a major incentive to come illegally. am i wrong? are important.s in part you are correct. the del rios sector does not necessarily release a whole lot of illegal aliens because they have immigration customs and foresman will stop they have the bed space to hold onto these people. is, do we have the space to hold onto these individuals and if we do have the space, then they do hold onto them. if we do not have the space, we release them. that is where the resources come into play. that is where the resources come into play. claim fearys aliens and have been subject to terrorism bars. it couldink that

encourage mourn of various actors to enter illegally along the southwest border? reasonable tois assume that the nefarious actors are constantly looking for ways to gain entrance to the united states. of i said, in the age instantaneous communication, the flaws in our border security are known instantaneously and carried in the media. it is a legitimate concern and i applaud the committee for taking an interest in this subject. >> one the word gets out, if you are somebody that would like to do the knotted states harm, you can come to the border, claim credible fear, he will likely be released -- released and have a court date in a couple years? >> now. in the olden days of people wanted to make an asylum claim we told them, fine, we will schedule you for an apartment -- for an appointment.

we will not admit you. that is still a code section in the immigration and nationality act. >> to you think if we moved away from some of these loopholes, people would come to be apprehended but wouldn't that be a deterrent for people to realize is not the best use of my time if they think there is the probability that the law can be enforced? >> absolutely. it would help to have an administration that is serious about defending the border and enforcing the laws and acted by congress.

there are also things congress can do to require officer training for more immigration officers. but when you have time to interview you, we will interview you, there is statutory authority already. >> my time has expired and i recognize the ranking member, mr. lynch. >> i do not want to spend a lot of time but let's talk about the credible fear standard. i would like to also thank chairman meadows and connolly for holding this hearing as well to examine border picture --

patrol and security. we are witnessing the largest global force displacement of people since world war ii. conflict, persecution, violence, and flagrant human rights violations have forcibly displaced nearly 60 million people worldwide, including 19.5 million refugees, 38 million internally displaced persons, and 1.8 million asylum seekers. that is a 60% increase from a decade ago. over 50% of the refugee population is now made up of children below 18 years of age. marking the highest child refugee figure in more than 10 years. in 2014, more than 34,000 asylum applications were submitted by other companies or separated children across 82 countries. the highest count on record since they began collecting the data in 2006. the war in syria and the rise of the islamic state have brought the unprecedented surge in global displacement. approximately 7.6 million people have been displaced within syria alone.

more than 4 million refugees have fled the country since 2011. >> i want to caution that the united states, not only does it have obligations under the international refugee camp, but we also have to think about turning to other states. if we have to turn people away from our border, what message does that send? in terms of the credible fear process, the 1996 law, instead of allowing people to go to immigration court removal proceedings allowed people to be deported on the order of a cvp

officer. we have found in the day in and day out practice that many who are legitimate refugees are not passing that process. review happens in just a couple of days and quickly in rare places. >> there are pull factors and push factors. we went down to el salvador and guatemala city. airport when the people who are mostly kids, with a few parents, when the kids arrived back in -- we had stopped them at the border and sent them back. by 1:00 in the afternoon, every

kid had been picked up, every child had been picked up. every child had been taken home by their families. thedeal there in talking to immigrants, to these families trying to get to the united , -- they getlly three tries to get to the united states. they call them coyotes. i do not like to use that term because it has a romantic appeal. these are human traffickers. they are putting these humans at grave risk in this whole exercise here. what i'm getting at is, there is a push factor. there is a push factor by having low standards in this country for allowing immigrants to come in but also because there is an industry in central america.

more profitable than smuggling drugs and most countries do not have human trafficking laws in place. they can do this and there are no dire consequences as the would-be if they were trafficking in drugs and guns. patrolking my border folks, is this the nature of the problem? what is a greater factor? of the unitedr states being lakhs or -- being lacks, or the push factor pushing them up to the border? >> we found through are a multitude of factors and drive .olks away smugglers have taken advantage of the situation where people believed that if they came to the united states that they could stay and we have reports smugglers are using that concept to draw more people that might not consider the trip.

