excluded with red plaid included for those who had prior convictions for criminal convictions for trolleys for sexual explication and those with prior criminal convictions for rape, murder and kidnapping. criminal history by itself. per se is not necessarily a bartering unification but clearly demonstrates a real threat to a child that is. these would be among the reasons that a person be ineligible based on oh rr determination which is there's significant doubts as they are actual parentage or significant doubts for the child history or the charming estimate to the mental health clinician in our care that the parent had abused them or they'd otherwise been carved. >> in the same way your responses to maybe your opening

statement that the oh rr care for these children are a part of is up to the same standards wewa would have for any child or your citizens in the same standard for having his children be redefinedld with her parents in terms of ultimatelynt care and safety of the child and is that fair to say? >> senator, the standards that we are required under court order to meet for reunification of children are not as high as standards required by tb pra. i can give you specific examples for example, the courtrt ordered us to consider punitive parentagein is parentage unless there a specific reason to doubt parentage but however, in the ordinary course under tbco pra established parentage typically viper certificates verified by the consulate of the home country and that's an example. this is why it takes longer to reify children with their parents in the ordinary process

then was permitted under the court order typing here.en >> this may be but we made progress on someone heree with senator feinstein and others on the oil to try and figure out a way to get reunification done and we talked about authorizations for judges up to an aggregate of 700 or a ratio of 2.5 attorneysur to each judge and we've got three resources to follow it and clearing the docket we talked about make sure that we have standards for family detentions that are up to the level of quality and other people would leadt you to belie wein would stand up to house families. for some reason we have a different opinion about we have language that taylor's application to [inaudible] some

say that we need that language but what would you say to that that you would not need that clarification to keep the family unit together pending processing through the adjudication proce process? >> i'm not having seen the exact language but to be difficult to comment but i will say that any language that allows or requires us to release those parents prior to the completion of the rebel proceedings is going to stmerely exacerbate our existing situation. >> we're talking about thee opposite for this preparation to allow the children to be with the parent that would be over the 20 day detention. but i think the docket in around 40 or 60 days if we prioritize families. it's quite the opposite and were just trying to get clarity for that segment of the publishing and is that what the needs to keep the families together?

>> is difficult to speak on any particular decision. i would say that what we seen in our experience is if there's a way that that family there's a timeframe that family is able to delay the process which requires them to be released prior to determination and commission of the process than that will happen. using frivolous appeals when they're here ten or 12 years for filing privilege appeal because there's a reason not too because her out in the community. >> last question is probably for all three of you. the alien identifier is like to meet we have a disconnect where some are thinking that we do separate these children are not trying to do our best and the documentation to keep the spammers identified whether electronic or paper records. are we not doing -- chief, i thank you said you try to link ever comes together whoever is

apprehended together in the center like through the process all the way over to hhs that there is identifying information to find that unit of people who are apprehended initially at the border and did i hear that rig right? >> yes, sir. when we apprehend somebody givei each individual is given and registered number. the system of record which is e3 our agents go inn and also identify family members related to those individuals in both the narrative of what is called form i213 and make reference to those so we can go back and look at the alien registration of the specific individual and find out who else is associated with them. and that includes members just beyond parental or legal guardians and they're the only ones that we would refer to or

that we would be making how do i want to say -- separating the family unit into unaccompanied. they come with cousins or uncles and aunts and those types of cases, as well. >> it feels like it slows to the processor might be slightly sophisticated than the chucky cheese model in an trying toli identify families who are apprehended -- anybody disagree? >> neither of these information systems for the programs were specifically built to affect beautification of children with parents and nice custody. so, this had to be a novel process because it's not how these programs were designed. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. [inaudible] that were check me

because there's nothing about this that seems normal to me. i have kids in my states that were separated from their parents and i was down at the border and met with a number of families including a mom who was fleeing an abusive hub husband in honduras and separated from her ten -year-old son and said she never thought she would see her son againdo but because of e court order and because of the work of people who been pushing this issue she did see him again and only in a way a ten -year-old would do that he knew that he would always see his mom again. and gave her a hug. i was struck by something that i don't think has gotten enough attention enough response to this coldhearted policy from the american people. sister norma running the operation down with catholic charities and the thousands of volunteers from americans all of the country club responded and

gone down a volunteer in the diapers and food and close and everything we have seen i hope it's not lost that despite this policy which was an enormous mistake americans have responded and not just people in this building. my first question is that at the time of last week second court ordered the line for the administration to reunite families that have been separated 711 kids ages five to 17 not been reunited with their parents including 431 children who are no longer in the us likely because they were deported. we have one like that in d minnesota. i want to address the issues involved in locating parents have already been deported to central american countries. other parents may feel they need to relocate in a different part of the country's to escape violence after they been deported so how is the administrationrk working to

address these challenges if these kids simply want to find their parents and go back. we have one like that. >> as indicated in the prior question since it's a subject of ongoing litigation i cannot ride different details until that time becomes a part of the record. >> okay. we don't know. all right. commander whites, and concerned about what efforts, if any, have been made that sibling groups stay together and having a parent forcibly taken away his dramatic potential use your sibling is also terrifying. when i traveled to texas i spoke with family that adjustment reunited, a brother and sister from honduras and the girl was taken to florida while her brother was detained in texas. does hhs have a policy in place regarding sibling groups and if so, can you provide the policy to the committee?

