[House Hearing, 116 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY'S FAMILY SEPARATION POLICY:
PERSPECTIVES FROM THE BORDER
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON
BORDER SECURITY, FACILITATION,
AND OPERATIONS
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED SIXTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
MARCH 26, 2019
__________
Serial No. 116-8
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Homeland Security
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.govinfo.gov
__________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
36-397 PDF WASHINGTON : 2019
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office,
http://bookstore.gpo.gov. For more information, contact the GPO Customer Contact Center,
U.S. Government Publishing Office. Phone 202-512-1800, or 866-512-1800 (toll-free).
E-mail, po@custhelp.com.
COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY
Bennie G. Thompson, Mississippi, Chairman
Sheila Jackson Lee, Texas Mike Rogers, Alabama
James R. Langevin, Rhode Island Peter T. King, New York
Cedric L. Richmond, Louisiana Michael T. McCaul, Texas
Donald M. Payne, Jr., New Jersey John Katko, New York
Kathleen M. Rice, New York John Ratcliffe, Texas
J. Luis Correa, California Mark Walker, North Carolina
Xochitl Torres Small, New Mexico Clay Higgins, Louisiana
Max Rose, New York Debbie Lesko, Arizona
Lauren Underwood, Illinois Mark Green, Tennessee
Elissa Slotkin, Michigan Van Taylor, Texas
Emanuel Cleaver, Missouri John Joyce, Pennsylvania
Al Green, Texas Dan Crenshaw, Texas
Yvette D. Clarke, New York Michael Guest, Mississippi
Dina Titus, Nevada
Bonnie Watson Coleman, New Jersey
Nanette Diaz Barragan, California
Val Butler Demings, Florida
Hope Goins, Staff Director
Chris Vieson, Minority Staff Director
------
SUBCOMMITTEE ON BORDER SECURITY, FACILITATION,
AND OPERATIONS
Kathleen M. Rice, New York, Chairwoman
Donald M. Payne, Jr., New Jersey Clay Higgins, Louisiana, Ranking
J. Luis Correa, California Member
Xochitl Torres Small, New Mexico Debbie Lesko, Arizona
Al Green, Texas John Joyce, Pennsylvania
Yvette D. Clarke, New York Michael Guest, Mississippi
Bennie G. Thompson, Mississippi (ex Mike Rogers, Alabama (ex officio)
officio)
Alexandra Carnes, Subcommittee Staff Director
Emily Trapani, Minority Subcommittee Staff Director
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Statements
The Honorable Kathleen M. Rice, a Representative in Congress From
the State of New York, and Chairwoman, Subcommittee on Border
Security, Facilitation, and Operations:
Oral Statement................................................. 1
Prepared Statement............................................. 3
The Honorable Clay Higgins, a Representative in Congress From the
State of Louisiana, and Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Border
Security, Facilitation, and Operations:
Oral Statement................................................. 4
Prepared Statement............................................. 5
The Honorable Bennie G. Thompson, a Representative in Congress
From the State of Mississippi, and Chairman, Committee on
Homeland Security:
Oral Statement................................................. 7
Prepared Statement............................................. 8
Witnesses
Ms. Jennifer Podkul, Director of Policy, Kids In Need of Defense:
Oral Statement................................................. 10
Prepared Statement............................................. 11
Ms. Michelle Brane, Director for Migrant Rights and Justice,
Women's Refugee Commission:
Oral Statement................................................. 20
Prepared Statement............................................. 21
Ms. Julie M. Linton, Co-Chair, Immigrant Health Special Interest
Group, American Academy of Pediatrics:
Oral Statement................................................. 29
Prepared Statement............................................. 31
Mr. Tim Ballard, Founder and CEO, Operation Underground Railroad:
Oral Statement................................................. 37
Prepared Statement............................................. 39
For the Record
The Honorable Clay Higgins, a Representative in Congress From the
State of Louisiana, and Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Border
Security, Facilitation, and Operations:
Excerpt, hearing held March 6, 2019............................ 61
Prepared statement, Honorable Kirstjen Nielsen................. 61
The Honorable Kathleen M. Rice, a Representative in Congress From
the State of New York, and Chairwoman, Subcommittee on Border
Security, Facilitation, and Operations:
Letter, Amnesty International.................................. 67
Appendix
Question From Ranking Member Clay Higgins for Julie M. Linton.... 73
Questions From Ranking Member Clay Higgins for Tim Ballard....... 73
THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY'S FAMILY SEPARATION POLICY:
PERSPECTIVES FROM THE BORDER
----------
Tuesday, March 26, 2019
U.S. House of Representatives,
Committee on Homeland Security,
Subcommittee on Border Security,
Facilitation, and Operations,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:06 a.m., in
room 310, Cannon House Office Building, Hon. Kathleen M. Rice
[Chairwoman of the subcommittee] presiding.
Present: Representatives Rice, Thompson, Correa, Torres
Small, Higgins, Lesko, Joyce, and Guest.
Also present: Representatives Underwood and Jackson Lee.
Miss Rice. The Subcommittee on Border Security,
Facilitation, and Operations will come to order. The
subcommittee is meeting today to receive testimony on the
Department of Homeland Security's family separation policy.
Today we are continuing the oversight we began at the full
committee's level earlier this month during our hearing with
Secretary Nielsen.
I thank our legal advocates and medical experts who have
joined us this morning for their willingness to testify and
share their first-hand knowledge of the current state of our
Southern Border.
Last summer, the Department of Homeland Security, under the
leadership of Secretary Nielsen, implemented a zero tolerance
policy which resulted in the separation of thousands of
families.
Despite knowing beforehand that this policy would
immediately lead to family separations, DHS and specifically
U.S. Customs and Border Protection, were completely unprepared
and ill-equipped for the massive and delicate undertaking of
sheltering thousands of separated children, with an unknown
number of babies and toddlers.
To make matters worse, within days of this policy's
enactment, it became abundantly clear that none of the Federal
agencies involved had any systems in place to effectively keep
track of and reunite separated family members.
The few systems that did exist were found to be severely
deficient according to multiple reviews by the Government
Accountability Office and the inspectors general of both DHS
and the Department of Health and Human Services. This means
that the reunification of family members was either an
afterthought of this administration or simply not prioritized
at all.
Due to their lack of preparations and planning, DHS has
still failed to fully account for the total number of migrant
children that were separated from their families over the past
2 years.
Even more shocking is that DHS still has broad authority to
separate families based on a set of vague criteria, which
agents can apply at their own discretion.
Like all of my colleagues, I am deeply committed to
combatting human trafficking at our Southern Border. But the
family separations that took place last summer had nothing to
do with preventing human trafficking.
In fact, multiple former administration officials have
openly acknowledged the zero tolerance policy was, first and
foremost, an effort to deter unlawful immigration.
To me and to many of my colleagues on our committee, this
means that any criteria or justification that this
administration uses to separate families at the border today
must be carefully scrutinized and subject to Congressional
oversight.
Congress has a responsibility to continue questioning DHS's
implementation of zero tolerance, its handling of families and
children in its custody, its compliance with reunification
efforts, and the standards used to determine if a family should
be separated.
But DHS's family separation policy is just one element that
we intend to examine today. Under the Trump administration, DHS
has pursued increasingly restrictive immigration policies at
our Southern Border that are having devastating humanitarian
consequences. At various ports of entry, CBP has been
regulating the number of asylum seekers, many of them families
who can present themselves daily.
This metering practice has led to long wait lists and
backlogs that have driven some families to seek access to our
asylum process through other and often more dangerous means,
such as traveling through remote areas of the border to find
Border Patrol agents. These parts of the border are often not
well-prepared or appropriately-resourced to handle families and
unaccompanied children.
Meanwhile, other asylum seekers and families are being
asked to remain in Mexico while their cases make their way
through our immigration courts.
Secretary Nielsen and others in this administration are
choosing to unilaterally reshape our asylum process. These so-
called migrant protection protocols are putting already
vulnerable people, including young, unaccompanied children, at
greater risk.
We have laws and procedures in place to protect migrant
children and families seeking asylum. There is a reason why
these laws exist, and we need to ensure that our immigration
process operates squarely within those boundaries.
Today's hearing is intended to give our Members an
opportunity to hear from legal and medical experts who have
been at the Southern Border for several years and who have seen
first-hand how DHS screens and processes family units, manages
detention facilities, and facilitates health care.
I look forward to hearing from each of our expert witnesses
about their experiences and what they took away from their
visits to the border.
Next week we are planning to visit the Texas-Mexico border,
and your testimony today will help inform us of the various
issues that we must explore while on the ground.
[The statement of Chairwoman Rice follows:]
Statement of Chairwoman Kathleen Rice
March 26, 2019
Today we are continuing the oversight we began at the full
committee level earlier this month during our hearing with Secretary
Nielsen.
I thank our legal advocates and medical experts who have joined us
this morning for their willingness to testify and share their first-
hand knowledge of the current state of our Southern Border.
Last summer, the Department of Homeland Security, under the
leadership of Secretary Nielsen, implemented a Zero-Tolerance policy,
which resulted in the separation of thousands of families.
Despite knowing beforehand that this policy would immediately lead
to family separations, DHS, and specifically U.S. Customs and Border
Protection, was completely unprepared and ill-equipped for the massive
and delicate undertaking of sheltering thousands of separated children,
with an unknown number of babies and toddlers.
To make matters worse, within days of this policy's enactment, it
became abundantly clear that none of the Federal agencies involved had
any systems in place to effectively keep track of and reunite separated
family members.
And the few systems that did exist were found to be severely
deficient, according to multiple reviews by the Government
Accountability Office, and the Inspectors General of both DHS and the
Department of Health and Human Services.
This means that the reunification of family members was either an
afterthought of this administration, or simply not prioritized at all.
Due to their lack of preparations and planning, DHS has still
failed to fully account for the total number of migrant children that
were separated from their families over the past 2 years.
Even more shocking is that DHS still has board authority to
separate families based on a set of vague criteria, which agents can
apply at their own discretion.
Like all of my colleagues, I am deeply committed to combating human
trafficking at our Southern Border.
But the family separations that took place last summer had nothing
to do with preventing human trafficking. In fact, multiple former
administration officials have openly acknowledged the Zero Tolerance
policy was first and foremost an effort to deter unlawful immigration.
To me, and to many of my colleagues on our committee, this means
that any criteria or justification that this administration uses to
separate families at the border today must be carefully scrutinized and
subject to Congressional oversight.
Congress has a responsibility to continue questioning DHS's
implementation of Zero Tolerance, its handling of families and children
in its custody, its compliance with reunification efforts, and the
standards used to determine if a family should be separated.
But DHS's family separation policy is just one element that we
intend to examine today.
Under the Trump administration, DHS has pursued increasingly
restrictive immigration policies at our Southern Border that are having
devastating humanitarian consequences.
At various ports of entry, CBP has been regulating the number of
asylum seekers--many of them families--who can present themselves
daily.
