the criminal justice system. our final one is ro versus wade in two weeks. -- is roe v wade. we do have a book available that is a companion guide to the $8.95, available on our website. tony mauro, veterans critical reporter. it has summaries of each of the cases, some highlights of the decision, and what the impact or legacy of what each case has been. giving us insight into what it's like to be in the court and how the court operates. really appreciate that. thanks for your time tonight.

♪ series continues next week with the supreme court's in miranda v. arizona. the case gave rise to the

uponda warning now issued arrest after the court ruled 5-4 that suspects must be informed rights before they are questioned. find out more next monday live at 9:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. radio.3 and c-span you can also learn more about c-sp's landmark cases series by going to cases.org/landmark from the website, you can order c-span's landmark cases book featuring background, highlights and the legal impact of each case. courtn by veteran supreme journalist tony morrow and published by c-span. availablecases" is shipping.plus coming up, senate judiciary member,e ranking patrick leahy on the impact of cases. court landmark

then house homeland security mccaul onchair mike security.of homeland carr.ater baker v.

landmark cases an series an interview with patrick leahy. about landmark supreme court decisions and their to date.y this is 30 minutes. >> senator patrick leahy thank us time to talk about the landmark sprout case cases.eme court how do you talk about the role of the supreme court in society today? >> well, the supreme court, depending how they decide, really touched just about everything. we have three branches of government. obviously the president and the congress but the court.

decisions can impact so much. a presidential election before the ballots were bush v. gore, changed dramatically the way we finance .olitical elections they had a great deal of effect they basically voting rights act. some states took that as a chance to disenfranchise a lot of people. far better or worse, they can things that affect the average person. might dothan what we in individual acts of congress. >> there is a continuing debate and perhaps it's one that gotten

not thet whether or supreme court overreaches. at a level that wasn't intended founders. what is your position on that? >> some of the members of the court stick exactly what the founders said. they tend to make that a uponble view depending whether it goes with their own views. it can be a very activist court. been.ave at oneheld segregation aint and then realized what mistake they made and years it illegal. they have done some very positive things. think of a case in virginia.

only a few decades ago, a man, womanl for marriedrent races to be in virginia. for that.ere arrested inconceivable in america to be that anymore. that's because supreme court that.t clear you can do one man one woman. change.of major wade. we debated abortion. court decided roe v. wade. i remember bush v. gore. decided an election before counted.allots were

i want a supreme court that is ideologically polarized >> let's stay with that far moment. people who are critical of the actions of the supreme court anti-democratic. nine judges get to decide something or overrule something the representatives branch of government has decided. is it anti-democratic when they review the laws? is.ome of the ways it take the voting rights act. ago.was passed decades years renewed just a few ago. after hundreds and hundreds of debate and hearings and

every member of the house of representative, both parties voted for it. unanimously iny the united states senate. democratsblicans and with great law pleasure by a republican president. weeks and months of debate, testimonies and hearings. had one hearing in the supreme court. of the justices in a cavaliers way, said they haven't looked it well enough. a 5-4 decision, they overroad it. went totally against what the american people wanted.

a small sub text the american people wanted. states can use that to immediately pass laws that made virtually impossible for some of the people in those states to vote. >> you are right now the ranking democrat. that's the most senior democrat on the senate judiciary committee. panel in thehat past. would you explain what the role senate judiciary committee. be careful.to the firstd during televised hearings by the court nomination hearing. sandra dayr sandr o'connor. i had to explain the most the or american system government work. it probably be the moment when

the choose a justice of supreme court. it's a moment in the interest of all three branches are joined.nt guardianship of a constitution have to be safely conveyed. there andve to stand say, is this man or woman going to be a guided by our constitution. the senate, there's 100 senators, we have to make a for 300 million americans. we make on supreme court justices goes beyond the most of us will serve. they are lifetime appointments in the supreme court. you don'te a mistake, get to do a do over. for?at do you look >> i look for somebody -- i'm concerned about their

philosophy whether a republican democrat. will they treat all the evidence equally? one person was nominated for the supreme court because i read about thee stuff constitution and the cases. then in his testimony under oath, he's taking seem to be entirely different position. having aim, are you confirmation conversion? because iainst not agree or disagree some of the things you written or said, but inconsistency of it, thought