>> yes, ma'am. it's a policysiin of or art to p sibling groups together wherever it is possible to do so. i don't know the specific case were talking about. lately, i'm surprised because except when there's a healthcare issue or something else it's verye very rare that we would e sibling groups separated in or our care. >> they were 15 or girl and i met them -- >> i'm just saying that case surprises me and i cannot speak to that particular and there is a policy and like all of the or art policy and procedure it is a public facing online but it's consistent with the best interest of the child to keep sibling groups together wherever possible and that iss generallya priority and placement of children. >> thank you very much. ms. higgins. like many of my colleagues we were troubled by attorney general sessions decision last month to overturn key asylum protestants in the matter of an aging case that help victims of

direct device seeking asylum in the west. i'm a former prosecutor and is one of our major focuses in our office and we would often have immigrant victims whether sexual assault for diversified cases perpetrators would deliberately pray on them because then their perpetrator could say that i will report you. if you don't have success with me or if you go to their peace with the fact that i'm beating you up everyday. that is why it's so important. after attorney general sessions decided to review the relevant president i sent a letter signed by senator feinstein and several of my colleagues urging the imagination to preserve the critical protections and since then i have seen the need for the protections and i mentioned the case h who had an abusive partner. many survivors of domestic violence have taken extra ordinary risk by seeking asylum in ourr country and what can yu

say about the need to ensure that those seeking asylum have the opportunity to make claims for release? >> thank you for the question. i would note that our officers adjudicate each and every case on a case-by-case basis based on the facts. they are required to ensure their abiding by all statutes relations and precedent decisions. as far as i understand there is nothing in that prohibits from someone seeking asylum or what our officers are test with doing is making sure the reviewing all relevant evidence in making those case by case basis. >> but what are the implications to overturn the president? >> i think it's a bit early to tell. i don't know if my colleague from doj would like -- >> will make it more difficult for asylum-seekers who are fleeing the best abuse to get that asylum? >> is difficult to say. there are a number of reasons.

it's quite possible that individuals would not qualify underr [inaudible] is a particular social group and my qualify under one of the excuse me, one of the other protected grounds. furthermore, in the credible fear context an individual could qualify for the productions under the curmudgeon of torture in which case note nexus is required. >> at the screening process has changed, right? >> our process is unchanged. our officers will interview individuals and address all of the facts and evidence before them and make case-by-case decision. >> are using it won't make an any -- >> i'm saying is difficult to predict. individuals may qualify under other grounds and it will be challenging to assess. >> where they involved in the decision the attorney general made to overturn this president? >> i personally was on ball. i understand thatt dhs was hardr to the litigation and provided a

briefing that i suspect are doj colleague mike able to talk more about the who the ag consultant. >> as indicated, the department of homeland saturday is a party to every immigration proceedingc with a representative by us immigration customs enforcement and removal proceedings. i cannot speak to who whether i.c.e. consulted with us cis or not and that would be up to dhs. >> okay. i'll ask it in writing at the end and try to get to the bottom of that because again, this policy and this policy change to me was unprecedented and unnecessary just like a policy of separating the kids. senator booker. >> senator hirono, pardon me. >> thank you very much. your testimonies today g made

pretty clear to me the government has no plan to reunite the separated children from the parents. if the judgetes, had not ordered the reification it would not be happening because these children are suddenly made orphans and became [inaudible] within hhs custody and is redefining these children with parents presumably they had no parents. if the judge had not forced the reunification it will not happen. what was the long-term plan for these children? once they were separated from their parents? >> again, i.c.e. has had long-standing policy that facilitates reunification of a parent and a child at the time of removal. that has better policy and that would've been the process we would have followed and have followed prior to this judge's orders. >> you mean even without the judge's orders he would've proceeded to reunify as

appropriate 3000 children be separated from their parents? >> if the adult had gone through the immigration court process and at the end of the process had been ordered to be removed by a judge the individual that had the right to take a child with them should they choose to do so. >> excuse me,, after the process what you did was he separated the children from their parents before any process even begin so i understand that once the process and all that if appropriate you would reunify the children with the parents but in the first instance that was not contemplated. ... get is what , they wereng immediately deemed unaccompanied children, sent to hhs, where hhs under the normal process would >> so your -- it's very clear

that the administration had no plans to unify these children and as such required by the courts. mister albence also testified that family residential centers, rc's like summer camps. i'd like to know whetherall the panel members are familiar with the security frc . miss ms. provost? >> ma'am,i do not have the specifics. i have not been to one of the frc's ? >> i've never visited a family residential center. i'd have to defer to my colleagues. >> i've never been to a frc

eater. >> what about you? >> yes, i've been to both. >> these are described as family residential centers and i'd ask of you mister higgins, would you send your children to these centers? miss higgins? >> i certainly think that in general practice people would prefer to be free to move about. i can tell you the centers i saw did as described have schools. >> so you would send your child to these centers? >> that's a difficult question to answer. it's difficult to put myself in the position of an individual who takes a dangerous journey in which their child can be harmed, let alone whether i would -- >> so these are summer camps. mr. albence, would you send . your child to a frc question?