This ``metering'' practice has led to long wait lists and backlogs
that have driven some families to seek access to our asylum process
through other and often more dangerous means, such as traveling through
remote areas of the border to find Border Patrol agents.
These parts of the border are often not well-prepared or
appropriately resourced to handle families and unaccompanied children.
Meanwhile, other asylum seekers and families are being asked to
remain in Mexico while their cases make their way through our
immigration courts.
Secretary Nielsen and others in this administration are choosing to
unilaterally reshape our asylum process. And these so-called ``Migrant
Protection Protocols'' are putting already vulnerable people--including
young, unaccompanied children--at greater risk.
We have laws and procedures in place to protect migrant children
and families seeking asylum. There is a reason why these laws exist,
and we need to ensure that our immigration process operates squarely
within those boundaries.
Today's hearing is intended to give our Members an opportunity to
hear from the legal and medical experts who have been at the Southern
Border for several years and who have seen first-hand how DHS screens
and processes family units, manages detention facilities and
facilitates health care. I look forward to hearing from each of our
expert witnesses about their experiences and what they took away from
their visits to the border.
Next week, we are planning to visit the Texas-Mexico border and
your testimony today will help inform us of the various issues that we
must explore while on the ground.
I thank all of our witnesses for joining us this morning, and I now
yield to the Ranking Member of the subcommittee, Mr. Higgins.
Miss Rice. I now recognize the Ranking Member of the
subcommittee, the gentleman from Louisiana, Mr. Higgins, for an
opening statement.
Mr. Higgins. I thank my colleague Chairwoman Rice, and I
especially thank our witnesses for joining us today. My friends
across the aisle will, perhaps, spend some time today
criticizing strict enforcement of our immigration laws.
I believe what we should discuss are the loopholes in our
immigration laws that fuel criminal organizations and their
propaganda, responsible for convincing hundreds of thousands of
vulnerable people from Central America to make the treacherous
journey to our Southwest Border.
Human smuggling frequently can lead to sexual assault and
sex trafficking, endangering the lives of thousands of women
and children, because we have not invested enough resources in
securing our Southwest Border.
To criminal organizations, the benefits clearly outweigh
the consequences. They extort money, cash, and smuggling fees
from migrants, while expanding their control of areas in
Central America.
We know of the horrible conditions these families and
children experience on their journey to our border, including
the very real threat of separation, assault, sex trafficking,
and labor trafficking that occurs at the hands of cartel
smugglers and coyotes.
I am grateful for all of our witnesses who are joining us
today to share your particular area of expertise. We appreciate
your passion, your love for America and, by extension, the
children that are entering our country illegally. It is quite a
crisis.
I am grateful that Mr. Ballard could join us today as a
witness to speak in more detail about human trafficking cases
that exist due to a lack of security along our Southwest
Border. We need enhanced security.
I know he will provide case examples from his law
enforcement experience in the CIA and working for Homeland
Security Investigations Unit. This is exactly what America
needs to hear.
Our Nation is generous and compassionate. We accept over a
million legal immigrants into our country every year. We are on
track to shelter more persecuted individuals with asylum under
this administration than the last. In fact, 5,638 people were
granted asylum in 2018, compared to less than half that number
in 2016.
Due to loopholes in our immigration laws, people attempt
and illegally enter our country with the intent to stay or
create an extreme backlog in our process.
These immigrants are told that once they step foot on U.S.
soil, they can stay. This is what they are told by the cartels
and the traffickers.
The truth is that most asylum claims prove to be
illegitimate, and of further concern is the fact that about 40
percent of people requesting asylum in 2018 never filed an
actual application.
That is 14,072 people who passed the credible fear
screening--they are trained on how to pass credible fear
screening and then decided they did not actually need to apply
for asylum and likely disappeared into the interior of our
country.
Criminal organizations tell migrants that children can be
used as de facto visas, making them vulnerable targets for
smugglers and human traffickers who know that after 20 days
families and minors must be released into the interior.
We have seen major spikes in unaccompanied minors and
family units over the last 5 years, incredible increases. We
are now seeing the greatest number of families attempting to
illegally enter our country in our Nation's history, and those
numbers are only expected to rise.
Because my more liberal colleagues, many of whom I greatly
respect and admire, continue to obstruct needed funding for
enhanced border security, 84 percent of migrants are arriving
between ports of entry and crossing illegally.
The reality is, every single day women are sexually
assaulted on the journey to our Southwest Border, children do
not receive adequate food, water, and shelter, and sometimes
people are forced into labor or sex trafficking.
By failing to secure our border and fix legal loopholes, we
are enriching the criminal cartels, making them more powerful
in Central America and Mexico, and enabling them to exploit new
victims. If Congress refuses to fix these loopholes and secure
our border, we are complicit in this problem.
I continue to support an all-of-the-above strategy to
secure our borders, including enhanced physical barriers, 21st
Century technology and additional manpower. Front-line
defenders have repeatedly testified before this committee about
how this multi-layered approach works.
I encourage my colleagues to work together to ensure that
more resources are provided to the Department of Homeland
Security to secure our borders in a safe and humane,
compassionate way.
Thank you, Madam Chairwoman, and I yield back.
[The statement of Ranking Member Higgins follows:]
Statement of Ranking Member Clay Higgins
March 26, 2019
Thank you, Chairwoman Rice and thank you to our witnesses for
joining us.
My friends on the left will spend much time today criticizing
strict enforcement of our immigration laws. To be clear, that strict
enforcement is no longer happening.
What we don't hear about as much are the loopholes in our
immigration laws that fuel criminal organizations' propaganda
responsible for convincing hundreds of thousands of vulnerable people
from Central America to make the treacherous journey to our Southwest
Border. Smuggling can easily turn into sexual assault and trafficking,
endangering the lives of women and children along the way. Because we
have not invested enough resources in securing our Southwest Border, to
transnational criminal organizations, the benefits clearly outweigh the
consequences we can deliver to them for facilitating this travel.
They extort thousands of dollars in smuggling fees from migrants,
while expanding their control of areas in Central America. We don't
hear about the horrible conditions these families and children
experience on their journey to our border, including the very real
threat of separation, assault, sex trafficking, and labor trafficking
that occurs at the hands of cartels, smugglers, and coyotes.
I am grateful that Mr. Ballard could join us today as a witness to
speak in more detail about human trafficking cases that exist due to a
lack of security along our Southwest Border.
I know he will provide case examples from his law enforcement
experience in the CIA and working for the Homeland Security
Investigations unit within DHS. While these may be troubling to hear,
they are exactly what America needs to hear.
Our Nation is a generous one. We accept over 1 million legal
immigrants into our country every year and we are on track to shelter
more persecuted individuals with asylum under this administration than
the last--in fact 5,638 people were granted asylum in 2018 compared to
less than half that number in 2016.
Due to loopholes in our immigration laws, people attempting to
illegally enter our country for solely economic reasons are coming too,
creating an extreme backlog in our process and causing those who
truthfully need this aid to be in limbo for years. These migrants are
told that once they step foot on U.S. soil, they can stay. The
unfortunate truth is that most asylum claims prove illegitimate and of
further concern is the fact that 40 percent of people requesting asylum
in 2018, never filed an actual application. That's 14,072 people who
passed a credible fear screening then decided they did not actually
need asylum to remain in the United States, likely disappearing into
our interior.
Criminal organizations tell migrants that children can be used as
de facto visas, making them vulnerable targets for smugglers and human
traffickers who know that after 20 days, families and minors must be
released into the interior. We have seen major spikes in unaccompanied
minors and family units over the last 5 years, a shift that coincides
with policies and court decisions made under the Obama administration,
specifically the extension of the Flores Settlement to families. We are
now seeing the greatest number of families attempting to illegally
enter our country in our Nation's history and those numbers are only
expected to rise.
And, meaningfully, 84 percent of migrants are arriving between
ports of entry and crossing illegally.
Once these migrants are apprehended, the cost of not only holding,
but processing, caring for, and monitoring them is an enormous sum,
which is even more alarming when you realize that a large number of
their immigration hearings end with deportation orders. Our border
agencies have diverted millions from their operational budgets to
address these surge concerns, decaying our readiness.
The reality is every single day women are sexually assaulted on the
way to our Southwest Border, children do not receive adequate food,
water, and shelter, and sometimes people are tricked into being labor-
or sex-trafficked. All because our border doesn't stop them from
crossing illegally once they get here.
Last year the Border Patrol rescued over 4,300 people who were left
for dead by smugglers or who were victims of the rugged terrain that
encompasses our Southwest Border. Agents unfortunately also find
skeletal remains of others that did not make it across.
Transnational criminal organizations control corridors where many
smuggling routes pass through Mexico, making reaching our Southwest
Border a question of ``how much?'' instead of ``how?'' Illegal
immigration generates tens of millions of dollars for these criminal
organizations every year.
By failing to secure our border and fix legal loopholes, we are
enriching the criminal cartels, making them more powerful in Central
America and Mexico, and enabling them to exploit new victims.
As a Congress that refuses to fix these loopholes and secure our
border, we are complicit in this problem.
I continue to support an ``all-of-the-above'' strategy to secure
our borders including enhanced physical barriers, 21st Century
technology, and additional manpower. Front-line defenders have
repeatedly testified before this committee about how this multi-layered
approach works. It's time we start believing them.
I encourage my colleagues to work together to ensure that more
resources are provided to the Department of Homeland Security to secure
our borders in a safe and humane way.
Thank you and I yield back.
Miss Rice. Thank you, Mr. Higgins.
I now recognize the Chairman of the Homeland Security
Committee, the gentleman from Mississippi, Mr. Thompson, for an
opening statement.
Mr. Thompson. Thank you, Chairwoman Rice and Ranking Member
Higgins for holding today's hearing.
Today we are joined by a panel of experts who have
witnessed first-hand, how the Department of Homeland Security
has put in place and carried out policies directly affecting
migrant families and children seeking asylum on our Southern
Border.
We must be clear. Though systematic challenges with
detention conditions, due process and family screening
protocols have been persistent over many years, the Trump
administration is unique. No other administration has carried
out a policy that deliberately separate migrant families, in
some instances by default.
When they reach the border at the scale we have seen over
the past 2 years, this policy is seriously inconsistent with,
if not a complete break from, the policy put in place by U.S.
Customs and Border Protection in 2015 to maintain family unity
to the great extent operationally feasible, absent a serious
threat to the safety of the child.
Last summer we saw the peak of these separations. I
adamantly hope we do not see a repeat of this cruelty this
summer. We now know that DHS put in place a family separation
pilot program in 2017, prior to the rollout of its zero
tolerance policy in 2018.
However, three independent oversight entities within the
Government, the Government Accountability Office and the
inspector generals of both DHS and the Department of Health and
Human Services, have since found that none of the Federal
agencies involved were prepared to adequately monitor families
throughout the intake process or handle the number of children
suddenly in their custody once their parents were criminally
charged.