clearly, the mexican cartels adopt people as a commodity and it is a core business model for the mexican cartels. many tot to encourage come across because they do not need precursor chemicals. they make immediate profit even when the get to the river. when further compounded by they move across river often, they will load them in stash houses and continue to extort them for additional money. >> mr. judd, do you have anything to add? >> absolutely. it comes down to risk reward. there is very little risk when you are smuggling migrants. cold,countability that we

when we arrest them it is a very low standard, but if we arrested drug smuggler smuggling cocaine or something like that, then the consequences are much greater. in theent a lot of time middle east and so do a lot of members in this committee. when angela merkel last august said, germany welcomes the , she ended ups with 1.3 million. she never expected it. that was a pull factor. they all want to go to germany because they were beckoned to do so. i'm wondering if we have a similar situation here, when there was civil war in el -- andr and nicaragua those people could had

legitimately said i have a civil war back home, i need to come to the united states. atdid not see the requests the borders that we are seeing now. there is something else going on here and maybe we are part of it appear creating this problem. >> the chair recognizes mr. meadows for five minutes. >> let me follow up a little bit on what mr. lynch just talked about because as we start to look at this particular issue, there is a big difference between refugees and asylum-seekers. somehow, we put those two together assuming that they are one and the same and they are not. served on the global health and human rights, foreign affairs committee. there is nothing that is closer to my heart that helping those who are truly in need.

but what mr. lynch is talking about is what are the place where they are most troubled from a standpoint of people needing asylum or refugee status. what countries come to mind as being the most horrific? what country would you put in the top two? it in terms look at of numbers and then of course you have syria. >> syria is number one? >> i will not rate the right now but -- >> is it in the top five? >> yes, i would say so. was talkinglynch about if the worst place in the world is syria, what we would see is coming across the southern border this mass infiltration from syria. but when we start to look at the numbers it is not bearing that out as much. understand the process because she talked about

the fact that these asylum seekers come and sit in jail. believe since to 2009 there was a different administration rule that would not actually put them in jail. that mr. judd would apprehend them, they would seek credible fear and they would be released and not sit in jail waiting for that. is that correct? >> there are two distinct programs. we have the most generous overseas rescue program and the world taking well over 55,000. >> the state department is involved. >> that is a pick and choose program. program -- there is

no limit on asylum. if you can claim that you are a refugee and already here, we cannot return you to your home country. there is no numerical limit. it is very tempting, given the fact that you may be a refugee turkey.laced person in if the u.s. does not pick you, you are stuck there. sooner oret processed later. that is a great temptation as mr. lynch says, that is a pull factor to the extent that people have a realistic expectation and i think the administration is

trying to balance expectations and deliver only trying to deter people by imposing consequences on their coming to the united states and making claims. >> i can tell by the nonverbal restaurants to your right that she does not agree. very short because i have limited time. >> are certainly protected from a large syrian influx by our geographical location, but the northern triangle countries are incredibly dangerous and asylum request are up significantly in the region as well. represent day out we asylum-seekers -- jailu said you put them in if there are credible fear claims, border -- border patrol will put them in jail? >> it depends where it is at. in rgb, most likely not because

we do not have the bed space. in the real sector? i can tell you that i drove by. it is anything but a jail. there are no fences, there is nothing around it. it is been described more like a country club. >> so we either let them go or put them in what you would classify as a country club setting. >> from what i saw. >> so part of the testimony here is that we deny a lot. it appears that in 2013 we approved 92% of the people across the border. 92% of the people who came across and said there is a credible fear that got approved. in the first quarter of this year it is 86%. approvinglooking at

that many, it is a lost everybody who comes across who says i have a credible fear and i want asylum. is that the reason those numbers continue to go higher? >> unfortunately, i do not go through the entire process. >> do they get along interview? what is it like? >> when we arrest them, if they are from countries other than mexico, it is very quick. they just have to claim that they have credible fear. >> if i am speaking farsi, i can say i have credible fear and i do not get a real interview. >> you don't. >> so the very people that may be terrorists, and i don't want to categorize one particular group speaking a particular language, but those are higher threat areas to us. >> for special interest we notify the fbi the