>> we're missing the point. these individuals are there because they've brokenthe law. >> they broken a law only as deemed so by the president . >> they are there for violation of title eight immigration nationality. that illegal entry as both a criminal and civil violation. they are in the frc pending the outcome of that civil process. they have broken the law . >> my understanding is that under zero-tolerance these are no longer civil proceedings but in fact criminal proceedings. >> they are criminal proceedings when the border patrol prosecute them. atthe conclusion of that process they would go to administrative proceedings . >> the criminal proceeding is an individual being prosecuted for illegal entry. >> and that was the zero-tolerance policy, that everyone would be prosecuted in a criminal proceeding . >> that is correct .

>> now, i know there are a number of children but the last report, this is the proceeding before the san diego report just this month c and that time there were 711 children who were deemed ineligible for a number of reasons but hundred 20 of these children was because of parents waived reunification and so 431 were because their parents had been deported. didn't the court tell the administration to find the 431 deported parents and reunify them with the children? >> although there are limits to what i can say because it's currently in court. >> didn't the court tell the administration you'd better find these parents that had been deported? >> we are working to make contact with all those parents. >> how many of them have you found so far? ha>> i don't have with me the

number that we contacted yet. but we can provide it. >> it's pretty challenging isn't it when you've already deported them and we don't know where they were deported to? they may not have been deported to the places in the country they came from so it's quite the challenge. with regard to the parents who gave you reunification with their hundred 20 children, there have been allegations that these parents, some of whom didn't even know they were waving the rights to be reunified with their children. there were language issues. i want to know whether we can be assured that these were knowing neighbors set. isn't there something you can showus who says they fully understood what was happening to them before they signed ? after they sign waivers? >> let me clarify because this is two different things being discussed. one is the written waiver process as discussed by our

director leaving the united states but from the hhs process that we did face-to-face interviews with parents to determine if they wanted reunification and i'll explain why. because many parents made at this journey to deliver their children here because that is the desperate last act of a parent trying to take a child out of some of the most dangerous places to take a child in the world. honduras has the highest murder rate in the world for any country not actively at work so although it might be unfathomable to understand why someone was presented with the opportunity to be reunified with their child might say no, it is unfathomable until you walk in those parents choose so the reality is because we knew some parents said no, i want my child to stay in and be your reunified with my sister or whoever, we did face-to-face interviews with

the parent to ask did you awant your child to come to you? most of the parents said yes. some said no and we asked them to complete a standard form call a letter of designation which is a way parent expresses a preference for who they like their child to go to, usually a close family member . >> question is whether these waivers, they were knowingly waived because of the circumstances, i understand that and is that because of the attorney general's decision that a certain kind of violence in their country would no longer be considered as part of their asylum argument , then you just said they come from these horrific conditions. that's no longer deemed inappropriate . >> that's what i said, thank you. >> before i recognize senator cruz who will be taking the gavel, a quick weston for you. would you send your child 300 miles with a group of people

that could include gangs, drug traffickers or human traffickers over 3000 mile journey to our border? >> again, i think it's difficult to put myself in the shoes of these individual . >> thank you. senator cruz. >> thank you mister chairman and to each of the witnesses for being here,thank you for the important work you do . these are challenging times for our country and the work you do, particularly border patrol agents, agents of ice, is difficult. it's important. i will say mister, mr. albence in particular to the ice officers, i want to thank the men and women that you serve who risk their lives each and every day to keep this country safe and in the political environment we are in , there's some in washington who have taken to applying and attacking ice

and on behalf of the 28 million texans, let me thank you for the work you do every day keeping us safe. >> on behalf of the men and women of ice, i thank you. >> i would express the same to border control. i spent time with many of your agents and they are heroes who put their lives on the line on a regular basis. >> thank you senator and on behalf of our 19,000 men and women, thank you . >> ms. provost, first several months of 2017, we saw a significant decrease in illegalimmigration . unfortunately that decrease has essentially evaporated in 2018. why do you believe it was that the numbers went down so dramatically, roughly a 70 percent decrease in the first

months of 2017 and why have they begun increasing again? >> senator, in my personal opinion i believe the numbers did go down initially when the new administration came in to office and discussions about border security became front and center. in regard to the numbers going up, and we are currently at 22percent higher compared to this time last year , so point once individuals see whether or not we do and are hard on immigration, hard line on immigration, at some point in time they start coming here and they seek totheir family members and other things. those are factors as well as, many push factors from the

countries they come from . there are numerous old factors, some of which we discussed today whether economic or the fact that court decisions impact that so those factors, eventually the numbers started creeping back up. >> there's been a great deal of discussion of children coming illegally and children being detained but children also coming through human traffickers. as the men and women on this panel know, it's not a new problem . we practically seen thousands upon thousands of children coming for a great many years. ms. provost, let me ask you. when kids are brought into this country toby human traffickers, what kind of treatment do they and what kind of abuse are they subject to in the process of coming here illegally?