Whether this lack of preparation was incompetence or
deliberate is what this committee intends to find out with
certainty.
Real oversight of this family separation policy and how DHS
and CBP are currently treating asylum-seeking families and
children is long overdue. Whether DHS and CBP began to change
their processes will go a long way in demonstrating their
intentions.
Three of our witnesses here today can attest to the impacts
of this lack of preparation, combined with other deterrent-only
policies have had on migrant children and their families.
There have been a steady increase in the number of families
and unaccompanied children presenting themselves to Border
Patrol agents, and at ports of entry for months now.
Unfortunately, I understand that necessary family separations
continue today.
During my recent visit to the border, I saw at least one
facility that is not at all appropriate for holding vulnerable
populations, particularly small children, for extended periods
of time.
I find it truly unfortunate that it took the death of two
young children in CBP custody last December for DHS to begin
conducting more medical assessments and to request funding to
more humanely handle families and children in their custody.
There has to be a better way.
What we will discuss today will help the committee hold DHS
accountable for its part in the trauma inflicted on these
children and families.
I also look forward to hearing from our expert witnesses on
how we can prevent any further harm from being carried out by
the Federal Government on these families. The proposal and
action carried out by DHS to date have proven inadequate,
harmful, and deadly.
Committee Democrats intend to advocate for smart,
effective, and humane alternatives to handling the humanitarian
challenge. I thank our witnesses for informing our efforts by
joining us today.
I yield back, Madam Chair.
[The statement of Chairman Thompson follows:]
Statement of Chairman Bennie G. Thompson
March 26, 2019
Today we are joined by a panel of experts who have witnessed first-
hand how the Department of Homeland Security has put in place and
carried out policies directly affecting migrant families and children
seeking asylum on our Southern Border. We must be clear--though
systemic challenges with detention conditions, due process, and family
screening protocols have been persistent over many years, the Trump
administration is unique.
No other administration has carried out a policy that deliberately
separates migrant families--in some instances by default--when they
reach the border at the scale we have seen over the past 2 years. This
policy is seriously inconsistent with, if not a complete break from,
the policy put in place by U.S. Customs and Border Protection in 2015
to ``maintain family unity to the great extent operationally feasible''
absent a serious threat to the safety of the child.
Last summer we saw the peak of these separations, and I adamantly
hope we do not see a repeat of this cruelty this summer. We now know
that DHS put in place a family separation policy pilot program in 2017
prior to the rollout of its zero-tolerance policy in 2018.
However, three independent oversight entities within the
Government--the Government Accountability Office and the inspector
generals of both DHS and the Department of Health and Human Services--
have since found that none of the Federal agencies involved were
prepared to adequately monitor families through the in-take process or
handle the number of children suddenly in their custody once their
parents were criminally charged.
Whether this lack of preparation was incompetence or deliberate is
what this committee intends to find out with certainty. Real oversight
of this family separation policy and how DHS and CBP are currently
treating asylum-seeking families and children is long overdue. Whether
DHS and CBP begin to change their processes will go a long way in
demonstrating their intentions.
Three of our witnesses here today can attest to the impacts this
lack of preparation combined with other deterrence-only policies have
had on migrant children and their family members. There has been a
steady increase in the number of families and unaccompanied children
presenting themselves to Border Patrol agents and at ports of entry for
months now. Unfortunately, I understand that unnecessary family
separations continue today.
During my recent visit to the border, I saw at least one facility
that is not at all appropriate for holding vulnerable populations--
particularly small children--for extended periods of time. I find it
truly unfortunate that it took the deaths of two young children in CBP
custody last December for DHS to begin conducting more medical
assessments and to request funding to more humanely handle families and
children in their custody. There has to be a better way. What we will
discuss today will help the committee hold DHS accountable for its part
in the trauma inflicted on these children and families.
I also look forward to hearing from our expert witnesses on how we
can prevent any further harm from being carried out by the Federal
Government on these families. The proposals and actions carried out by
DHS to date have proven inadequate, harmful, and deadly. Committee
Democrats intend to advocate for smart, effective, and humane
alternatives to handling this humanitarian challenge, and I thank our
witnesses for informing our efforts by joining us today.
Miss Rice. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Other Members of the committee are reminded that under the
committee rules opening statements may be submitted for the
record.
Additionally, I ask unanimous consent that the Members of
the full committee shall be permitted to sit and question the
witnesses, as appropriate. Without objection, so ordered.
I welcome our panel of witnesses. Our first witness, Ms.
Jennifer Podkul, is the senior director of policy and advocacy
at Kids in Need of Defense, or KIND.
Ms. Podkul is an international human rights lawyer, an
expert on issues affecting immigrant children. Prior to joining
KIND, she was a senior program officer at the Women's Refugee
Commission, where she researched issues facing vulnerable
migrants and advocated for improved treatment.
Next we have Ms. Michelle Brane, who is the director of the
Migrant Rights and Justice Program at the Women's Refugee
Commission. Ms. Brane is one of the Nation's foremost experts
on U.S. asylum protections and detention policies for migrants.
She has more than 25 years of experience working on
immigration and human rights issues, including serving as an
attorney adviser for the Department of Justice Board of
Immigration Appeals, where she specialized in asylum cases.
Next, we have Dr. Julie M. Linton, who is the co-chair of
Immigrant Health Special Interest Group at the American Academy
of Pediatrics.
Dr. Linton holds a B.S. in psychology from Duke University,
an M.D. from the Perelman School of Medicine at the University
of Philadelphia and completed her residency in pediatrics at
Children's Hospital of Philadelphia. She has authored numerous
publications and testified before Congress once before on the
Department's family separation policy.
Finally, we have Mr. Tim Ballard, the founder and CEO of
Operation Underground Railroad. Before founding OUR, Mr.
Ballard worked as a special agent within the Department at
Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Homeland Security
Investigations.
While there, he was assigned to the Internet Crimes Against
Children Task Force Program and deployed as an undercover
operative for the U.S. Child Sex Tourism Jump Team to combat
child sex trafficking rings.
He continues this work at OUR by supporting and training
law enforcement agencies on best practices to liberate children
from these trafficking rings.
Without objection, the witnesses' full statements will be
inserted in the record.
I now ask each witness to summarize his or her statement
for 5 minutes, beginning with Ms. Podkul.
STATEMENT OF JENNIFER PODKUL, DIRECTOR OF POLICY, KIDS IN NEED
OF DEFENSE
Ms. Podkul. Thank you Chairman Rice, Ranking Member
Higgins, and Members of the subcommittee.
I am here to represent Kids in Need of Defense, a National
organization dedicated to promoting the rights of child
migrants and ensuring that every child has access to high
quality legal representation.
I am grateful the subcommittee is holding today's hearing
to look at the systematic and intentional attacks this
administration has launched against some of the most vulnerable
people in the world, migrant children.
Before I begin recounting the ways in which recent policy
changes have harmed children, I want to start by telling you a
bit about some of our clients who, thanks to my dedicated
colleagues, have legal status and are able to live safely in
the United States.
I think it is important for all of us to have an
understanding of who these kids are and not just think of them
as numbers or statistics.
There is Jonathan, who came here from Guatemala, who is
almost finished with high school and is planning on joining the
Marines when he graduates.
There is Alicia, who came to the United States as a
teenager and learned English incredibly quickly and then also
graduated high school early.
Then there is Alejandra. She created a Nationally-
recognized anti-bullying campaign when she was in high school.
Then she secured a full scholarship to a prestigious college.
See, this is what happens when you give kids a fair chance.
However, instead of dedicating resources to ensure that our
system is able to efficiently process and fairly adjudicate the
cases of children seeking protection, this administration has
invested in malicious deterrence tactics.
When a child has fled torture, is being persecuted by
criminals that even the police are afraid of or witnesses the
murder of her close family members, they can't be deterred from
fleeing. Draconian policies will only serve to make their lives
worse and waste taxpayer money.
Family separation, one of the most high-profile methods of
deterrence by this administration, has been condemned across
the board. Yet separations are continuing to happen on a
regular basis, and we don't know why.
There is still no public guidance on when CBP can separate
a child from their parent. There is no requirement a licensed
child welfare professional screen the child, and there is no
way for a parent to challenge the separation if it was done in
error.
KIND attorneys are still seeing cases which separations are
not fully tracked, information about extended family members is
not captured, and it is not clear the separation was truly in
the best interest of the child.
Another harmful policy that has been the information-
sharing agreement between DHS and ORR. The use of information
obtained by ORR during the sponsor vetting process to conduct
immigration enforcement against sponsors not only causes
emotional distress to the children, but it has resulted in a
ballooning population of children held in ORR custody.
In violation of the spirit of the Flores Agreement,
children are being held in unlicensed emergency facilities for
months on end. Detention fatigue has resulted in many children
giving up their valid claims for protection.
Children should not be used as bait for immigration
enforcement. Compliance with the Flores Settlement Agreement
and minimum standards of detention must be a priority for every
agency that holds children.
Finally, in an attempt to deny any kind of access to our
justice system, this administration has tried to slam the door
completely on those arriving at our Southern Border. Children
are being turned away and denied the right to ask for
protection, both between ports of entry, as well as at the
official ports. This is in violation of the law.
I have interviewed children and families sleeping on
bridges and living in extremely dangerous conditions in Mexico
all along the border from San Diego to Brownsville. Some are
waiting for months to be able to present themselves and ask for
protection.
If they are lucky enough to be processed, they are then put
into freezing cold CBP facilities that are not appropriate for
children and are not staffed with appropriate child welfare or
medical professionals. This has resulted in children getting
very sick and, as you know, some even dying.
Our enforcement system has not modernized to catch up with
what has been a reality for many years now, that children make
up a large percentage of the population that DHS is
encountering. Enforcement methods used for single adult males
are not appropriate for children in search of safety.
DHS must implement the directives set forth in their
funding bill and stop using sponsor information for enforcement
purposes. They must direct funding to ensure adequate medical
treatment for children in DHS custody, and they must not
continue to engage in efforts that preclude children's access
to the United States.
Because deterrence won't work, we must instead focus on
addressing the root causes of their migration. We must ensure
our justice system offers due process and fair adjudications
and that decisions reflect the best interest of the child. We
must stop hurting children who are coming to us asking for
help.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Podkul follows:]
Prepared Statement of Jennifer Podkul
March 26, 2019
Kids in Need of Defense (KIND) was founded by the Microsoft
Corporation and the United Nations Refugee Agency (UNHCR) Special Envoy
Angelina Jolie, and is the leading national organization that works to
ensure that no refugee or immigrant child faces immigration court
alone. We do this in partnership with over 600 law firms, corporate
legal departments, law schools, and bar associations, which provide pro
bono representation to unaccompanied children referred to KIND for
assistance in their deportation proceedings. KIND has served more than
18,000 children since 2009, and leveraged approximately $250 million in
pro bono support from private-sector law firms, corporations, law
schools, and bar associations. KIND also helps children who are
returning to their home countries through deportation or voluntary
departure to do so safely and to reintegrate into their home
communities. Through our reintegration pilot project in Guatemala and
Honduras, we place children with local nongovernmental organization
partners, which provide vital social services, including family
reunification, school enrollment, skills training, and counseling. KIND
also engages in broader work in the region to address root causes of
child migration, such as sexual- and gender-based violence.