to be greatly. >> one of the specific cases we'll be looking at. before you came to the senate, were a prosecutor. two of the cases have to do with rights that would have affected people who were in the judicial system. is the famous miranda case. is the exclusionary law. will you talk about those in the context of your work as a they changedd how the process? very interesting vote. ast about the final i became -- time i became a prosecutor. enforcement officer for about a quarter of the state of vermont's population. was 26 years old. years.ing law for 23 i was asked on a friday if i on mondaythe job because there's been all kinds of problems in the state's

attorney's office. he was leaving. i took it over. i did some studies over that. notalized the police have mapp.oing the miranda or i bring in police officers and training them. haver have retired police up and show me the miranda card that have my name on it. them, try to point out to thieves help follow the rules of mapp. wrong thing and it's going to be excluded. of miranda,e rules warn people of their rights, you cannot use the

profession they make. rules protect you as well as the person you're arrested. follow it. good case, you're to have it, no matter what. people's rights are respected. own work androm my defending cases, sometimes you get the wrong person. show that you respected the rights. time, it was very controversial. you mean i have to read accused person. we have to tell them their rights. do.ourse you think of it this way, what if you were arrested for something and you may think, you got the wrong guy. wouldn't you want to know what rights are?

that's pretty heavily. cases were thrown out, of my cases were thrown out. they followed the rules. it's inconceivable. in my state, do not follow those rules. >> in the case of mapp, the rule much more far is the age of prosecution of people accused of terrorism against the united states. of --re some >> we are a nation of laws. supposed to follow the constitution. if you don't have something like mapp or have have exclusionary the temptation is of course we'll follow the rules. not this one time. it is so important. we got to ignore the rules.

easy andvery treacherous road to go down. that onemines what time is. i remember some members of the senate when osama bin laden's captured. was and going to be prosecuted in york. that, they read him his rights. they told him that. that is, we are a laws. that believes in don't want we want to show that theple to the rest of world? i said frankly, if you're a city andr in new york laden's osama bin son-in-law being charged, you

have all the evidence against to not,er they ca confess or you'll do anything. of course he was convicted. the signal to the rest of the world. that's why i worry about guantanamo. inch of thethe united states we want to give. plays against us. case,n always find a getwhere, somebody might away with something. happens so rarely. if you don't follow the rules, you do, then none of us get away it. by it.hurt area, some say precedence is important.

you're so involved in privacy issues. affected mapp decision government's decision tov-- how we were allowed get. it's not going out as a --secutor, you baseball and you a warrant.ly get to put theot have idea -- we have a blanket and a wall. to hurt usg longhorn. that's not going to make us suffer. the example i use is this, if in your desk at expect as a -- i

went into your home and look at and they're going to have to get more. you're holding those same files ,shouldn't they have to follow rules?e it is your privacy that we talking about. need this to be safer. we had all the information before 9/11 to stop that attack happening. they didn't take that had to and they connect dots. anything, learn to do better now. very little people look into this material who can speak languages.

doesn't make us less safe after following the rules of law. >> change sum, you referenced earlier of the voting rights act. one of the cases chosen for this is baker v. carr. chief justice called that the case during his tenure on the court. do you agree? >> i do. school at the time. georgetown. where youin vermont assume that. i realized here and way.dn't always work that have things where

dis proportionately ill. impact over the course of time has been what? think it's probably changed much in the united states. all part of the impact, you see erode it and to myself. to ask at the one look period of the court. see?happen do you he tried to get

court.nimous was first -- first look at where that was going. -- they had it unanimous. think that president eisenhower would have thought enforce it. desegregation. i was a young law student. invited theciety supreme court for lunch. came. have astance they didn't

who hashere's a man froma segregationist, couth. it very clear to the students if we're going to something significant in the going tontries, it's unanimously.ne otherwise people will question what the court is doing. notknow and i know that's always going to happen. -- when you see some of the cases, some of the bitter havent because you

workloadwho know their harder to make this unanimous. v. gore, very hard. quarte -- these were cases shall be counted. notes. at some of the i may remember some of these things. thezens united so split court. he read the dissent. scalding dissent from the bench. justify davis was a republican

nominee. nominated him. aboutt very strongly this. reasons why it for her.so much >> we have about eight minutes left. one of the other constituencies the series, is that four cases we have chosen are was 150 yearsi now part of the second founding. it that? you call >> we haven't found it without

fathers in their -- those series through.ments came it wasn't the second founding, theas the second coming of united states. that, i pick so many in really done know. those whoeven among stricken, theybe gone way off the reservation. they say thatd, citizens.ns are