>> senator, as you know it's a treacherous trip that they are making. there are numerous factors that impact obviously the terminal organizations. they treat all people like commodities. it's aboutmoney, not the care and well-being of these individuals . we apprehend large groups in ãhouses and in horrible conditions as well as riding in tractor-trailer trucks which as we know in san antonio just a year, year and a half ago we had that tragedy so these individuals are put at risk day in and day out and that's just what happens when they are on the apborder, not to mention the trip. there are cases of rape, of abuse, of all types of different things happening to these illegal aliens that are making the trip to the country. >> as you know, there is

widespread agreement in congress on both sides of the file that families should not be separated. the best place for children is with their parents, with their mom and dad. the same time i believe it. also enforce the law. that we should not be adopting policies effectively mandate catch and release because that only serves to attract more people here illegally and to ensure that even more children will be subject to the abuse, to the horrific treatment that human traffickers subject them to. i introduced legislation that anwould mandate families stay together and at the same time enforce the law and prevent a return to the policies of catch and release and we are engaged in ongoing negotiations with senate democrats to see if there would be bipartisan agreement c. behind legislative effort. i'm hopeful and optimistic.

mr. albence, can you share your thoughts about the consequences of catch and release and what it does to levels of illegal immigration? >> again, keeping to steve! recently, you saw that initial get after the middle part of last year when there was concern that the laws of this country would be rigorously enforced. unfortunately what the smugglers and illegal aliens learned was the loophole that exist which facilitate this process and versus us to release these individual shortly after apprehension scene because they need congressional action to do so . >> mr. albence, in your answer can you discuss the implications, the consequences of the consent decree and how that constrains your enforcement abilities? >> absolutely. the biggest issue is that we have family altogether by florida's decision which was

in 1977 and reinterpreted by the judge in 2016 and applied , the uac requirements to family detention even though family detention didn't exist in 1997. it requires us to release those individuals within 20 days of taking them into custody and we cannot effectuate the entire immigration hearing process, the asylum process within 28 period. as a result we have no choice but to release those individuals into the community and most times we don't see that again. >> thank you. >> thank you mister chairman. i cannot agree more with your opening statement. the administration has mishandled family separation and in some ways i'd say we sit here now in the middle of a humanitarian crisis largely

of the trump administrations creation. the zero-tolerance policy has led to the separation of thousands of children including infants and toddlers from their parents and as intentionally inflicted and untold amounts of human suffering. as a father , i find this unconscionable in the administration's efforts so far to reunite children with their sadly inadequate. i'm frustrated that despite repeated inquiries across a broad range of congressmen and women , we've not been able to get timely, full information about the process where we stand so first mister chairman, senator langford and i with a dozen of our colleagues to support members, seven, seven democrats to request information, this is a letter we are sending to attorney general sessions, to secretary nielsen just asking for basic details and regular updates. what factors.

ages, they are being paid, we arebeing reunited. enter this into the record . >> that each of the five of you simply say yes, sir no, are you committed to getting timely responses to congress in response to broad and bipartisan requests for information about our progress towards resolving this separation situation. >> yes senator, i will take is that we will work on getting that information to you? >> yes, absolutely. >> yes, of course. >> likewise, we will. >> yes, senator. there are disturbing reports in the press that individuals tseeking asylum have been misinformed or misled to give up their legal claim to try to get their children back

and american immigration courts will testify there are dozens of individuals that have been interviewed eefelt and i'm quoting, coerced into relinquishing their rights or who your unclear that they had done so. some who were added that the paper they signed was one that allowed them to be reunited with their children when in fact the form a side opposite effect. mr. albence, could you produce me and my staff copies of the forms that mr. albence has been getting parents ? ice has been getting parents. >> we have form as part of the case easily you developed and approved by the court. i cancertainly give you a copy of that . >> would be helpful because there's a lot of stories, both sides that these are folks who are well-informed and making responsible

decisions to return to their countries of origin and leave their children here and there's some very disturbing reporting that the opposite is the case. mr. albence, our parents given the opportunity to consult with a lawyer and their children they sign a form waving theirlegal rights to be reunited? >> as required , realizing the form we discussed, there is a 48 hour waiting period in which the individual is allowed to contact an attorney, they make the easy on you. we have signposted. which is by simone and a way to do so. allows individuals who are not members of the class to still make contact. they so desire. >> are able to contact? >> they do have contact with their children, whether they choose to do so at this time, ask their child, their opinion, i do that but they do have regular contact with the children that are in the facilities? >> my concerns has been reporting that strongly suggests that children who are separated and in some pieces by thousands of miles