Additionally, KIND advocates to change law, policy, and practices to
improve the protection of unaccompanied children in the United States,
and is working to build a stronger regional protection framework
throughout Central America and Mexico.
introduction
Family unity is a fundamental human right and central principle of
U.S. immigration policy and international law.\1\ The administration
gutted this fundamental principle when it began separating families as
a way to deter asylum seekers from seeking protection at the U.S./
Mexico border. Families like that of Luisa, a 7-year-old child who was
separated from her father after they entered the United States last
summer.\2\ The day after this separation, Luisa's mother and 10-year-
old brother entered the United States and passed a credible fear
interview, which placed them into removal proceedings during which they
may assert their claims for asylum. Although Luisa's brother and mother
were released, Luisa stayed in a detention facility. On her own, she
could not have made a case for asylum because she did not know why her
family came to the United States. When KIND spoke with Luisa, it was
impossible to even conduct a legal assessment with her because she
could not stop crying--she was so distraught by the separation that she
simply sobbed during most of the meeting with an attorney.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See U.N. International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights,
art. 23, Dec. 16, 1966, 6 I.L.M. 368 (1967), 999 U.N.T.S. 171; U.N.
Convention on the Rights of the Child, art. 9, Nov. 20, 1989, 1577
U.N.T.S. 3. See also WILLIAM KANDEL, U.S. FAMILY-BASED IMMIGRATION
POLICY, CONGRESSIONAL RESEARCH SERV. 2 (2014) (available at https://
trac.syr.edu/immigration/library/P9368.pdf).
\2\ How You Can Help Separated Families and Ensure Protection for
Children, KIND (June 28, 2018), https://supportkind.org/resources/how-
you-can-help-end-family-separation-and-ensure-protection-for-children/.
\3\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additional policies of the administration have delayed the release
of children in detention to their families--even children that had gone
through the horror of having been separated from their parents. Two
sisters KIND is working with remained in ORR custody for nearly 8
months after being separated from their father, who was then deported.
The girls' mother submitted all necessary paperwork for the girls'
release, but officials insisted for months that one particular
individual, who periodically resided in the home, but traveled
frequently for work, also submit fingerprints. In December, ORR
suddenly changed its policy and no longer required the missing
fingerprints. The girls were finally released the week before Christmas
and able to reunite with their mother. The children remain very
concerned about their father, who was deported and faces on-going
threats to his safety.
These children belong with their families.
KIND recommends the following: First, the Trump administration must
end the ``Migrant Protection Protocol (Remain in Mexico)'' policy as
well as metering at ports of entry that leave children in dangerous
conditions in Mexico while waiting to ask for protection. Second,
family separations should occur only when they are in the best interest
of children using public standards created by child welfare experts.
Third, the Government should document the reason for separations, and
allow parents to challenge separation decisions when they occur.
Fourth, the Government should track all separated family members and
provide that information to the child and their attorney. Fifth
Homeland Security should hire licensed child welfare professionals to
screen and provide adequate care for children in DHS custody. Finally,
DHS should never use information obtained from the Office of Refugee
Resettlement to vet a sponsor to conduct enforcement.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ This practice was limited in the 2019 DHS appropriations bill.
See, https://appropriations.house.gov/sites/
democrats.appropriations.house.gov/files/documents/Summary%20of%20-
Conference%20Report.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We urge the committee to consider our recommendations and to hold
the Trump administration accountable to do what Congress has mandated:
Allow asylum seekers to apply for protection in the U.S. Border
security policies should protect the integrity of our immigration
system and our Nation's commitment to extending protection to those in
need of safety--particularly children.
the ``migration protection protocol'' policy must be eliminated
In December 2018, DHS Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen announced the
Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP)\5\--or the ``Remain in Mexico''
policy--under which certain asylum seekers are forced to stay in Mexico
pending their immigration proceedings in the United States.\6\
Relatedly, in November 2018, DHS and the U.S. Department of Justice
issued an interim final rule that, coupled with a Presidential
Proclamation issued shortly after, would bar migrants from seeking
asylum if they cross the border between official ports of entry.\7\
Both policies disregard Congress' express intent to allow asylum
seekers to apply for protection, regardless of where they enter the
country.\8\ They further violate international norms and treaties by
which the United States is bound, including the 1951 Refugee
Convention, which prohibits nations from expelling or returning
refugees to a country where their lives would be threatened.\9\ In late
January 2019, DHS formally implemented the Remain in Mexico policy
turning back 240 migrants since that time.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ See Secretary Kirstjen M. Nielsen Announces Historic Action to
Confront Illegal Immigration, Dep't of Homeland Security (Dec. 20,
2018), https://www.dhs.gov/news/2018/12/20/secretary-nielsen-announces-
historic-action-confront-illegal-immigration; see also Memorandum on
MPP Guiding Principles (Jan. 28, 2019) (hereinafter MPP Memorandum),
https://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/assets/documents/2019-Jan/
MPP%20Guiding%20Principles%201-28-19.pdf.
\6\ MPP Memorandum, supra note 4, at 1-2.
\7\ 83 Fed. Reg. 55934 (Nov. 9, 2018). The United States District
Court of the Northern District of California issued an injunction
against the measure. East Bay Sanctuary Covenant v. Trump, No. 3:18-cv-
06810-JST (N.D. Cal. Nov. 19, 2018) (Order Granting Temporary
Restraining Order).
\8\ See INA 208, 8 U.S.C. 1158(a)(1) (2008).
\9\ Nations are prohibited from expelling or returning a refugee to
a country where ``his or her life or freedom would be threatened on
account of his or her race, religion, nationality, membership of a
particular social group or political opinion.'' UNHCR, Advisory Opinion
on the Extraterritorial Application of Non-Refoulement Obligations
under the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees and its
1967 Protocol (Jan. 26, 2007), https://www.unhcr.org/4d9486929.pdf. The
United States is bound to the 1951 Convention as a signatory to the
1967 Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees, Jan. 31, 1967, 19
U.S.T. 6223.
\10\ Julia Ainsley, Trump admin has turned back 240 asylum-seekers
at border under `Remain in Mexico' policy, NBC News (Mar. 12, 2019),
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/immigration/trump-admin-has-turned-
back-240-asylum-seekers-border-under-n982246.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
While the administration has asserted that the Remain in Mexico
policy would not apply to unaccompanied children,\11\ U.S. and Mexican
officials are nonetheless preventing unaccompanied children from
entering the United States to seek asylum. Moreover, at least 25 minors
have been returned to Mexico under the new policy.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ MPP Memorandum, supra note 4, at 1.
\12\ Maria Verza, US sending Central American migrant minors back
to Mexico, AP (Feb. 25, 2019), https://www.apnews.com/
8548e76bed794a9eb1f3b38d15e0601b.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
During a research mission to Mexico, KIND learned that CBP agents
have turned back unaccompanied children to Mexico after telling them
that they can no longer seek asylum in the United States.\13\ Mexican
officials are similarly blocking unaccompanied children from presenting
themselves at U.S. ports of entry, with some Mexican officials even
requiring migrants to pay thousands of dollars before letting them
apply for asylum.\14\ Mexican officials also frequently transfer
unaccompanied children seeking asylum in the United States to the
custody of Mexico's child welfare agency (DIF).\15\ Once in DIF
custody, these children are informed that they may seek asylum in
Mexico or be deported to their countries of origin.\16\ They are not
informed of their right to seek protection in the United States.\17\
Fearful of deportation by Mexican officials, some unaccompanied
children have chosen to hide from Mexican officials or to cross the
border between ports of entry--circumstances that increase the dangers
facing vulnerable youth.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ See KIND, The Protection Gauntlet: How the United States is
Blocking Access to Asylum Seekers and Endangering the Lives of Children
at the U.S. Border (Dec. 21, 2018) (hereinafter The Protection
Gauntlet), https://supportkind.org/resources/the-protection-gauntlet-
how-the-united-states-is-blocking-access-to-asylumseekers-and-
endangering-the-lives-of-children-at-the-u-s-border/.
\14\ Emily Green, Exclusive: Mexican Officials are Extorting
Thousands of Dollars from Migrants Applying for Asylum, Vice (Mar. 13,
2019), https://news.vice.com/en_us/article/kzdy4e/exclusive-mexican-
officials-are-extorting-thousands-of-dollars-from-migrants-to-apply-
for-asylum.
\15\ KIND, The Protection Gauntlet: How the United States is
Blocking Access to Asylum Seekers and Endangering the Lives of Children
at the U.S. Border 2-3, (Dec. 21, 2018) (hereinafter The Protection
Gauntlet), https://supportkind.org/resources/the-protection-gauntlet-
how-the-united-states-is-blocking-access-to-asylumseekers-and-
endangering-the-lives-of-children-at-the-u-s-border/.
\16\ Id.
\17\ Id. at 3.
\18\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Due to severe restrictions on the number of available U.S. asylum
interviews, migrants must wait months to present their asylum claim at
the border.\19\ In several cities on Mexico's northern border, migrants
place their name on a non-governmental wait list and wait to be called
by U.S. officials to present themselves.\20\ Once called, the migrants
can then present themselves for asylum at the U.S. border.\21\
Unaccompanied minors, however, are not permitted to place themselves on
the wait list, impeding their ability to even make any asylum claim
under the new Migrant Protection Protocol.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ Fernanda Echavarri, Teens Fleeing Central American Gangs Are
Stuck at the Border--and Fear for Their Lives, Mother Jones (Mar. 7,
2019), https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2019/03/unaccompanied-
minors-asylum-seekers-central-america-tijuana/.
\20\ Id.
\21\ Id.
\22\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unaccompanied children face grave danger in Mexican border towns,
where they may be preyed upon by smugglers and human traffickers.\23\
Last December, two unaccompanied youth were tricked, abducted,
tortured, and killed in Tijuana.\24\ A third child reported that he and
his friends were kidnapped, tied to chairs, undressed, and tortured
with scissors in an attempt to extort their relatives for money. Across
our Southern Border there are children and babies sleeping in tents, on
the streets, exposed to the elements and depending on volunteers for
food. When they finally are allowed to present themselves to U.S.
officials many are sick, dehydrated, and in need of medical attention.
Despite horrendous incidences like this, Mexican officials continue to
block unaccompanied children from accessing U.S. ports of entry.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ Jack Herrera, Five Takeaways from the Lawsuit Over Trump's
Plan to Keep Asylum Seekers in Mexico, Pacific Standard (Feb. 14,
2019), https://psmag.com/news/five-takeaways-from-the-lawsuit-over-
trumps-plan-to-keep-asylum-seekers-in-mexico.