a handful of people with huge amounts of money. >> why one of the other cases that we chose, you would refer era. a notorious lochner case. >> it's a case, we're not going to look at everybody in this country. at thoseng to look wellthe wealthy, the connected not to care about the

others. >> it was 32 years long when supreme court was favoring employers. fromu had the threat .ranklin roosevelt president roosevelt knew it never happen. supreme court reads the papers started suddenly changing. there was a sense that we all come from this privileged class. ours. to take care of i thought if you're a supreme court justice you supposed to take care of everybody. obviously they were not. an improvement. that.rom it also showed the same member

we can't docourt, mayhing but this or we actually get replaced so they may expand the court. decides to say you mean, those ideas of protecting employees. of course they're okay. >> we have about five minutes left. the cases that was on our actually -- harry court.was at the supreme there's a big debate over now.tive power right i wonder what do you thinkful role of making decisions about executive power? can bo back to the checks andrt, balances go back to marlboro versus madison.

it's well established. any president uses executive answer is congress doesn't like it, ask the law. of presidentticism powerto using executive immigration. the at that time passed by a 2-1 margin. as that passed the house, the president will not be doing any executive power. in the view of the tea party, it up.uldn't bring it was never brought up. has to be frustrating to a president. any time a president

are.teps, there's a they -- we'll talk about a. passing anythem law. >> in our final three minutes. backondering if you look over the arc on the course that you studied over the years. worked with -- what the greatest period of the court history? >> i think it's all the way different times.

it established the supreme court -- when you see dread scott terriblewas a decision. years -- it hurt years. there were some bad parts. end of virtual right aghts were brought, that was very good move. you start talking about one inone vote. choose.a wop's right to i would we're going into a very area where the right vote is being diminished greatly. continue ises, it

going to be badly damaged by it lowery and untraveled that's going to '20 wherek to the the and certain individuals have a pour in this country person and one vote. andill bring about cynicism disillusion among veterans. right now the supreme court along with the congress is rating.g with approval >> they suffering i think people a lot. they. i hear it from procedures. stand up with the

ability. total -- what congress has passed, hour do we have any voice? society --a complex we're not a homogeneous country, got all kinds of backgrounds where we live and what our racially andre else.hing it's not being reflected of the country. melting pock to use otors. sayn that note we have to thank you for your time. senator patrick leahy. get better.e world

>> thank you for your time. >> landmark cases series next week with the decisionourt's 1996 with miranda v. arizona. the case gave rise to the warning. 44 mighte court ruled need to by more. and on c-span, c-span 3 c-span radio. ♪ >> c-span presents landmark cases, the book, a guide to our whichrk cases series 12 historic spring decisions. versus arizona and roe

v. wade. written by veteran supreme court journalist tony mauro. an imprint of sage publications. availables -- house homeland security security committee chair michael mccaul on the state of homeland security. spoke at the national defense university in washington d.c. on monday. remarks are an hour.

>> good afternoon and welcome. the wonderful to be back at national war college. it's such a prized institution. you a privilege to join today no introduce the chairman of the homeland security committee chairman michael mccaul. is currentlyll term.g his sixth in january, he'll enter his theth year as chairman of house homeland security security committee. committee has a -- he also served on the committee of foreign affairs. under the chairman's leadership, the homeland security security theittee has made quite run. has passedhe company

bills became 7 law. this is the result of leadership teammate of chairman -- congressman mccaul was the congressional high-tech caucus and the cybersecurity caw fuss cuss. the me had led the way between and industry. he's responsible for creating the hope act, which was signed lawhe president and became in october 20.

chairman mccaul was well versed operations.unterterrorism the joint terrorism task fort charged with terrorist activity. earned hisul business in history major from of mary.y trepping called learned the equivalent.he thank you again for joining us today. ladies and gentlemen, chairman michael mccaul. you.ank

i want to thank you for your service to the committee and to country. thank you for mentioning my five -- it's tos home w cpbs, we had former attorney. to thank you sir for your service service forking. here. few is leav leaving the justice department. want top recognize john who chaired the task force. with distinction

distinction. defense be ink the can't think of a better place to remarks.e i picked this day for several reasons. anniversary of pearl harbor harbor. iifather was a world war -- 74 years ago forces strucke the united states naval base at harbor. up givingday ended give the greatest -- the

falls.rung by many.d b o again on soy barrier is at stake. we are a nation at war. on.ears rapes up newersities opened line. our own city streets are now the lines. disappointed last night when the president failed to lay thisny new steps to fight

threat. instead, he doubled down on a hesitancy and half measures.