don't have a chance to communicate for parents are forced to return to the country of origin, leaving the children the wilderness to what their parents. in that case?>> let me mention what we do to provide contact to children and a second about the mental health. we have to go with this situation so it sounds like the question touches on both . every child within 48 hours of arrival is given the chance to call family members either in the united states for their own country. there also allowed an acute phone calls and many children. are currently in detention status are harder to call in some cases than people who have cell phone but there has been strong collaboration between ice and hhs to do that. as we send our field teams, our 200 strong field teams to detention centers part of what they did was in the course of interviewing parents they also would

promote telephone contact between parents and childhood so we are doing what we can you have been in contact with parents but i think the second part of your question is which is in the middle of this art children age from infancy until the data for their birthday. every child in our care as a mental health clinician, 12 to 1, plan to clinician ratio. every single child whether separated as a mental health clinician they see what we are leveraging is the fact that this is a program designed to support children who experience from us. weare getting the support to also cope with the uncertainties of this situation for the who's who have been separated . >> do more things before i conclude. senators langford and i joined senator collins in a letter urging the

administration to work with the faith community proactive in efforts to reunify families. i'm concerned by the courts of faith-based groups are willing and able to provide support for reunification are getting little or no notice before being asked to provide support to hundreds of families. these are organizations that stand ready to help . can you give more information, or notice about when or where families will be released so that they can get the support services that will allow them to make their posttrauma transitions youare talking about ? >> the specific pieces are actually ice but the compressed timeframe required by the court required us first to do something we've never done before which is reunification of minors with children and second to do it under compressed timeframe. to achieve that with the eligible liners. effective meaning that children and parents are being unit reunify i see, those who work with mr. albence and mikey were

working 24 seven. i work 18 hours a day and we were doing everything we could to move these children as quickly as we could. the two ngos who worked with ice to provide safe entry into communities for release parents, we did what we could to facilitate giving them timeframe to provide assistance but this was complex of the size and speed of reunification efforts. >> i was enclosing that the entire process is i think a consequence of the child administration lamented a cool policy of intentionally separating families with coherent plan in place of uniting them and i respect and appreciate the very hard work you've gone through to comply with the court were seems clear from what i heard in his hearing that there was sufficient funding in advance to what would happen in terms of reuniting children and their parents were this policy to be reversed. this is the third immigration

crisis created by this administration. a travel ban, ending daca the zero-tolerance policy. i'm looking for updates until the number of children returns to zero and it's my hope on a bipartisan basis we canmove to resolve the underlying legal framework issues that immigration such a difficult issue for all us . >> senator booker. >> thank you mister chairman. i'm grateful is here and obviously i've met a lot of folks and i have a tremendous amount of respect for the service that they're getting to the country but i have a lot of concerns about the policies we have. a lot of them stemming from the white house. it was a lot of harm and they don't represent who we are or our best values. i went down to texas recently and the first thing i did after landing around midnight was to point of entry nearby and i crossed over into

mexico, walking in the dark the length of the bridge across the rio grande into mexico and as soon as i got there, the mexican officials, the one guy there warning me about the danger of this community . i'm a big guy but they were concerned and that wasn't my intention to go into the community. i came right back around and walked back in to see how people were looking to present themselves for asylum or grievance and i was a bit surprised because as soon as i got there instead of being at the point of entry there e were folks right there at the middle of the bridge right on the border and i had a th conversation with them, they didn't recognize me as a united states editor but i had a conversation about why they were posted there, what they were doing and they said they thwere turning away that were presenting themselves for a site.

again, internet community i was told was dangerous, their job was to prevent asylum-seekers from setting thon american soil presenting themselves in a legal manner that our law says they are allowed to do. they warned me about safety. they said you're turning away children, mothers back into the community and you say it's not safe for me and i wondered about that. it really was difficult for me as americans to see us turning away people trying to seek asylum being evaluated in asystematic crisis might what existed and instead of being pushed back into this environment . we've all seen these reports of people seeking asylum at points of entry being turned away and it's been clear why. if this is the issue which i had great conversations with folks that talk to me about the issue of having enough space so i'm wondering in all of our processes out we are

prioritizing what reflect our values and keep us safe? i talked about minorities communities, i live in an inner-city, i live in a prominent african-american city. i have shootings on my street in the last two yearsi am concerned every day about safety in our country .and i think we should be focused on the safety of our citizens. but what i worry about is those folks who pose no threat whatsoever that we're not figuring out a way to get our resources to focus on our values. the keepers and making sure that we create legal processes because the fact that were turning people away leaves more danger not just for them and their families but also pushes more people into breaking the law and gain judah in systems in ways that we don't want to. the moral? prioritization and so my question real quick is for small, i'm wondering and maybe mr. albence you can answer this is are you