\24\ Ed Vulliamy, Tricked, abducted and killed: the last day of two
child migrants in Mexico, The Guardian (Feb. 16, 2019), https://
www.theguardian.com/world/2019/feb/16/tijuana-migrant-child-murders-
mexico-us-asylum.
\25\ Herrera, supra note 23.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
family separations should occur only when they are in the best interest
of the child
On May 7, 2018, Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced the
administration's Zero Tolerance Policy (ZTP), under which families
arriving at the border would be separated. Parents would be held in
adult detention facilities and prosecuted for illegal entry--despite
exercising their lawful right to seek asylum--while children would be
reclassified as unaccompanied children and placed in the custody of the
Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR). From May to July 2018, at least
2,700 immigrant and refugee children were separated from their parents
after crossing into the United States seeking safety.
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) filed a lawsuit--the Ms.
L v. Sessions case--which resulted in a court injunction mandating
reunification of children with their parents by July 26, 2018. With
other direct legal service providers,\26\ KIND formed a part of the
Steering Committee ordered by the court, to provide legal expertise and
input in the lawsuit and locate and interview the deported parents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ The Steering Committee approved by the Court in the Ms. L
litigation includes the law firm Paul, Weiss as well as three non-
governmental organizations: Justice in Motion, Kids in Need of Defense
(KIND), and the Women's Refugee Commission (WRC).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In response to the ZTP, KIND formed a dedicated Family Separation
Response Team (FSRT). In addition to directly handling the legal cases
of separated children and their families, the FSRT provides expert
mentorship and training to pro bono attorneys and staff, collaborates
in on-going coalition-building and litigation efforts, and works with
partners across the United States to support families affected by the
crisis. The team has also collaborated in the effort to locate deported
parents in Central America. Additionally, KIND represented over 100
detained children who had been separated as part of this policy. The
average age of these children was 10 years old.
In addition, KIND has now received approximately 280 additional
referrals for released, separated children across our 10 field offices,
including numerous children whose parents were deported. KIND is also
assisting dozens of reunified family units.
Parents and children face lasting trauma as a result of their
forced separations. In 2017, the American Academy of Pediatrics
explained that detention stunts child development and causes severe
psychological trauma, like depression and post-traumatic stress
disorder.\27\ Medical and mental health experts have concluded that the
forced separation of migrant children who fled violence can have
particularly harmful consequences, even if the separation is brief.\28\
At the Port Isabel detention center, a father articulated the pain he
felt being separated from his 9-year-old son, saying, ``I haven't seen
my son in over 2 months--I don't want anything from the United States
other than my son.''\29\ A mother who was separated from her 6-year-old
son said, ``I don't know how he's doing; I haven't spoken to him, I
don't know where he is. We're here because we watched our family get
murdered.''\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ JULIE M. LINTON ET AL., AM. ACAD. OF PEDIATRICS, DETENTION OF
IMMIGRANT CHILDREN 6 (2017).
\28\ BETRAYING FAMILY VALUES, supra note 41, at 12.
\29\ SilencedVoices, KIND, https://supportkind.org/get-involved/
silencedvoices/.
\30\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Not only are family members physically separated, but their legal
cases and experiences within the immigration enforcement system are
also bifurcated. This raises serious due process concerns, and serious
inefficiencies in a backlogged system, especially when individuals from
the same family have the same claim for asylum. Children, in
particular, may not know all the details or have important documents
relating to their family's asylum claim. When this happens, disparate
results and incomplete information are far more likely to affect
important immigration proceedings.
Children should not be separated from their parents barring
instances in which separation legitimately protects the child and is in
line with child welfare standards.
reasons for separations must be documented and the government should
track all separated family members
The uptick in family separations came after the Department of
Justice (DOJ) and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) implemented
a ``zero-tolerance'' immigration policy in the spring of 2018.\31\ The
policy directed DHS border officials to refer every individual
apprehended near the border who did not present at an official port of
entry to DOJ for criminal prosecution, even when individuals were
primary caregivers to children and exercised their lawful right to seek
asylum.\32\ Adults were taken to Federal detention facilities, while
children were transferred into the care of ORR, which operates within
HHS.\33\ Once separated from their parents, DHS classified the kids as
``unaccompanied.''\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\31\ U.S. DEP'T OF HEALTH & HUM. SERV., OFFICE OF INSPECTOR
GENERAL, OEI-BL18-00511, SEPARATED CHILDREN PLACED IN OFFICE OF REFUGEE
RESETTLEMENT CARE (2019), 1 (hereinafter INSPECTOR GENERAL REPORT).
\32\ Press Release, KIND & Women's Refugee Comm'n, Family
Separation at the Border (May 30, 2018) (on file at https://
supportkind.org/media/family-separation-at-the-border/).
\33\ INSPECTOR GENERAL REPORT, supra note 35, at 2.
\34\ Press Release, supra note 36.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Even before the ZTP, the New York Times reported that, from October
2017 to April 2018, over 700 children were taken from their
parents.\35\ The latest HHS Inspector General's report estimates that
DHS separated thousands of children from 2017 to June 2018.\36\ After
the administration officially acknowledged the ZTP, a Customs and
Border Protection (CBP) official testified that 639 parents traveling
with 658 children were processed for prosecution in the span of 13 days
in May alone.\37\ As of December 2018, HHS had identified 2,737
children who had been separated from their parents under the policy and
were required to be reunified under a June 2018 Federal court
order.\38\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\35\ Caitlin Dickerson, Hundreds of Immigrant Children Have Been
Taken From Parents at U.S. Border, NYTIMES (Apr. 20, 2018), https://
www.nytimes.com/2018/04/20/us/immigrant-children-separation-ice.html.
\36\ INSPECTOR GENERAL REPORT, supra note 35, at 1, 13.
\37\ TVPRA and Exploited Loopholes Affecting Unaccompanied Alien
Children: Hearing Before the Subcomm. on Border Security & Immigration,
105th Cong. (2018) (Statement of Richard Hudson, Deputy Chief of the
Operations Program, Law Enforcement Operations Directorate, U.S.
Customs & Border Protection).
\38\ Miriam Jordan, Family Separation May Have Hit Thousands More
Migrant Children Than Reported, NYTIMES (Jan. 17, 2019), https://
www.nytimes.com/2019/01/17/us/family-separation-trump-administration-
migrants.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alarmingly, the HHS Inspector General's report confirms what KIND
has seen with its own caseload, which is that the Trump administration
continues to separate families at the border. Even after President
Trump announced an end to the ZTP, ORR received at least 118 newly-
separated children between July 1 and November 7, 2018.\39\ ORR often
receives little or incomplete information about the reasons for such
separations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\39\ Id. at 11.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
dhs must develop standard guidelines for the continued separations
The HHS Inspector General's report notes that DHS only provides ORR
with ``limited information'' about why a family has been separated.\40\
Under current policies and practices, these decisions are arbitrary.
They require no justification or documentation and do not call for the
screener to have any child welfare expertise.\41\ The HHS Inspector
General's report emphasizes that ``[i]ncomplete or inaccurate
information about the reasons for separation, and a parent's criminal
history in particular, may impede ORR's ability to determine the
appropriate placement for a child.''\42\ It also notes that DHS does
not consistently respond to ORR's requests for follow-up information
about the reasons for a child's separation.\43\ KIND continues to see
cases in which neither ORR nor the attorney are notified that DHS
separated a child from a parent. A parent can lose physical custody of
their child without any judicial oversight and for reasons that are
inconsistent with child welfare legal standards.\44\ For example, while
a parent may have a prior deportation order or an arrest warrant in the
home country, that history may actually be the basis of the parent's
asylum claim for government persecution, such as in the case of a
parent fleeing an oppressive government regime.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\40\ INSPECTOR GENERAL REPORT, supra note 35, at 11.
\41\ KIND, WOMEN'S REFUGEE COMM'N & LUTHERAN IMMIGRATION SERV.,
BETRAYING FAMILY VALUES: HOW IMMIGRATION POLICY AT THE UNITED STATES
BORDER IS SEPARATING FAMILIES 4 (2017) (hereinafter BETRAYING FAMILY
VALUES).
\42\ INSPECTOR GENERAL REPORT, supra note 35, at 12.
\43\ Id.
\44\ BETRAYING FAMILY VALUES, supra note 45, at 7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
KIND has seen several recent cases, post-ZTP, of children separated
from their parents for unknown reasons. In one case, a father was
separated from his teenage daughter and no information was given for
the reasons for the separation. Moreover, KIND only found out this
child had been separated from her father through interviews with the
child. The separation was not noted in her file and no one from ORR
flagged the separation for the attorney of record. Frequently in these
cases, KIND attorneys have had to track down the location of the
parents, and then begin the difficult task of communicating with them
at an ICE detention facility, often several hundred miles away. Even
when KIND attorneys are able to establish contact with the separated
parent, the parent is typically given little to no information as to
why they were forcibly deprived of their ability to remain with their
child. There is currently no formal written document issued to parents
outlining the reasons for the separation, and no vehicle for them to
challenge any assertions being made against them. Moreover, even when
the separations are recorded, it is taking almost a week for DHS to
facilitate communication between the parent in their custody and the
child.
Many children are also separated from extended family members like
siblings or grandparents, or when CBP questions the veracity of the
relationship between the adult and child. These separations are not
recorded in the new DHS system. Therefore, if CBP does not believe an
adult is the true parent of a child, the separation will not be
recorded and there is no way for that parent to find their child and
challenge the separation later. Many children travel with extended
family members like grandparents or other relatives who may have cared
for the children their entire lives but never obtained legal
guardianship in the home country. CBP must separate these family
members but they should be tracking these separations for the same
reasons it is important to track children separated from their parents.
The separation from extended family members may be just as emotionally
traumatic as being separated from a parent and that adult may have
important information related to the child's legal claim for
protection.
dhs must ensure child welfare professionals screen and care for
children in their custody
KIND recommends the government hire child welfare professionals at
the border to supervise the protection of children and families and the
circumstances in which family separations occur.\45\ Further,
immigration enforcement agents should be trained to consider family
unity as a primary factor in charging and detention decisions.\46\
Written standards should be drafted, in consultation with child welfare
experts, describing protocols and procedures for determining when
separation may be in the best interest of a child. Immigration
enforcement agents should also receive training on how to apply the
``best interests of the child'' framework for when they believe a
child's separation from their parent is warranted.\47\ These instances
include when a parent has a conviction for a violent offense or child
abuse or neglect offense. DHS should also consider ORR's best interest
recommendation. Family separation should be recorded and justified in
writing, with an opportunity provided to the parent or child to
challenge the separation. ORR, family members, and attorneys should be
able to easily access this information. In order to ensure that
accurate information is available, ORR must demand that DHS input
detailed information about any separations going forward into the ORR
portal in a rigorous and systematic way.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\45\ Id. at 2.
\46\ Id. at 1.