honor we vowed never forget. never forget that day but we are repeat the mistakes of the past. we are not acting early enough terrorist groups from spreading. there are some in washington who the threatal about that we face. in 2013 president obama announced the global war on terror was effectively over. hisically this week before speech, announced the formation isis. afteruary 2014, only days isis invaded fallujah, the assident dismissed the group a j.v. team of terror. that same month, his own of homeland security, a man who i deeply respect, the jihadiste that

threat.ming more the president touted his draw down of american forces overseas declared the shadow of passed.as later the director theunced that it was deadliest in the history of global terror. the president's words came only shocking charlie attacks in paris. i assure you they did not think passed.ow of cries had claimedth the president that isis was too taint.

the president said isis.a was safe from i've had enough. threatot be blind to the before us. isis is not contained. at a great cost to the free world. november, the group managed to conduct three major terrorist on three separate continents in just three weeks. ons is not a terrorist group the run. it is a terrorist group on the march. and their ability to conduct operations is growing. linked more than westernr plots against targets. it has established presence in countries. ives fromcruited operate

nations. isis is now more dangerous than was under osama bin laden. spread into the west including the united states. the president's national security strategy released this ofr, outlines a doctrine strategic patience confronting threats. wreckless. america cannot adopt a wait and see approach while the world turns and terrorist blot. lead. called upon to it was president reagan who said direction.s invites president kennedy beforehand paid anyamerica was price bearing burden to secure our free society. but today our allies, we are up certain. to lead and eager to

place the burden on someone else. the streets of paris to the skies of egypt, we have been reminded of the tower of this movement and the ideology that fueled it. we have also been reminded that the ways can be deadly. when we see terror in western cities, when isis declares new provinces when millions of additional refugees flood the it will be further proof that inaction has serious consequences.

in fact, i believe this the unitedhas put states homeland in the highest 9/11. environment since the fbi is investigating nearly 1000 home grown terror cases. most of which isis related states.ll 50 already, federal authority have over 70 isis supporters in our country. that's more than one per week the last year. you add san bernardino to the list, there has been 19 here at home. they set up pipe bombs on detonatingl, explosives at new york city attack in american college campuses. extremist activity has made

active yeargle most of home grown terror. months of 2015. our intelligence and law professionals have stopped attacks. however in a world where terror has gone viral, we are struggling to monitor every threat. as we saw in tech, th -- texas e of a hatch not might be an internet hash tag. before ang minutes attack. as we saw in san bernardino, it be a facebook status online. word might be like the chattanooga terrorist rampage shooter have no hint

of taking the lives of united states service members. why we need to focus on stopping acts of terrorism themselves. the message of groups like isis either come to syria to join where you are.ll the administration is not doing america fromp from groupsashed like isis. no effort here at home to combat terror propaganda. are few credible offramps from the path of terrorist violence. this is unacceptable. be recruited by terrorist groups at the speed of respondingbut we are at the speed of bureaucracy.

our committee unanimously legislationartisan to accelerate prevention efforts in the homeland. in the wake of shooting in california, i'm working to get packed --quickly passed. we also need to do everything we can to keep away from terrorist safe havens. i launched a bipartisan congressional task force on combating terrorists foreign fighter travel. in the final report, task force statesed the united government has largely failed to stop americans from going overseas to join extremist. they identified security weaknesses which allow borders.s to cross more than 30,000 individuals from around the world had become fighters in syria. over 5000 of them have western

which make it easier to get into the united states. as we you saw in paris, some are being sent back to conduct the attacks. more than 250 americans also joined the fight. the 50 have already come home. some have been arrested on charges while others bombs.e ticking time we must be more urgently to shut jihadist super highway. one american said, i just went online and bought a ticket. was that easy. towas like booking a flight miami beach.

congressional delegation loopholescurity firsthand. widespread failures. many countries were not screening travelers against terror watch lists they were not checking passports for fraud and didn't have access to the needed.ence they our task force issued over 50 protecting these vulnerabilities in america and overseas. today i'm pleased to announce are turning these recommendations into law. starting this week to program.he viva waiver which allow countries to come to the united states for 90 days getting a visa. about that.