.bi immediately they were immediately turned over to the fbi. we didn't even interview them. for china and bangladesh would be the same. as long as they tell us they have credible fear, the interview basically ends for porter patrol. >> the chair now recognizes the gentlewoman from illinois. >> in today's complex threat environment, effective andterterrorism law-enforcement efforts rely on sophisticated intelligence gathering and sharing capabilities. we should focus our efforts to strengthen the border. states aten testimony

whole of government approach er agencyrages int partnership will be the most effective way to keep our borders secure. which other agencies does customs and border control share intelligence or information with to secure the border? the entities, state, local, tribal, are at the immediate border and we have important relationships in the contiguous countries of canada and mexico with their immigration authorities. cdp has the benefit of a worldwide footprint. where wef the places are active either providing services for people coming in the country or a liaison relationship, in places like mexico and canada. that has a common

interest of securing the border, etc., those are people that we interact with. can you further explain how they act as a force multiplier? >> it is a simple example with the mexican immigration authorities when a surge of unaccompanied minor started in 2014. several requests through that liaison and official government requests to do more at their southern border. up androup stepped effectively shut down some of the more common routes of people coming to the united states and seeking out to prosecute smugglers responsible for some of that activity. that led to an overall reduction of people who could use those routes. we were able to support their work with liaison's and mentors theexico, to understand

challenges we haven't given tips and advice and mentorship so that they can do their work better. >> that is a good example of how the hout inter-agency international partnerships can strengthen the border. important have a very relationship in canada as well. information about threats that we perceive coming from the u.s. into canada and vice versa. it is the responsibility of our leadership in the field to maintain good relationships with all law enforcement in the community so we can identify and make sure we understand which of the threats are most important by community and work together to update them. >> it seems when you hear about threats to the border it is always the southern border, not as much the northern border. what are their percentages? >> overwhelmingly our resources are demonstrated at the southern

border. of the nature of the real estate and the differences in both economies, etc.. we also have important work that we do with canada and similar things as it relates to where we need to be on the border, technology to help us patrol and monitor and the relationships are key in understanding the threats that are faced. >> your testimony continues working with our state, local, tribal and international partners to address transnational threats. helpfules of information does the u.s. and others provide that the u.s. would not have access to? cdp helps identify the criminal networks responsible for human trafficking and gun smuggling, and illicit

financing. we try to understand amongst ourselves what the threats are and how to combat them and to help identify by network which are the most problematic. do you feel these partnerships improved over time and you're getting more information and there is more of a comfort level with these other agencies? >> in canada i think it has been stable. in mexico it ebbs and flows with the changes of the administration. but they have been a strong in theirith us immigration authorities. >> thank you mr. chair. >> the chair recognizes the gentleman from florida, mr. mica for five minutes.

ents we have seen and relating to the terrorism at our border vulnerability. tens of thousands of illegals are coming across the border. would that be appropriate. do you think that is correct? >> that is correct. these are very motivated individuals. you described the vehicle that they cut the wires and came and you do not know

whether there were drugs, weapons or explosives? they carried great quantities of that across the border. >> it could have been anyone. >> let me ask the dhs representative, i just heard drugel chapo, the noted kingpin and czar, he bragged capture liker his he was coming on some regular vacation journey to the united states, are you aware of that? >> no, i had not heard that. >> not only were we informed that he was crossing routinely, of have evidence that some the weapons, at least one of the weapons found when he was captured was from the fast and furious collection which was .rovided by the u.s. government >> i did see that in media reports. >> mr. judd, you described one