\47\ Id. at 7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
dhs must conduct oversight of facilities holding migrant children
At a time when children, both accompanied and unaccompanied, make
up a significant portion of all migrants processed at the Southern
Border, this administration has actively sought to roll back Flores
protections, which set out National standards for the Government's
treatment, detention, and release of children. In September 2018, it
proposed regulations that would relax Flores standards for how kids in
custody can be held and transported.\48\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\48\ Apprehension, Processing, Care, and Custody of Alien Minors
and Unaccompanied Alien Children, 83 Fed. Reg. 45486 (proposed Sept. 7,
2018) (to be codified at 45 C.F.R. pt. 410).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The proposed regulations would eliminate the vital third-party
oversight and monitoring that is currently provided through judicial
enforcement of Flores. As recently as July 2018, the supervising court
found that the Government had breached the agreement in several ways,
including by undertaking policies that ``unnecessarily delay'' the
release of children to custodians.\49\ In January 2019, it was reported
that Flores counsel discovered facilities holding unaccompanied
children operating without licenses.\50\ Flores counsel recounted that
ORR has failed to notify children and parents of their rights relating
to securing children's release from facilities, discouraged parents
from seeking their children's release by passing their information to
ICE,\51\ and delayed background investigations of potential
sponsors.\52\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\49\ KIND, Comment Letter on Proposed Rule Relating to
Apprehension, Processing, Care and Custody of Alien Minors and
Unaccompanied Alien Children 29 (Nov. 6, 2018), https://
supportkind.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/KIND-Comments-DHS-Docket-
ICEB-2018-0002-11.6.18.pdf.
\50\ Graham Kates, Migrant Children in U.S. Are Being Held in
Unlicensed Shelters, Lawyers Say, CBS NEWS (Jan. 24, 2019, 2:17 PM),
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/migrant-children-in-u-s-are-being-held-in-
unlicensed-shelters-lawyers-say/.
\51\ A leaked internal DHS memo from December 2017 proposed a
Memorandum of Understanding between ORR and ICE, under which the
agencies would coordinate to place undocumented sponsors in removal
proceedings. It anticipated that the policy would ``result in a
deterrent impact on `sponsors' who may be involved with smuggling
children into the United States'' and there would be ``a short-term
impact on HHS where sponsors may not take custody of their children in
HHS facilities, requiring HHS to keep the UACs in custody longer.''
Memorandum from Dep't of Homeland Security (Dec. 2017) (on file at
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/5688664-Merkleydocs2.html).
This policy took effect 4 months later.
\52\ Kates, supra note 56.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
ORR remains the appropriate entity to care for migrant children--it
has experience resettling refugees and child welfare expertise. It is
not an immigration enforcement agency. However, third-party monitoring
of facilities must be retained and protected, particularly at a time
when there is enormous strain on ORR's resources. Compliance with
Flores must not be left to discretion, especially at a time when ORR
policies result in higher and longer detention rates for children.
dhs should never use information obtained from the office of refugee
resettlement to conduct enforcement
The Homeland Security Act requires the Office of Refugee
Resettlement to ``coordinate and implement the care and placement of
unaccompanied alien children who are in Federal custody by reason of
their immigration status.''\53\ The TVPRA clarifies that ORR is to
``promptly [place children] in the least restrictive setting that is in
the best interest of the child.''\54\ This requirement derives from the
longstanding Flores Settlement Agreement (FSA), which provides that
children should be placed in the ``least restrictive setting'' in their
best interests,\55\ and directs that parents and legal guardians
receive priority among potential sponsors, who may also include other
immediate relatives, distant relatives, or unrelated individuals.\56\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\53\ The Homeland Security Act, Pub. L. No. 107-296, 116 Stat. 2135
462(b)(1)(A) (2002).
\54\ 8 U.S.C. 1232(c)(2)(A) (2013).
\55\ Stipulated Settlement Agreement, Flores v. Reno, No. CV 85-
4544-RJK(Px) (C.D. Cal. Jan. 17, 1997), available at https://
cliniclegal.org/sites/default/files/attachments/
flores_v._reno_settlement_agreement_1.pdf [hereinafter Flores
Settlement Agreement]. The Flores Settlement Agreement is the result of
a class action against the Government by a class consisting of all
immigrant children detained in custody of the Government. Id. at 10.
This binding agreement sets standards for the detention and release of
immigrant children to sponsors. See id. at 9.
\56\ Id. at 14; 8 U.S.C. 1232(c); Sponsors and Placement:
Release of Unaccompanied Alien Children to Sponsors in the U.S., ORR,
https://www.acf.hhs.gov/orr/about/ucs/sponsors (last visited Sept. 23,
2018); U.S. Dep't of Health and Human Services, Office of Inspector
General, HHS's Office of Refugee Resettlement Improved Coordination and
Outreach to Promote the Safety and Well-Being of Unaccompanied Alien
Children (July 2017) (``ORR releases most children to their parents or
an immediate relative.'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Although ORR has received information about a potential sponsor's
immigration status since 2005, it has not, until recently, shared
immigration status information with other agencies for the explicit
purpose of immigration enforcement, as immigration status typically is
not relevant to evaluating whether the sponsor can adequately care for
a child.\57\ Instead, ORR's policy has been to enable ``the release of
unaccompanied alien children (UAC) to undocumented sponsors, in
appropriate circumstances and subject to certain safeguards.''\58\
Rather than disqualifying potential sponsors, immigration status
information has previously only been used ``to ensure the safety and
well-being of the child by making sure that there is an adequate care
plan in place that takes all relevant aspects of the sponsor's
situation into consideration.''\59\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\57\ Sponsors and Placement: Release of Unaccompanied Alien
Children to Sponsors in the U.S., ORR, https://www.acf.hhs.gov/orr/
about/ucs/sponsors (last visited Feb. 25, 2018).
\58\ Id.
\59\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the summer of 2017, however, U.S. Immigration and Customs
Enforcement (ICE) began using information gathered by ORR to initiate
enforcement against sponsors--identifying individuals for enforcement
based on their role as the designated or potential caretakers of
unaccompanied children.\60\ ICE arrested more than 400 people in its
initiative targeting sponsors for smuggling.\61\ However, news reports
indicated that the majority of those arrested were not charged with
Federal smuggling crimes, but instead charged with violations unrelated
to smuggling.\62\ Many of those arrested were not the suspects ICE had
targeted, but merely present in the home of the potential sponsors when
the agency arrived.\63\ These actions stoked fear in immigrant
communities and raised concerns among many about stepping forward to
care for unaccompanied children in ORR custody. KIND issued a report in
December 2017 documenting the stories of unaccompanied children and
sponsors affected by DHS's enforcement actions and the detrimental
impacts of enforcement against sponsors on the well-being of children
and due process.\64\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\60\ See KIND, Targeting Families 8 (Dec. 2017), https://
supportkind.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/TargetingFamilies_December-
2017_Final-v.2.pdf.
\61\ John Burnett, ICE Has Arrested More Than 400 in Operation
Targeting Parents Who Pay Smugglers, NPR (Aug. 18, 2017), https://
www.npr.org/2017/08/18/544523231/arrests-of-undocumented-parents-
sparks-debate-between-Federal-officials-and-immi; Hannah Dreier,
Relatives of Undocumented Children Caught Up in ICE Dragnet, ProPublica
(Sept. 11, 2017), https://www.propublica.org/article/relatives-of-
undocumented-children-caught-up-in-ice-dragnet; Uriel J. Garcia, ICE
Arrests Young Immigrant's Sponsor Months After Feds Assured Him He'd Be
Safe, THE NEW MEXICAN, Sept. 9, 2017, http://www.santafenewmexican.com/
news/local_news/ice-arrests-young-immigrant-s-sponsor-months-after-
feds-assured/article_428366f5-6d03-552c-a277-93b83d3005e2.html.
\62\ Dreier, Relatives of Undocumented Children Caught Up in ICE
Dragnet, supra note 13.
\63\ See Garcia, ICE Arrests Young Immigrant's Sponsor Months After
Feds Assured Him He'd Be Safe, supra note 13.
\64\ KIND, Targeting Families 8 (Dec. 2017), https://
supportkind.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/TargetingFamilies_December-
2017_Final-v.2.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In April 2018, information sharing between DHS and ORR was
formalized through a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) providing for the
continuous sharing of information about unaccompanied children from the
time of their apprehension through their release from custody,
including information about potential sponsors and other adults in the
home. Shortly after, DHS issued a notice in the Federal Register to
modify its system of records to carry out the agreement.\65\ That
notice stated that ICE will use information about sponsors obtained
through ORR to ``identify and arrest those who may be subject to
removal.''\66\ At the same time, HHS pursued modifications to forms
related to its sponsorship process to implement the MOA.\67\ ORR's
modified process included expanded fingerprinting and background check
requirements, including for all potential sponsors and adult members of
their households.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\65\ 83 Fed. Reg. 20844 (May 8, 2018).
\66\ Id.
\67\ See, e.g., Administration for Children & Families, Sponsorship
Review Procedures for Approval for Unaccompanied Alien Children, OMB
No. 0970-0278, 83 Fed. Reg. 22490 (May 15, 2018); 83 Fed. Reg. 42895
(Aug. 24, 2018); 83 Fed. Reg. 52221 (Oct. 16, 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The MOA has impeded ORR's ability to promptly place unaccompanied
children in the least restrictive setting by deterring potential
sponsors for unaccompanied children. Potential sponsors have expressed
fear of engaging with the agency's sponsorship and family reunification
process due to both the expanded scope of the information collected as
well as ICE's intent to use information it receives from ORR for
immigration enforcement.\68\ KIND has heard reports of individuals
declining ORR's request to fill out necessary paperwork to serve as
sponsors or withdrawing from the family reunification process after
their applications have been submitted. Fear of enforcement has
similarly compelled some potential sponsors and other household members
to miss their fingerprinting appointments or to discontinue their
applications. Moreover, the burdensome requirement that all adult
household members submit information significantly delayed some
reunifications.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\68\ See 83 Fed. Reg. at 20846 (noting among the purposes of DHS's
proposed system of records change ``[t]o screen individuals to verify
or ascertain citizenship or immigration status and immigration history,
and criminal history to inform determinations regarding sponsorship of
unaccompanied alien children . . . and to identify and arrest those who
may be subject to removal.'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recent enforcement actions by ICE in the course of implementing the
MOA have only compounded these fears. From July through November 2018,
ICE arrested 170 potential sponsors of unaccompanied children in ORR
custody.\69\ Nearly 64 percent (or 109) of the individuals arrested had
no criminal record.\70\ Such actions have led to a decline in the
number of individuals willing to sponsor unaccompanied children in ORR
custody and delayed the release of children from ORR. Numbers of
children in ORR custody have soared as children remain in care for
longer, indefinite periods. In the fall and winter of 2018, the number
of unaccompanied children in ORR's care reached historic levels--with
nearly 15,000 children in care in mid-December 2018. The length of time
in ORR care similarly ballooned as a result of the MOA and other
policies--at one point with an average length of stay at longer than 70
days.\71\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\69\ Geneva Sands, CNN, ICE arrested 170 potential sponsors of
unaccompanied migrant children (Dec. 10, 2018), https://www.cnn.com/
2018/12/10/politics/ice-potential-sponsors-arrests/index.html.