coordinating with border patrol to prioritize using this so that there are resources available for legal asylum-seekers instead of using advanced a lot of people who are otherwise law-abiding citizens? >> . >> we manage a diverse portfolio of beds. we have our judgment centers and adult detention centers. we command center that helps those in and out officers stationed at the cdp command center in dc to manage those back. whole bunch of placeholders dedicated to the managementof beds . >> i guess i'm not talking about the beds available, i'm talking about the prioritization. in those beds a lot of people that don't pose a threat, ice shows according to their classifications they describe more than half of the population in ice custody are closing zero community safety risk of according to the national immigrant justice

center so it seems to me -- >> a lot of those individuals are subject to detention. individual asylum-seekers unless they were paroled in our subject. >> when you say they are individuals, i have no more time but you're saying that some of ourasylum-seekers . my question is if you are working with cdp, can't we be doing more to make sure there are more beds available?ab >> we are continually looking to expand our bed capacity. we are generally between 97 and 99 percent all in terms of our adult days. >> we would need the funding to do that to. >> that's great because that is the policy issue but i worry that i see just how arrested about 4143 undocumented immigrants without a criminal record under this administration. a lot of resources going after people that poses no

threat. >> while the concerns of my republican and democratic colleagues about people who are holding or people who are trying to come here through the legal means who are being turned away and often and upcoming through the system, there's gotta be a better way to prioritize and i question what you need congresses help to provide more resources for bed and that's the case, i'm gung ho to help out but as senator he said, you call your line and that reflects your iepriorities right there. you said the very first thing they want you to do is report on your neighbor. press one for reporting undocumented immigrants. not terrorists, not gang members.the first thing. you have wato go pretty far down, terrorism is number four so i ithink that should dobe numberone frankly. reporting crimes against children was number six .

reporting gang activity is laid out number eight. as a guy who lives in the city with a lot of undocumented immigration, we see that in our cities across america. your prioritization seems to create this year so now the people are free to report crimes for undocumented immigrants, this documentation seems problematic. so ice should be in the business of catching criminals. catching criminals, not encouraging americans to report on their neighbors for possible immigration offenses and it this prioritization that is disturbing because i think, and i've seen this with the drug were in america. we have literally tens of thousands of people locked up right now in this country for low-level drug crimes, many of them were doing things the last president admitted to doing. think about thoseresources that could be used to keep people safe . >> i want to ask you last question, can we do a better job prioritizing people that are threatening our country as opposed to locking up so

many people that have posed zero? can't you re-examine your prioritization even your tip line for god's sake and encouraged americans to help you make us safer and not continue to round up people that take resources away opfrom the really dangerous situations? >> i can get a short answer i'll do my best.what i can tell you is nine out of every 10 people that we arrest as a criminal conviction are in charge with a criminal offense. the aggregate numbers of convicted criminals that we've arrested has risen in the past 2 years so we do that same place, we encounter individuals your unlawfully during the course of our enforcement actions, prioritizing those public safety checks, we are not going to turn a blind eye. the other largest group of individuals we are individuals who have their day in court, having lost in the process and our fugitives s

meaning they ignored the judges order or to somebody that's been previously arrested and the board has returned is as you know is a felony. 92 percent of people arrested those categories and if i can answer, and it's going to be speculation so i don't know line but we been working with the line to prioritize and categorize the types of calls that come in and cro which is in force and effect, i'm speculating about their doing that so they can move those cases cro for referral while vacation i keep their categories that i find out where question for the record if ican, doesn't jive with the data area . >> if that is true, why does this phone data show that people pose no threat whatsoever? it sounds like you're prioritizing your resources for public safety at all. in fact, you're reading or safety hazards because you're creating your to report crimes work with police? >> senator blumenthal.

>> thank you for your patience in being here and thank you for u the service of the many men and women who diligently seek to enforce our laws. let me ask this panel, who year thinks that zero-tolerance has been a success? raise your hand if you think success . >> thinks that family separation policy has been a success. >> . >> here and tell me who is responsible, which public official, which member of this administration is responsible for zero-tolerance and family separation? can anyone tell me? who's responsible? nobody knows? >> zero-tolerance prosecution policy was issued by the

attorney general on april 2016. >> so the official responsible for zero-tolerance would be attorney general of the united states. >> that being presumably with the approval of the president of the united states. >> he is the one who issued a memorandum in 2018, an extension of the earlier memorandum. >> did anyone, any member of this panel say to anyone, maybe this is such a good idea? commander? >> during the delivery process, we raised a number of concerns in the or program about any policy which would resultin family separation . due to concerns we had about the best interest of the child as well as whether that would be operationally supportable . >> i'm going to translate that into what i would call

layman's language. you told the administration that gives would suffer. as a result. that pain would be inflicted, correct? >> . >> separation of children from their parents and causing harm to children? >> from for any child separating from his or her parents. am i correct? i think for children . >> there's no question that separation of children from parents entails significant potential for traumatic injury to thechild . >> would i be correct in assuming that the answer to you was in effect that's the whole purpose of the policy, to inflict pain so as to deter asylum-seekers from coming here, correct?