of the issues and you said border patrol due to dhs prosecutorial guidelines released more than 800 illegal aliens in our custody were subjected to deportation hearings. they were released because they claimed to have been in the united states continuously since january 2014. through policy -- this is the president's policy of amnesty. is that what rules proceedings? control --sk border border patrol agents, absolutely. >> so we have allowed tens of thousands -- i saw an estimate of about 50,000 criminal illegals in the united states, a

guesstimate. they are subject to deportation, aren't they? -- anybodysubject here illegally is subject to deportation. >> we have allowed millions this sort of waiver and tied your hands which you put in your written testimony. not only the borders but the airports throughout our borders where people are flying in whether it is from europe or central, south america and around the world. there is a credential screening gateway system which was thatned in an ig report worker credentials that stack, we don't have thousands of passport numbers. no alien people who --

registration number for immigrants working at our airports, 13,000. no passport number for immigrants, 75,000. first names with two characters or less, 1500. 87,000 active and we do not have those records, are you aware of that? dhs inspector general report. >> it is not my area but i am aware of the reporting. >> at the borders -- we have people working at the airports who we do not even know anything about. we cannot even confirm their alien registration number or their passport number, is that correct? >> yes.

>> if i may, in my local community, my police chiefs -- we have a big drug epidemic in florida throw the nation we talked about illegal aliens. they say that they arrest them and detain them and call border patrol and they advise them they cannot help them and are often just escorted to the county line. that there are local jurisdictions and borders? this?t area is >> central florida. back intoumping them the community and you all are refusing to do anything. maybe some of it is like what mr. judd described.

we have let them through presidential edicts stay here and not be accountable. >> the gentleman recognizes the gentleman from virginia for five minutes. in listening to this last , i seem tostioning think that some progress has been made but maybe i am wrong. how many border patrol agents are there on the southern border? >> approximately 17,500. >> how many would there have been eight years ago? >> at least half that. >> so we have doubled them? bill,e immigration reform that had been worked out on a bipartisan basis in the senate would have doubled that again, is that correct? >> i believe so. >> so, we doubled the border

patrol agents. deportations that fall into record lows -- >> i think that our activity overall has seen a reduction with the buildup of resources that we have had. >> is it not true that in this last eight year period we have record deportations. >> i have seen various reports of the numbers and i think that there was a time when those numbers were higher and now have dropped off comments written with the reductions. >> at the height of deportations , where they hiring -- higher in the previous eight years? >> i believe they hit an all-time high. >> in this administration? >> status my -- that is my understanding. >> hiding by executive order

order sounds good, but there is another record to be told. going back to your point about secure borders, do you mean to say it is harder to get into the united states, the borders are less porous because the measures were put in place, including personnel were more effective? >> we are certainly more capable than we were, as far as the number of agents, the level of technology, the information in place and the improvements we have made. >> all of that combined has allowed us to catch people if they try to cross the border? >> we certainly have got much more capability. >> so we are deterring lots of people at the border? >> it is hard to measure deterrents. over the historic highs in the number of arrests we are wait -- making, we have

seen a reduction in that. the insufficient measure of apprehensions alone that we have seen reductions in activity commensurate with the in thements we're seeing physical structures and other things we are doing. postarrest interviews. >> mr. mica made the point. hear anecdotally, people who are deported, including gang activists and leaders, especially from el salvador and honduras, who are multiple times deported and multiple times reenter the united states. it is not the penultimate punishment or deterrent. can you comment on that? what are we doing to try to make are that repeat entrants

permanently barred and deterred? >> we do have the number of arrests as well as their previous immigration history. theugh the things like consequence delivery system we target things that will be repeat offenders or recross multiple times. we seek assistance from the u.s. district attorney's office to prosecute those folks when we find them. >> do you have a special division or a special targeting task force or system with respect to gang activities? in a lot of our communities, we are worried about dad actors who but weious gang members do not want them in our communities and we do not want them in our countries and we want them back home, though that causes albums too.