, the majority of the terrorist western passports. they can get into the united visa. without a this bill has strong bipartisan support and i believe will identified.problem this bill also force high risk to terror who been hot spot to go through a more rigorous screening process before coming to america. they will share with their allies. on passportk down fraud. this is just the beginning. over the coming weeks, we'll billsuce a slate of new passed on the findings of the task force to keep terrorists our borders. this will include enhancing the

the visa process. national strategy and improving information sharing here at home. push forward as well legislation to enhance airport the streamline department homeland security. must also move extremist combat the syria. can reveal today that the has nfctates government to indicate that individuals tied to terror group in syria is to gain access to our u.s. refugeegh the program. accordingly, i drafted

create the most robust national security vetting process to screen syrian and iraqi refugees. passed the house with a veto proof major. threats, i urge the senate to act on our legislation and for the sign it. to no longer terror plots by using cakes. today they hide their messages in dark pace. encrypted applications to their law enforcement intelligence service. the greatestf counterterrorism challenges of the 21st century. it is one of the biggest fears me up at night. when the administration says

no known credible threats it means less today than did.ce we cannot stop what we cannot see. terrorist uses secure communications and they managed to stay under the radar. findould be careful not to itself.on light on't shine a these communications even with the warrants. unfortunately, there are no answers to this complex problem. this privacy versus security challenge.

it is a security versus security challenge. a legislative knee-jerk reaction could weaken internet protections and privacy for americans, but doing nothing puts american lives at risk and makes it easier for terrorists to escape justice. it is time for congress to act because the white house has failed to bring all parties together to find solutions. that is why today i am calling for the creation of a national commission on security and technology, challenges in the digital age. i plan to unveil legislation soon that would establish this commission under congressional authorization and would bring together the technology sector, privacy, and civil liberties groups, academics, and the law enforcement community, to find common ground. this will not be like other blue-ribbon panels established and forgotten.

so thisats are real, legislation will require the a range ofto develop actionable recommendations to protect privacy and public safety. importantly, we must recognize that the best homeland defense is a good offense. this was the top recommendation of the 9/11 commission, yet we have failed to live up to it. we need to drain this want in syria and iraq, or the swamp will come to us. unfortunately, the president lexical here in military strategy. , he believes now in containment. the winning strategy is to

defeat and destroy isis, and to provide the resources to do exactly that. these are the immediate steps we need to take to turn the tide. first, we must remove the limitations that have kept us from hitting isis as hard as we can. this means loosening the rules of engagement from the air, letting our special operations forces get directly involved in the fight, and arming opposition groups more quickly and completely. second, we must carve out the space needed to protect the moderate opposition and to alleviate the humanitarian crisis. i've spoken with the ambassadors from turkey, iraq, jordan, and saudi arabia, and they agree we need a no-fly zone over parts of syria to provide safe zones where refugees can be relocated and protected. third, the united states must lead a broader global coalition

on the ground to destroy isis in syria, and one that includes nato and features deeper involvement from our regional allies. this includes our sunni arab partners who must help build an indigenous ground force to clean up their own backyard and to protect their own religion from these fanatics. we must also deal with russia. after the downing of the russian airliner, i hope mr. putin chooses to engage more constructively. he has serious homeland security issues of his own, and we have a shared interest in fighting islamist terror. before we think about working more closely with the russians, strict conditions must be met. mr. putin needs to push aside towards the exit door, cease military operations against moderate rebels, and bring an

end to russia's provocations against nato allies. only then can moscow become a potential partner in destroying isis. in the end, our military strategy must can be -- must be combined with a political strategy. last month, negotiators in vienna brokered an 18-month timeline for free elections in syria. while i am skeptical about whether this plan will succeed, we can't give up. when theis will end syrian people every taken their country and can provide the level of security needed to clear extremists from their territory. sadly, we will still need to go further. since the president failed to develop on on the ground plan to aroundt isis, we need an the globe strategy to defeat them. this is no longer just about syria and iraq.