>> no sir, we were advised that the separation was not the policy. >> family separation just happened to result from zero policy without anyone knowing and in fact, even though you raise this question, correct? >> yes, we raised concerns tabout the children as well as the effect on the program. >> what was the answer? >> at no time during the time i was in was there an actual policy announcement. of family separation, it was merely a discussion of future consequences. >> so there was awareness that it would be the consequence. you raised it. >> i did raise it. >> and i'm asking again, what was the answer? >> the answer received was that family separation was not policy. there was no policy that would result in family separation . >> as a consequence of the

policy. >> correct. no, i was advised there was no policy would result in separation from children of families. >> are you satisfied with the amount of care and counseling provided to these children to deal with the trauma and the pain of their separation from their parents? >> yes. the children in our care each have mental health clinician. >> i know they have a mental health clinician. are you satisfied they are receiving sufficient care or do you believe thatmaybe those clinicians are overworked, overburdened ? >> i believe children are receiving sufficient care. >> let me ask whether anyone here has authority to end the appeal of judge g's decision that the flores settlement

should be continued. does anyone here have that authority? >> the department of justice has litigation decisions, i wouldn't have that authority, the department would . >> coand can you commit to me that there will be reconsideration of the departments decision that flores should be sustained? >> as i indicated in response to a prior question, the department is considering its options in light of the most recent ruling. >> what are the number of children under five who have been reunified? >> sir, i don't have that number with me. >> is less than the full number of 102, i think it was that were separated? >> third, some miners were

not eligible for reunification. >> you know the number? >> i don't know the number el although we have that number. >> and of those 431 total, only eventually of them do you expect will be reunified? >> are you referring to the total of the miners removed from the united states? >> yes, is there any prospect w they will be reunified and what number? >> there's no way i could say what number it would be. we are working on strategies to affect reunification for re all the eligible ones. a number of parents may elect that their children remain in the united states . >> whenparents are put in detention facilities , are they permitted to retain their cell phone? >> not at the facility itself, no. >> how do children reach their parents? >> i can our capabilities the

defense facilities. commanders very well about the process they utilize. our individuals are allowed phone calls during the course of their detention. we have acontractor that provides low-cost , but it's not free call. they would get one free five minute call domestically or internationally. worked loosely with commander s whites people during the course of this process to ensure communication occurs on aregular basis. a server resources to facilitate communication . >> i'm going to finish because my time has expired. i want to say that there is now total consensus on both sides of the aisle that this zero-tolerance and family separation policy, and it has been a policy, as you indicated commander.it was clearly foreseeable as a consequence of

zero-tolerance. it was part and parcel of the policy to inflict pain so as to her asylum-seekers from coming to this country. now we have this is the highest level because general kelly himself and other top officials indicated that deterrence was an objective. and it constitutes as i said, kidnapping or child abuse and ultimately i hope that there's a lesson here. but right now, it seems to be no prospect for reunifying many of the children still separated from their parents and i welcome any response either now or in writing depending on when the chairman will do it. >> thank you. mister chairman, it is clear that the folks that are before us now are not the

shot callers.they are following orders. they are carrying out policy clearly was not of their own making. i'm heartened that when senator blumenthal asked the question soliciting anyone to raise their hands in defense of this policy about separating children from their families, not raised their hands and that being said, i believe you need to call this policy what he needs. it is a policy that is about the united states government committing human rights violation and i will repeat what i have said. i believe that those who called and created this policy implemented including secretary nielsen should step down because this has been a policy that has not only read half, it has probably the entire rest of the lives of the people, it will cause them harm and damage. that being said, commander

whites, as of today, what is the current number of parents outside the country who were separated from these children and have yet to be reunified? pleasedon't give me the number 431 . >>' >> we don't have the parents, we have the children but i will talk about thenumber of children who have parents . anyone have all those children have been discharged. 429 children remaining care, whose parents have departed. >> and what is the deadline by which we are and that you are going to reunify those children with their parents? is there a deadline in place? >> my team is working to affect those reunification . >> is there a deadline in place? >> you have a deadline in place, three different courts are not involved in what we

can do and what we must do. >> don't you believe that we should be held accountable for ensuring that all means necessary are put in place to ensure that these children are reunified with their parents, there should be a deadline to emergency clear to all involved? >> down, is absolutely in my heartfelt conviction that we must reunify those children with their parents. >> will you commit to creating a deadline for when. >> the deadline will be imposed by court and we will execute them. my preferred deadline is absolutely as quickly as humanly possible . >> are you saying you don't have the authority to create a deadline? >> i'm saying that if i could have reunify the childrenwith their parents fight yesterday it would be done . we are operating under,

working in the world is what is operationally achievable? >> under the consent decree? >> consent decree? >> by the court. >> i'm going to have to defer to dot. >> and what for any is the government making to provide phone and video contacts that we need families while they are in detention? >> as we indicated, for the children in our care , we work to provide them with unimpeded access with phones to contact their parents? >> is a policy that they are not to be charged to make these phone calls? you're aware that there is an expensive with making those calls? okay thanks? >> miners, whether those miners have been separated or otherwise, those cold are paid for under the appropriation that congress provide for the program as for the care of the child.