are you targeting that particular subgroup? then the context of delivery system, anyone who is a repeat offender we seek to use the maximum effective -- in the cities and towns represented we work with our state and local officials. am asking good, but i if we can target them and profile them as a likely repeat offender? that is what we want to deter. data in theate the agent is doing the booking procedure, when they run the angerprint, they will have

previous record and those that tip the scale toward gang activity or known criminal --enses inside of that working with the local u.s. attorney's office to get them prosecuted. >> the chair recognizes the gentleman from georgia for five minutes. let me go a different direction for a moment . >> you noticed in the past some of the challenges in securing the border on federal land. specifically, what sort of action to agents face when access is limited? >> i can tell you that i started my career in el centro, california. if an illegal alien would cross the border, i could follow them in my vehicle until i caught them, forever. i could go follow them forever.

, ifif you look at arizona an illegal alien crosses i have to get out of my vehicle, they have to call somebody and they try to get ahead of me. access roads which puts us behind the curve and it is difficult to access individual's unprotected land. another similar type of fault with you regarding federal land. you are aware of the permitting delays? roader it is for maintenance or forward operating bases or mobile surveillance systems -- what is an acceptable period of time permitting to take place before you have lost your tactical advantage? >> in the concept of, when pursuit, whenhot

they are actively following a trail, even in the wilderness area they have the ability to continue on that traffic. as it relates to infrastructure and other improvements in certain protective land, we have a memorandum of understanding with the department of agriculture to work through things like permitting environmental assessments for improvements we want to make. >> at some point, your intel becomes irrelevant if permitting takes so long to where if one kind of time for -- what kind of timeframe is reasonable? >> as soon as possible. receiving cooperation? >> they encourage us to start the conversation and work toward milestones to get things

accomplished that we want to have done. >> we all know that isis is attempting to exploit any and on ourour loopholes nation's national security and in particular our borders from infiltrating the refugee program. borders,omes to our how can we mitigate those. i will begin with you, mr. judd. >> the best way to mitigate these risks are resources in the field giving us the resources necessary. >> i think it is very much related to the volume of border crossers that have to be processed. we were all aware there was a tremendous border search and fy 2015 and preliminary statistics

show that the border security in the current fiscal year may exceed that number. >> when you have an historic border that stresses the resources available at the border, it makes it more likely that security risks can take advantage of that situation and had a trait our border. simply writing the tide of the high volume of processing that has to occur. looking at fy 2016, a lot of us think we are confronting that situation this year. how i -- how you, high are the security risks and how do we mitigate it? >> it is substantial. connolly was concerned about other criminal aliens that come across and had

you keep them coming back? the only way to do it is to secure it. we to provide agents more detection technology and aviation assets. that's the only way you can actually dig mitigate the risk. >> mr. chairman, can i just weigh in. >> the gentleman's time has expired, we will have a chance for votes here, so let me recognize the man from michigan. >> mr. judd, a constituent of who is a dhs officer contacting me, he has been working on the border in california. concern about a policy between california and

mexico. where individuals who cross illegally cannot be set home. as long as seven to 10 years down the road. are you aware of that policy? >> yes i am. we debit the catch and -- we do policy.atch and release officials believe it is one of those factors that invites individuals to try to break us. is it unique to california? >> it is not. all of the aliens who cross the border given notices to appear before the court? >> no, they are not. let me take that back. not all illegal aliens that we arrest or given notices to appear. there are different factors that go into that.

i would say if we see them cross the border they will be given a notice to appear. what is the typical time frame for court hearings? with the courtl hearings. from what i am hearing from high-level dhs officials, i am hearing anything from five to seven years. i have heard the same thing. it varies by city and the capacity that the department of justice has to schedule an notice those hearings. on thei weigh in immigration reports? we have just issued a report to adequately fund the immigration courts to bring down those delays. >> your contention is funding? >> yes, that is a major need for fundings -- funding for the immigration courts. there anyd, are