this is about preventing countries like afghanistan from falling back into darkness. places,ll of these president obama is more inclined to tell us what he won't do rather than what he will. that is why we need a global strategy to win the war against islamist terror. president prepared to commit the resources and political will to make it a reality. the tactics of terrorists cannot stand. in return for barbaric violence, we must be prepared to deliver justice. areas been said that who we is who we were. everyone in this room is tied to the greatest generation, an era of americans who showed unflappable courage while

staring down evil as it spread across the globe. we cannot forget their courage .s our heritage it is a distinct element of the american spirit. it's not enough for us to have inherited their valor. as we embark on another long, generational struggle, we must summon their resolve. that means we cannot be satisfied with quick victories and temporary safety in the war against islamist terror. we must be prepared to keep radicals on the run and stop them from passing the torch to a new generation of terrorists. my father was a bombardier in world war ii and flew missions against the nazis. i had the distinct honor to visit normandy in may with the delegation.l

we went to omaha beach where 3000 american soldiers were , one of the most empowering, emotional moments of my lifetime, and while i know it was the bravery of men like him that won that war, he told me it is ours -- it was our nation's fortitude that won the peace. last month, the president said he was "not interested in pursuing some notion of american leadership or america winning in this long war." he thinks these are mere slogans. i differ with the commander-in-chief, because what i do know, what i do believe in deeply is that the security of our homeland and the free world depend on our determination to lead.

in this ideological battle, i know we will ultimately prevail. in the final analysis, our ideas prevail. thank you so much for having me here today. [applause] >> at this time, we would like to take some questions from the audience. if you have a question, please stand up for the chairman. >> i wonder if i could ask you seems like yout are portraying the problem of encryption as a problem of smart people not talking, but most of the smart people involved in making encryption say there is nothing to talk about.

weakening will be exploited by hackers. there is no further debate worth having. chairman mccaul: that's a great question. i've played the role of shuttle diplomacy between federal law enforcement, the intelligence community, and silicon valley. .t is a very complex issue one that initially lawmakers thought there was an easy legislative fix where we amend the statute, until we found out that providing a backdoor on everyone's iphone was not going to be a good strategy. not only would it provide a backdoor for the government, but also for hackers. you've noticed the language of the fbi director and the language of the secretary of --eland security's shifted security has shifted to find in a technology solution to this

problem. i will not tell you it's an easy solution, but i have had , so ith discussions believe there are alternatives, some solutions to this problem. i think the inherent problem and the reason why i am advocating the formation of this commission is because of the reluctance of both parties to sit in the same room together. what this legislation provides -- provides, in fact, it will mandate all parties sit in the same room together, and in a short period, provide the congress with solutions and legislative recommendations to deal with what i consider one of the most difficult challenges of this century in dealing with counterterrorism and criminal behavior. if we don't do anything, title iii wiretaps and fisa's will become a thing of the past.

when we saw the encrypted apps s, the paris attackers' iphone when eight attackers and numerous co-conspirators of foreign fighters in syria can do something like that, and it's completely under the radar screen, we know why it went undetected. it went undetected because they were communicating in dark space, in a space we can't shine a light on to see these medications, even if we have a order. we must solve this problem. i agree with you. it's not an easy one to solve. i have set them at top experts like keith alexander, one of the brightest minds on this issue, but i do believe that the first to get forcing them together in the same room to work out these differences and find a solution. i can't say that i have all the solutions to the problem, but i

know the experts know how to get there. i think that is what this legislation will provide. >> david smith of "the garden." you mentioned new efforts about people trying to enter the u.s. in terms of the refugee program. do you have any further details on that? the second question is, would you rule out a major ground force in iraq or syria, or is that a debate worth having? chairman mccaul: these are two different issues. the refugee crisis is as a symptom of a larger problem. the root cause is the civil in syria and the creation of isis and the failure to engage maliki in any political delight -- dialogue, and thereby, disenfranchising the sunni tribes.

most chose isis. we saw them drop their weapons in mosul because they didn't want to fight isis. the refugee problem is just a symptom of that. we were briefed earlier this week by the intelligence community. i don't want to get into specifics, to protect my sources, but by the intelligence isisnity, but in fact, syrians, isis members in syria have attempted to exploit it to get into the united states. that was courageous for them to come forward with this, to tell me about this personally given the political debate on the hill with the syrian refugee bill, but i think it demonstrates why that bill is so important. now we have direct evidence and intelligence they tried not only to infiltrate europe, which is easier to do, but to infiltrate

and get into the united states. to me, that is very disturbing. problem ofsolve the the refugee crisis until we deal with -- when i talk to sunni arab nations and ambassadors, they want to know we have a strategy. mr. chairman, we will put a ground force in, the turks, jordanians -- they will put a ground force in, but they insist we have a strategy. the political situation has to be resolved on the ground to it until we have that strategy, we will continue to have this problem. states tothe gulf take these refugees. that ambassadors agreed protected zone if you will in syria was the best way to do with the refugees so they don't leave syria.