>> want to call the parents make their children who pays for those ? >> one of the facilities that have access to our free platform, then those calls are at no cost to the individual. if not, the individual will have a minor call associated depending on who that individual is calling. the calls of family members, emergency situations are not charged. : looking into a facility are not charged. >> have you visited the otay mesa detention facility?>> i may have been. >>. >> i met with the parents. was told by the people running the facility most are contract workers that all that and their children are

free. however, when i satwith the mothers at the detention facility and then, i found out there being charged five cents a minute for those wrongful . i further found that when visiting detention facility that windows parents are there and perform labor is cleaning toilets, or doing laundry, they are paid one dollar a day. policy? familiar with that practice? >> many of the individual in custody are eligible to apply and work in a voluntary work program. not mandatory, voluntary. asyou do choose to do so at the time while they are awaiting a hearing. >> you think people literally choose to clean toilet platelets? >> we have a large number of individuals volunteer to work in the work program. >> to clean toilet?is that what you're saying? >> i know every task of siindividuals but again, voluntary. >> are you familiar with a practice that detention facility that is to pay

attention detainees a dollar a day for labor in the facility? >> i'm not familiar with that facility. >> i differ back to the committee. how many pregnant women have been detained since januaryin any facility ? >> i don't have since january, i can give you the year today. which would be as of july 21. 1395. >> transferring them to a less restrictive facility if there is such a policy on the term that they are in in pregnancy ? is there a policy? >> yes ma'am, we have a policy of detainees in their care. this policy has changed last year to comply with executive orders. in practice, the only effective change is that no longer our parents, excuse me, pregnant women given the

presumption of the release. we look at every case on a case-by-case basis. >> which was a previous policy to allow pregnant women in a lessrestrictive center . >> we still utilize it for summary release so the number we have right now is not vastly larger than it was the last few years. >> the conditions and terms by which they are detained in terms of policy change. >> we are using the same detention facilities now and in 2015 17. >> no, the presumption is as yousaid . >> and presumptive release. >> i've heard these two cases recently where women were going to labor while they were in detention, are you familiar with those cases? >> and what protocol is being followed or has been promulgated for women who are going into labor while your detention facility? i'm also concerned, are they being accompanied by ice officers to a hospital or are they, is there a patient that

they will give birth and do you have any policies in place regarding them being shackled? >> so our policy withregard to shackling , in 2011 we do not shackle women that are in active labor. >> what does active labor mean? >> they are in labor to their six months pregnant and not later, that would not be active labor. >> is there a policy regarding women being shackled westmark. >> i have to look what it says. when an individual is being transported when they would need to be for their own safety as well as the safety of the officers and inmates transferred, absolutely. >> if you can follow-up on the number of women that are in their third trimester were currently housed in your detention facilities, i appreciate. >> efthank you, or ic meeting adjourned, you all very much .for participating.

we hopefully answered a lot of questions. you will probably get questions answered in writing. some of you have received orally already. it would be a week for members to submit questions so hopefully you will get answers back. this is as soon as you can. and we thank you very much for your participation and your help and meeting adjourned.

>> the night president will hold a rally in pennsylvania in support of congressman lubar c is: passing trailing in: bob casey president 112 to 14 for eastern pennsylvania counties in 2016. live coverage starts at 7 pm on c-span2 and you can watch it at mr. albence were listed with our free radio. >>. >> there are lots of people who feel like i don't want my kids read stories that are sad, downbeat, whatever.

no that's like not a totally illegitimate thing to say. i want to choose parents when my kid understands stuff that might bring them up there are also certain points beyond which like well, they are 14 now. are you going to introduce them to the idea that not everything is perfect outside your summer? so all those factors world together to create the perfect dumpster fire of mass censorship of fulton by marginalized people. >> science fiction author cory doctorow will be our guest on in-depth fiction edition live sundaynight discussing his latest book walk away. his other books include down and out in the magic kingdom, little brother , plus casino novels. interact with corey my phone, twitter or facebook. our special series ãaction edition with author cory doctorow.

so they live from noon to 3 pm eastern on tv on c-span2. >>. >> we have found out over the last two years that many of the metanarratives that were introduced into the 2016 election were not all american origin. they were crafted by intelligence agencies outside the united states. >> sunday night on "after words", former military intelligence officer malcolm man and his book the plot to destroy democracy. >> these were very slow burning propaganda worker used by russia but which never keep pace with the news media world of the 1960s, 70s, 80s, even the 90s. only when social media came to its height of its power, the ability of you to pick up a fake story and in fact three or four or 10 other

people inside your facebook channel or twitter feed and then they would do the same thing in a daisy chain to create essentially a unbreakable length of false narrative. at that point, nothing you believe before could be real because you are left-handed on the basis of its been reinforced by everyone you know including the president. >> watched "after words" on c-span's book tv. >> acting epa administrator andrew wheeler took office after scott pruitt resigned and talk about exemptions to emissions rules and california's auto emissions regulations.