efforts to keep track of the where of the individuals that are a winking -- awaiting these lengthy time? hearings >> not that i'm aware of, all they need to do is provide us an address, for instance, in the mid to thousands we were arresting a large number of brazilians in the tucson sector and all brazilians were giving us the exact same address. >> large buildings? >> yes and we were releasing them based on the addresses they were giving us. >> i assume that this is frustrating to your colleagues? >> it is extremely frustrating. but one gets even more frustrating is when we have a supervisor who tells us that if we do not like it, we can find another job. macgraw, how are the administration efforts or enforcement priorities and

release policies affecting your organization? clearly concerned. there is no adequate way to properly vet them. concerned that we continue to see transnational gangs, cartel operatives, drugs, heroin, marijuana, methamphetamine, cocaine infiltrating a drought in texas. those are the key concerns that we have. we've a transnational crime that happens. including stash house extortion and kidnappings. all of those things occur that we are having to address in texas because of it. >> i would assume that you have

ideas on how to secure that? >> if you were allowed as a state official, responsible for securing your peoples safety and borders, could you do it? >> i can tell you that this chief to me could do it if provided the appropriate resources. if border patrol is given this -- the adequate assets, they could do it today. no doubt in my mind. a problem but for the fact that you are not able to do what you are able to do and assume that he is not as well. >> the problem is that it has not been properly resourced for the decades. border security has not a priority or a concern through multiple administrations. in today's environment in it and not be concerned with border security. texas and a national security standpoint.

>> the gentleman's time has expired, we will try to go to can book for five minutes. 2014, judd, real quickly, as a result of the change in the onsident's policies immigration in 2014 we saw a surge of minors crossing the border. do you know the percentage of those minors from contiguous countries? >> very few. majority are from non-countries. >> how are they treated fromrently if a juvenile mexico enters versus eight juvenile from el salvador? >> >> if it is a juvenile from mexico they will be treated the exact same. it does not matter what country you are from. if you claim credible fear and claim your seeking asylum you'll

be treated the same by order patrol. >> mr. patella, and a different treatment or process that is used for contiguous versus noncontiguous individuals? both populations would be screened to make sure they were not victims of human trafficking. cann most cases we facilitate the return into mexico with the assistance of their government. so being placed with hhs does not necessarily always occur with folks from mexico because they have a friendly neighbor and they will facilitate ringing their citizens back and repatriating them. >> of there is a legal distinction in terms of how they are -- >> the law requires that all the populations are screened. noncontiguousom

countries, the law allows for us not to do that screening and once we recognize that there are non-accompanied -- unaccompanied children it is the chance to transfer them to another department of health and human services which puts them in a beting where they can reunited with family in the states are cared for appropriately given their age. >> that is individuals in noncontiguous countries? >> correct. >> and many of them, you used the term friendly. in many of them we have a friendly relationship with also? >> we do. >> if the law changed, we could arrange it in a situation where they are not victims of human smuggling or seeking asylum. we could arrange for those individuals to be returned to those countries without going to the five to seven year hearing

process? >> that would require a change in the law, as far as i know. >> do you see any adverse effect in changing that law? >> i would have to look exactly at the contours of that, but certainly in our relationship with mexico this is a smaller problem. miss acer advocated, all we need is more money. if we increased our national debt above the $19 trillion, we could take care of this problem. a much simpler solution, much less costly and more humane to the individuals coming into this country would be to change that law and allow those individuals to return to their homes and set up policy in this country that does not attract juveniles like magnets. humane it would be more rather than putting somebody in limbo for five years.