refugee is somebody who wants to go back to their country. if they come to europe and the united states, they will never return. i also implored the saudis and gulf states to take these refugees. they have the wherewithal. these are sunni arabs fleeing from a sod and isis -- assad and isis. they claim they have taken refugees, but it's a bit of political spin. in fact, what they've taken in are really guest workers, not in fact refugees coming out of syria. what has happened? turkey has over 2 million. jordan has over one million. jordan can't absorb this. now europe has half a million unvetted refugees pouring into europe. we know that two of the paris attackers exploited those refugee routes to get into europe. how many more are out there? you don't know what you don't know.

>> thank you for doing this today. i wanted to ask a little bit more. you said you are maybe going to address bigger bills, the refugee bill in the house, the possibility of more vetting with the visa waiver program. [indiscernible] basically, iul: think one of the biggest highlights -- i want to thank the chairman for his work -- there is no national strategy to deal with combating terrorism and foreign fighters. it we don't have a strategy. i think you are going to see a bill in the near future that deals with that issue. extremism,iolent another bill we passed unanimously out of our committee . it is not a priority or focus within the administration to

basically combat violent extremism. what am i talking about? its radicalization from within. the boston bombers were some radical that they were kicked out of their moscow by his imam, and we didn't know about that. and every one of these cases, when you go back and look, there are early signs and flags and warning signs of radicalization. we need greater community out reach. it may not be the government itself. as a federal prosecutor, i would walk into a mosque with the fbi. it's a chilling effect. we need leaders engaged and working with a public-private partnership to engage these communities to identify early signs of radicalization. there is no priority to do this right now in this country. when we looked at the total manpower within the department of homeland security, we have less than two dozen federal

employees even working on the issue. in fairness to jeh johnson, he has started to elevate this this bill,t i think whether we pass it on the floor or put it in the omnibus would be a great step forward. i think the dark space issue is one of the most complex, dangerous issues out there. when i would look at their communications, when they radicalize somebody and get a hook onto them, they say, let's go to another messaging box, and let's go into these dark platforms. at that point, even if we have a fisa or title iii wiretap, which i used to do, we can't see communications at all. all we see is encrypted space. ismay know someone in raqqa talking to someone in paris or belgium or washington, d.c., but we can't say what they are saying.

if you can't see what they are saying, you can't stop it. when they say there is no specific and credible threat, that is what we don't know. what is communicated in the dark space we don't know? as i speak, they could be plotting a paris-style terrorist attack. i have been a critic of this administration for downplaying the threat. i think the campaign narrative has been all along to get out of iraq and afghanistan and shut down guantánamo. when isis reared its ugly head, he couldn't refuse head around that issue, because it wasn't supposed to happen. you can't wish it away, and you can't put your head in the sand. you have to confront evil where it exists. that is where we have failed as a nation to lead. lead as a superpower. lead as a superpower to get a coalition of forces to defeat

one of the greatest evils in my lifetime. >> good afternoon. i'm with the center for complex operations here. that foreign fighters coming back, americans coming back to the u.s. are either being arrested -- [indiscernible] is there anything being done to look at those individuals differently? chairman mccaul: without getting into too much of what the fbi obviously,igatively, in my career, we would follow people. you get to a certain point where you have to take down the individual, but prior to the

takedown, there is an intelligence value to monitoring and following them. with the 50 that have returned, the ones we can charge with the constitution, we do, and for the ones we can't, we monitor them. and monitoring them, we gain , but intelligence value once they get to a certain point, we have to take them down, which is why you seem over 70 isis-related arrests over the past year. the fbi and homeland have decided to take out the threat before it could -- they could attack americans. it's a delicate balance. say, of my constituents why aren't you rolling them up and throwing them in jail? we have the constitution. you can't just arrest people and throw them in jail without evidence.

some of these people, we are not quite sure what they were doing over there. were they working with doctors without borders, or were they doing something more to farias? since we don't have the intelligence on the ground adequate to know, this is the problem. you don't know what you don't know. with syrian refugees, we don't know anything about these people because we have no databases in syria. we are getting better intelligence now in syria. unfortunately, the russians are blowing it up. they don't have rules of engagement. to answer your question, there's a very good intelligence value to monitoring an individual without the proper predicate to arrest, but enough to monitor them with predication to monitor their communications. if they are going onto a dark platform with a nap -- an app, we can't see what they are saying. this is a new phenomenon.