\70\ Id.
\71\ Jonathan Blitzer, To Free Detained Children, Immigrant
Families Are Forced to Risk Everything, The New Yorker (Oct. 16, 2018),
https://www.newyorker.com/news/dispatch/to-free-detained-children-
immigrant-families-are-forced-to-risk-everything (``Officially, the
H.H.S. claims that the average time is 59 days, but according to one of
the department's own officials, who agreed to speak with me on the
condition of anonymity, detained children now spend an average of 74
days in Federal custody, more than double what it was at the start of
2016.'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Held indefinitely in ORR custody with no knowledge of when and to
whom they may be released, unaccompanied children experience
significant anxiety and distress. These impacts may be particularly
significant for child survivors of trauma. In detention for months
potentially without the emotional support of family members children
may grow hopeless and decide to return to their countries of origin,
even when they may have viable claims for humanitarian protection and
face serious harm or death if deported. Detention fatigue not only
affects children's physical and mental health, but it negatively
impacts their ability to proceed with their legal cases.\72\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\72\ See, e.g. Julie M. Linton, Marsha Griffin, Alan J. Shapiro,
Am. Academy of Pediatrics, Detention of Immigrant Children (May 2017),
https://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/139/5/e20170483.short.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
conclusion
Children and families seeking asylum in the United States are often
escaping dangerous and violent conditions in their countries of origin.
The opportunity of asylum seekers to pursue protection from harm is the
very foundation of our country's asylum laws, and efforts to restrict
access to humanitarian protection like the Remain in Mexico policy do
nothing to make our country safer. Instead of restricting access to
protection for unaccompanied children and families, the administration
should ensure that all are provided due process and an opportunity to
have their claims fully and fairly considered. We look forward to
working with Members to ensure our country's continued commitment to
justice and to the protection of the most vulnerable.
Miss Rice. Thank you, Ms. Podkul.
I now recognize Ms. Brane to summarize her statement for 5
minutes.
STATEMENT OF MICHELLE BRANE, DIRECTOR FOR MIGRANT RIGHTS AND
JUSTICE, WOMEN'S REFUGEE COMMISSION
Ms. Brane. Thank you, Chairwoman and Members of the
committee for giving me the opportunity to testify today. The
Women's Refugee Commission has been monitoring immigration
enforcement and border screening policies for almost 20 years.
Whether the policy we are discussing today was a zero
tolerance policy with the primary focus of prosecution or an
explicit family separation policy, the consequences are clear:
Thousands of families seeking protection at our Southern Border
were separated.
One of the many shocking realities we must face is that
even after making a decision to implement a policy that they
knew would result in the separation of thousands of families,
no one in this administration, not DHS, not CBP, not ICE, no
one did anything to create a system for the actual separations,
for identifying and tracking separated children or minimizing
trauma or for tending to their basic needs.
The actual process for separating families was chaotic,
cruel, inefficient, and dangerous. In my opinion it was
criminally negligent.
In June 2018, at the height of family separations, I spent
2 days at the border speaking with parents and children in CBP
custody.
It is impossible to overstate the impact of seeing
Government officials, performing as part of their daily job
functions what can only be described as cruelty. Families were
separated before my eyes with no explanation, no opportunity
for goodbyes, no humanity.
In one case, I was speaking to a father and his 9-year-old
daughter, when an officer interrupted to say, I have to take
the girl. When I asked him why and where he was taking her, he
said, I don't know, ma'am, to a shelter. I just have her on my
list. The officer did not explain that this was a separation.
In fact, he didn't even seem to be acknowledging it himself.
But this was a separation happening before my eyes. It was
described only as being about, ``taking her to the bus.'' The
officer didn't even intend to give them an opportunity to say
goodbye.
At the Ursula processing center, there were over 500
separated children in cages when I arrived. Several of the
children were listed as being 1 or 2 or 0 years old, 0 years
old. I asked to see some of these babies.
The officer told me that he couldn't find them. He said
that he had called their names and they had not answered. I was
incredulous. Of course, they did not answer. They were babies.
I asked who was caring for these babies, and he told me he did
not know.
Eventually, he brought me a toddler listed as being 2 years
old. A 16-year-old girl was holding the child. She told me that
she had found the child there in her cage.
When the toddler cried, no guards or officials helped. This
16-year-old girl, who had also been separated from her mother,
found this toddler in a cage. When the toddler cried, she
comforted her. She changed her diapers. She helped her get in
line for food and gave her bottles.
At night she sang the crying girl to sleep. She had been
there for 3 days and she was worried about what would happen to
this little girl when she was transferred away.
I eventually discovered that this toddler had been
separated from her aunt and that Border Patrol had incorrectly
recorded her name and her age. We will never know what would
have happened to this child if I had not been there that day or
if a 16-year-old girl had not met or cared for her.
What is worse is that we will never know what other cases
like hers existed that day or on any other because DHS did not,
and still does not, track separations.
Another child I met with was a 5-year-old boy. He was
sobbing and inconsolable. He was clutching a rolled-up
photocopy of his mother's ID. Someone must have given it to him
before they separated them.
This piece of paper was the first indication I had seen in
my 2 days in those facilities that indicated that anyone in
Border Patrol cared at all about what was happening to these
children.
These outrageous and traumatizing separations did not just
happen to these families. This was not a natural disaster. This
was an affirmative decision and instruction given by and to
Government actors, and it was done to these families. Even
today, separations continue and there is still no system in
place for tracking families.
I thank the committee for holding this hearing, and for
continuing to ask these critical questions. We must ask how
this happened. Either the Government considered, but did not
care, about the consequences of separation, or they did not
even consider the consequences of their own policy, a
conclusion that is just as shocking and disturbing in its
negligence.
Why were policies to receive, process, and manage arriving
families humanely not even considered? There must be
consequences. It is essential in order to ensure that this does
not happen again.
Thank you, again, and I am available later to answer
questions about these stories and practices at the border.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Brane follows:]
Prepared Statement of Michelle Brane
March 26, 2019
Thank you for this opportunity to testify about the Department of
Homeland Security's Family Separation Policy, an extremely important
matter that profoundly affects the lives of vulnerable migrant and
refugee children and families seeking safety and our fundamental values
as a Nation.
The Women's Refugee Commission is a non-governmental, non-profit
organization that works to identify gaps, research solutions, and
advocate for change to improve the lives of crisis-affected women and
children.\1\ The Women's Refugee Commission is a leading expert on the
needs of refugee women and children, and the policies that can protect
and empower them.\2\ For over 2 decades, the Women's Refugee Commission
has monitored immigration detention facilities and migrant children's
facilities operated under what is now the jurisdiction of Immigration
and Customs Enforcement (ICE), Customs and Border Protection (CBP), and
the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR), and interviewed facility
staff, local service providers, asylum seekers, and migrant children
about the policies, practices, and conditions of custody that relate to
the ability to access to protection. We have been monitoring border
screening policies, including family separation, for over 4 years.\3\
The testimony submitted here is based on my observations, personal
experience, and the Women's Refugee Commission's expertise and
accumulated knowledge (in addition to the specific sources cited).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Women's Refugee Commission, https://
www.womensrefugeecommission.org/about.
\2\ Women's Refugee Commission, Border Surge of Unaccompanied
Children: Why They're Coming and What the Government Should Do (2014),
available at https://www.womensrefugeecommission.org/news/press-
releases-and-statements/2080-an-administration-made-disaster-the-south-
texas-border-surge-of-unaccompanied-alien-minors.
\3\ Women's Refugee Commission, Betraying Family Values; How
Immigration Policy at the U.S. Border is Separating Families, March
2017, https://www.womensrefugeecommission.org/rights/gbv/resources/
1450-betraying-family-values.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Trump administration has implemented various policies designed
to deter migrants--particularly migrant families and children--from
seeking protection in the United States. In March 2017, then-Secretary
of Homeland Security John Kelly announced that the administration was
considering a policy of separating families in order to deter them from
seeking asylum at the U.S.-Mexico border.\4\ While he quickly changed
course and announced that the policy was temporarily off the table,
discussion of how to deter families through separation continued.
Unfortunately, even by March 2017, the administration was already
separating families and in fact, increased the practice. By summer
2017, ORR and service providers noticed a marked increase in separated
children arriving at shelters for unaccompanied children around the
country.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Daniella Diaz, ``Kelly: DHS is considering separating
undocumented children from their parents at the border'', (March 7,
2017); https://www.cnn.com/2017/03/06/politics/john-kelly-separating-
children-from-parents-immigration-border/index.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In July 2017, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) began a
pilot \5\ of the now infamous ``zero tolerance'' policy that
prioritized the criminal prosecution of immigration-related offenses in
order to deter migrants. The pilot, which began in the El Paso area,
continued until October or November 2017 before zero tolerance was
expanded nationally in May 2018.\6\ Under zero tolerance, CBP was to
refer any migrant attempting to cross into the United States without
authorization, including asylum-seeking families and parents traveling
with infant children, for criminal prosecution. Although then-Attorney
General Sessions characterized the policy as applying to everyone, the
policy was never applied universally. It was, however, applied to large
numbers of parents. DHS authorities have said on many occasions that
one of the objectives of the policy was to deter families from seeking
protection at the U.S. border.\7\ CBP would select a parent for
prosecution, and then generally transfer parents to U.S. Marshals
custody and in doing so would separate them from their children. In
most cases, CBP would then classify the children as unaccompanied and
transfer them to ORR. For many months, WRC and many others had been
warning the administration of the harm such a policy would cause to
children, and of the complete lack of any systems in place to track
separations, ensure follow-up, facilitate communications, and to
reunify parents and their separated children.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Department of Homeland Security, Office of the Inspector
General, HHS-OIG Issue Brief, January 2019 OEI-BL-18-00511, https://
oig.hhs.gov/oei/reports/oei-BL-18-00511.pdf.
\6\ Ibid.
\7\ Julia Ainsley, NBC News, Trump Administration Weighed Targeting
Migrant Families, Speeding Up Deportation of Children, Jan. 17, 2019;
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/immigration/trump-admin-weighed-
targeting-migrant-families-speeding-deportation-children-n958811.