>> the chair now recognizes the gentleman from wisconsin for five minutes. some territory that we have already covered a this is a, but question for mr. judd and mr. ting. effective do you believe the administration's commitment to border security has been? i am not a partisan person. under the impression we did not get a lot from the past administration either. changing, how has the fear and commitment then in last ministration to border security? yield to mr.g to udd, but how serious are they?

i think there is a lack of concern for deterrence. i think that deterrence is an important part of immigration policy. we will never have enough order patrol agents on the line if we do not to turn people from attempting to violate our laws. i think that deterrence is part of immigration policy which has been abandoned by this administration and not a high priority of previous administrations. one of my colleagues said the poor people of the poor -- of the world may be poor, but they are not stupid. out and figure that they are going to figure it out. if we don't deter people, they will figure out that you have a better life in the united states. your kids go to school for free, there is better security and better job opportunities.

you can compete with americans for jobs in the united states. that is fixed in to the cost-benefit analysis. we can overwhelm resources by sending messages that were -- that we are like angela merkel willing to accept unlimited to come liveople with us in the united states. notan do that and it will matter how much money we spend on the border and how many border patrol agents that we put up. >> i do not mean to put words in your mouth, but it seems to me that at least under the last two thenistrations, while average american knows that we have border patrol and thinks ,hat we have border control there hasn't been a commitment for many years in this country by powerful people who presumably ran and said that

they wanted to enforce immigration laws. for whatever reason passive ministrations of both parties do not seem to care that much for enforcing our immigration laws. i don't know what is going on in her head but do you think that is an accurate statement? >> this is the first election campaign that i can recall that immigration has been a major issue and historically both parties have not wanted to raise immigration because it is such an emotional and divisive issue. for the first time this year, suddenly immigration has popped up as an issue. maybe it is the unusual situation we have seen at the border. certainly it is the national security situation that we are arefeeling that people focused on immigration and asking, why are we having such overwhelming problems at our borders and wanting something to be done? i think that deterrence is part of it. send theistration must

message that we are serious about enforcing our laws and we will do the best that we can to enforce them efficiently. people are not entitled to be here and to expect to be turned around at the border, and asylum interview and if they are denied, they should be turned around immediately. will, what, if you you have to have is agency officials who will tell you the truth. and tell to be open you everything. i will tell you that you have a chief patrol agent right now who has been very open and given you all candor. that because of that openness and because of that candor, our current acting chief patrol agent will not even be considered for the department chief patrol agent because "he cannot be controlled."

just in my final 10 seconds would like to correct mr. ting. i think there are a lot of republicans who were very concerned about what happened under president bush and do not want another resident like bush representing our party in the future. >> the time has expired. i would like to thank the witnesses. i think his hearing was important in fleshing out some important aspects of our national policy here. we do not have a secured order, we are inviting threats to our country and it goes from having more resources more physical security but as professor king said, you have to have laws that are actually enforced and people need to see that. that we will continue in this vein on this committee but in particular, there was a particular report

where we had in custody 124 different detainees that they later released and that after ice released them they got charged with murder. that,s the type of thing had ice simply done its job properly may be people would not have been killed in our country and i think that is an absolute tragedy. if there is no further business, without objection, this subcommittee stands adjourned. [inaudible]

>> coming up next, your calls and comments live on "washington journal." then "newsmakers." after that, actor george decay -- george takei talks about the treatment of japanese americans world war ii. >> tonight on c-span, the supreme court cases that shaped our history come to life with the c-span series "landmark cases."

between some of the most significant decisions in american history. in marburyshall versus madison said that this is different. it sets up the political structures but it is also a law. when the courts to tell what it means. have the courts to tell what it means. >> this was the ultimate anti-presidential case. >> who should make the decisions about this case? and lochner versus new york, the supreme court said that it should make the decisions. >> tonight we will look at the case that established the constitution as the supreme law and establishing the supreme court is the national review. tonight and c-span and c-span.org. >> this morning on "washington ifield hasjames holl

the latest on the refugee crisis in europe. then later rachana pradhan has more on the affordable care act. "washington journal" is next. host: it is sunday, march 27, 2016, easter sunday. welcome to "washington journal." happy easter. we are going to spend the first 25 minutes, first of all, telling you what happened last night in the caucuses overnight. but secondly, because a presidential election means so much to our attorney policy and our role in the world, we're going to ask you about what, what should be america's role in the world? democrats, 202-748-8000. republicans, 202-748-8001. independents and all others, 202-748-8002. or join us on