we use to look at careers. we were looking at foreign fighters who could do an attack like paris, but what do you do about guys communicating and radicalizing in the united states over a dark platform where you can't see what they are saying? it's very pervasive. they are in their 20's. they are young, sophisticated. hussein was only 23 years old. hussein was the one who did the , new york, the plots. he was sending out directives to come to syria or kill where you are, kill mayra terry. he was taken out by an airstrike, but his wife is still alive, and there are others who to form aced him cyber jihadist army, if you will, out of internet cafés in raqqa. look at over 200,000 isis tweets

per day that are going on around the world. this is not a european and u.s. problem. it's a global phenomenon, and it is spreading at broadband speed. >> dealing with the cyber aboutty issue, we talked the broader cyber challenge. people talk about the next cyber pearl harbor. thank you for your leadership on cyber security. would you like to expand a little bit on some of the challenges? chairman mccaul: i focused on islamist terror, but the cyber bernardino,ris, san some of these can be one or two-man operations.

a cyber attack, if done as an attack of cyber warfare, would be devastating, and the consequences could be far more severe in terms of the capability to bring things down. we have the criminal theft of ip. we have espionage. andnow china attacked opm stole 20 million security clearances, the greatest active espionage by a nationstate against the united states in cyberspace. no response to that other than a couple meetings with them to work things out? it's the power grids. it's the stock exchange, financial sector, energy sector, all tied to the internet. we are tied more to the internet than any other nation, and therefore, we are most vulnerable to a cyber attack because of that. we are in a conference with the senate as we speak to pass on

information sharing bill that will allow both the federal government and private sector to share these codes, with liability protection, and it's a voluntary program. to share these codes in a civilian portal and the department of homeland security. we are hopeful or this may be the biggest, most significant piece of cyber legislation ever passed by the congress. it needs to be done now, because the threat is so severe. if we don't pass it now, we are going to get hit. the sony attack was very destructive. they are on our financial sector all the time, russian activitiesd targeting home depot. it's finally getting the attention from the american people it deserves. the senate, we are trying to get to a middle ground between the house and senate as we speak, and i'm optimistic we will get

there, but it's absolutely we passed it. the white house -- i've been critical of them in my speech -- on this issue, i must say the white house has been a very good partner in trying to get this accomplished. >> the other last question? [laughter] >> i was wondering if you could talk we passed it. about the directive to .ttack where you are as we've seen with san bernardino and in the last few years with attacks on u.s. military bases, and paris, what has been done with guns -- the white house, as you know, has proposed using the no-fly list to try to take guns out of the hands of terrorists.

version you think you could use to try to accomplish that? chairman mccaul: let me say first -- i used to prosecute gun terrorists too, so i've got some background, but when someone purchases a firearm, that is a background check run on them. the fbi is notified, and the fbi will know if this person is on a watchlist or no-fly list. they factor that in. if for some reason under the current law to prevent the purchase, they do. this is a complicated issue. sometimes, people are put on the watchlist based on suspicion, and you are talking about denying a fundamental constitutional right because of that. if there is insufficient evidence to issue a warrant for

an arrest, to me, there's not enough evidence to deny a second amendment constitutional right. noing said that, make mistake -- if the fbi sees someone on one of these lists, and under the current law, that purchase cannot be denied, they will be obviously monitored to prevent any further potential terrorist attack from occurring. one bill that i am a cosponsor of -- a lot of these cases are either mental illness or isis-related. i know congressman tim murphy has health legislation. martha mcsally has a bill that simply says, if you have been adjudicated mentally defective come under current law, you cannot purchase a firearm. when i was in new york a month ago after one of the shootings

-- they have training to deal s -- theree shooter' are so many of these cases that haven't been put into the system. the navy yard shooter had been adjudicated mentally defective under the law and yet was able .o purchase a firearm his information was not put in the system. this bill, and senator cornyn has a companion in the senate, would provide funding to help ramp up the process to make sure that anybody who has been found by a judge -- not just someone who goes to a doctor because they want counseling. at you can see the final line. if you get denied a second amendment right because you went to see counseling for an issue, which there are probably people in this room who have done that, the standard is, an arbiter, a judge who has declared that person to be mentally defective, so the bill would enhance