\8\ Women's Refugee Commission, Betraying Family Values; How
Immigration Policy at the U.S. Border is Separating Families, March
2017, https://www.womensrefugeecommission.org/rights/gbv/resources/
1450-betraying-family values.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is well-established that even after making the decision to
implement a policy that would clearly result in the separation of
thousands of families, and specifically a policy that was intended to
separate families as a form of deterrence, the administration--DHS, and
CBP in particular--did nothing to address the fact that they had no
system in place for identifying and tracking separated children or
minimizing trauma, let alone protecting their Constitutional rights to
due process and family unity. Even with the increased separations and
the formal policy of zero tolerance--that the administration knew based
on both common sense and on the pilot that they implemented--would lead
to massive separations, and even after public outcry over separations,
including an extensive complaint that my own organization and others
filed with DHS's Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties (CRCL) and
Office of Inspector General (OIG),\9\ no system was implemented to
track separations. No system was implemented to identify children as
having been separated when transferring them to ORR. No system was
implemented to enable communication between parents and their separated
children. No system was implemented for informing parents or children
of what was happening and how they would ever find each other again.
And no system was in place for reunifying families in any way, whether
for deportation or release from criminal custody. This is undisputed in
any serious way and was confirmed by the court in the case of Ms. L et
al. v. ICE.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ Women's Refugee Commission, et al, Joint Complaint on Forcible
Separations of Families by Customs and Border Protection, https://
www.womensrefugeecommission.org/rights/resources/1540-joint-complaint-
on-forcible-separation-of-families-in-customs-and-border-protection-
custody.
\10\ Ms. L. v. U.S. Immigration & Customs Enforcement (Ms. L. v.
ICE), No. 18-0428 (S.D. Cal. June 26, 2018). GAO report, https://
www.gao.gov/assets/700/694918.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Judges, prosecutors, and public defenders in criminal court were
equally unaware of what was happening or what recourse was left to
separated parents.\11\ Federal criminal courtrooms were filled with
hundreds of parents who were desperate for their children. Reports
indicate that many had been told by CBP officials that they would never
see their children again. Some were told their children would be sent
for adoption. Many were falsely told by court authorities or CBP
officials that the best way to get their children back was to plead
guilty in criminal court and accept voluntary departure.\12\ In
numerous cases, parents were deported without their children. Although
Secretary Nielsen recently testified before Congress that she believes
all parents were given an opportunity to reunite with their children
prior to deportation,\13\ the court in Ms. L created a steering
committee to locate several hundred deported parents who had been
separated from their children in order to determine their wishes. I
also spoke to several of these parents who had been deported without
their child even after begging to be reunited, pleading guilty,
withdrawing their asylum claim, and accepting voluntary departure or
agreeing to deportation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ Debbie Nathan, Hidden Horrors of ``Zero Tolerance''--Mass
Trials and Children Taken from their Parents, May 29, 2018, The
Intercept. Available at: https://theintercept.com/2018/05/29/zero-
tolerance-border-policy-immigration-mass-trials-children/
\12\ American Immigration Council (AIC) and American Immigration
Lawyers Association (AILA), The Use of Coercion by U.S. Department of
Homeland Security (DHS) Officials Against Parents Who Were Forcibly
Separated From Their Children, (August, 2018), https://aila.org/advo-
media/press-releases/2018/complaint-re-coercive-tactics-on-separated-
parents/the-use-of-coercion-by-us-department-of-homeland; See also
Declarations in Ms. L v ICE, ibid.
\13\ ``DOJ Lawyers Contradicted Nielsen On Family Separations
Within Hours Of Her Testimony,'' March 7, 2019, Talking Points Memo.
Available at: https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/doj-lawyers-
contradicted-kirstjen-nielsens-testimony-on-family-separation-within-
hours.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Only in the spring of 2018, months after family separation had
escalated and after direct intervention by advocates, did ICE post
information for parents in detention on how to call a child from whom
they had been separated. Even these efforts were deeply flawed. DHS's
own Office of Inspector General found that information on how to call a
separated child through the Department of Health and Human Services'
(HHS) toll-free number was posted in one area of the Port Isabel
Detention Center only after the June 20 Executive Order on family
separation, and that fliers did not fully explain the instructions on
how to place a call.\14\ Similarly, OIG found that CBP was inconsistent
in providing parents who were referred for criminal prosecution with a
DHS/HHS flier explaining how to obtain assistance in locating their
child. In addition, those parents who were sent to U.S. Marshals
custody during their criminal prosecution had no meaningful way to
access any DHS/HHS hotlines as their facilities did not have the same
phone capacities as an ICE facility might.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ OIG Report, at page 13, https://www.oig.dhs.gov/sites/default/
files/assets/2018-10/OIG-18-84-Sep18.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For those parents who did manage to contact an ICE or ORR hotline,
which many did not, the hurdles for actually speaking with or making
contact with their child were often insurmountable. These hurdles
included: (1) Not reaching an ORR official and having little or no
opportunity to leave a message or receive a return call, (2) not
receiving meaningful information about the location and well-being of
their child given ORR's policies to confirm parentage, or (3) not being
able to schedule time to speak with their child while in ICE detention.
These calls were not always free of charge, and WRC has reason to
believe that even today ICE might not facilitate free calls between
parents separated from their children. It is important to note that it
was not until ordered to do so by the judge in Ms. L v. ICE that DHS
began to make a concerted effort to ensure that parents were able to
have at least one telephonic contact with their child. Even then,
separated children were limited to 2 calls of 10 to 20 minutes each
week. Some children were too young or too traumatized to be able to
speak on the phone. And in a few cases, parents reported being put on
the phone with the wrong child.
The numbers were not insignificant, but because DHS never tracked
them, and is still not transparent about what they know, we have no
accurate accounting of how many families were separated, nor do we know
how many remain separated after all this time. What we have learned is:
Between June and November 2017, at least 281 individuals in families
were separated, with the children being transferred to ORR facilities;
The New York Times reported that between October 2017 and April 20,
2018, ORR identified over 700 children placed in their care after
separation from a parent at the border;\15\ And by June 2018, ORR
identified 2,654 children in their care who had been separated from
their parents by CBP at the border,\16\ and more than 400 of those
parents had been deported without their children. More recent
investigations have revealed additional children ORR failed to identify
in June, and that there were likely thousands of separated children who
had been released from ORR prior to the June accounting.\17\ This means
that between the summer of 2017 to the time of the court order in 2018,
there were, at a minimum, over 3,000 children, and potentially
thousands more, who had been separated from a parent and placed into
ORR custody.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ ``Hundreds of Immigrant Children Have Been Taken From Parents
at U.S. Border,'' The New York Times (Apr. 20, 2018), https://
www.nytimes.com/2018/04/20/us/immigrant-children-separation-
ice.html?module=inline.
\16\ Ms. L v ICE, Supra.
\17\ OIG Report, https://oig.hhs.gov/oei/reports/oei-BL-18-
00511.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In April 2018, again, many months after separations had first
become official policy through the El Paso pilot and well after
separations had been happening at an alarming rate, CBP began assigning
families that were apprehended together a Family Unit Number which
allowed CBP to identify families who arrived together. This was the
first indication that someone considered the urgent need to track
family members. However, the interest and effort was short-sighted and
ineffective. The family unit numbers did not transfer with the child to
ORR nor with the parent when they were transferred to ICE custody. The
Family Unit Number and related data was deleted at the point of
transfer, rendering it effectively useless both in notifying an
individual ICE or ORR official assigned to a separated parent or child
to know about the separation and in facilitating Government-wide
tracking of family separation. To WRC's knowledge, no other effort was
made to effectively track family separations on a comprehensive and
systemic scale.
This policy had consequences far beyond what is evident on the face
of it. Whether this was a policy intentionally designed to be as cruel
as possible with the express purpose of traumatizing parents and
children and separating them forever, or whether it constituted a
criminally negligent failure to anticipate the consequences of the
policy, the results were disastrous. Not only did the administration's
policy to separate families cause lasting trauma and harm to thousands
of children and their parents, these policies of separation and
deterrence have not been effective in preventing parents from fleeing
extreme danger to protect their children. The Trump administration has
been intent on rolling back essential, long-established child welfare
protections for children in an effort to deter the migration of
families seeking protection. They have focused on family detention and
family separation as two such policies, claiming that there is no other
way to manage migrant families.\18\ However, both efforts have failed
to deter migrants and in fact, have served only to traumatize and
endanger children and harm families while also undermining pre-existing
screening, management, and processing systems.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ Women's Refugee Commission, The Harm of Family Detention,
https://www.womensrefugeecommission.org/images/zdocs/WRC-harm-of-
family-detention.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is important to note that around the same time the Trump
administration first began to forcibly separate families at the border
in order to deter them from seeking protection, the administration
ended one of its most effective programs--the Family Case Management
Program (FCMP)\19\--that had been designed specifically to manage the
compliance of and support families seeking protection while in their
immigration proceedings. In addition to costing a fraction of the cost
of detaining a family together in ICE or separately in ICE/ORR custody,
FCMP was an alternative to detention program that was more than 99
percent effective in ensuring family appearances at ICE appointments
and hearings, and also supported some parents during deportation. The
program had been intended at minimum as a 5-year pilot but had only
been in place for 1.5 years when the administration prematurely
terminated FCMP in June 2017.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ Women's Refugee Commission, Family Case Management Program
(FCMP) Backgrounder, available at: https://
www.womensrefugeecommission.org/images/zdocs/Backgrounder-FCMP.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The crisis at the U.S. border is a crisis of political policies:
Policies that are undermining border protection, and intentionally
exposing children in Government custody to lasting and irreparable
harm.
In June 2018, at the height of the family separation policy crisis
and 1 week before President Trump's Executive Order, I spent 2 days at
the border speaking with parents and children in CBP custody under the
Flores Settlement Agreement attorney access privilege. I spent 1 day at
a Border Patrol station in McAllen, Texas where families are taken for
initial processing, and another day at the Ursula Processing Center,
also in McAllen. The Ursula Processing Center is a larger overflow
center, also run by Border Patrol, where some children were taken for
further processing as unaccompanied children after being separated from
their parents, and where some families were taken for initial
processing. Ursula was also sometimes used as a holding facility for
children who are temporarily separated from their parent while the
parent it sent for prosecution. What I witnessed at Ursula was as
haunting as it was gut-wrenching, and is an experience that I will
never forget.
I witnessed several families being separated. I heard with my own
ears the cries of children. I heard parents and children being given
false or misleading information about what was happening to them. No
consideration was given by any Government actor for the well-being or
basic human emotions of frightened children being taken from their
parents, nor the desperate parents distraught at having their child
ripped away from them. It is impossible to overstate the impact of
seeing Government officials performing, as part of their daily job
functions, what can only be described as cruelty.
The CBP station was cold, which is consistent with all my visits to
CBP stations. Despite the over 100-degree temperatures outside, I wore
a sweater and jacket inside the facility. Many of the children and
parents I spoke to were still wearing wet clothes from having crossed
the river or been caught in a rain storm the day before. Families were
divided into male and female cells, and children over the age of 5 or 6
were separated from their parents of the opposite sex. Some of the
children were held with other children, while others were held with
other non-relative adults of the same sex.
I spoke to a mother and her 7-year-old son who had been placed in
separate cells. They were reunified for the purpose of my interview
with them. The child would not speak to me. He was almost catatonic--he
just stared into space. When he occasionally answered his mother's
questions, it was barely in a whisper. She was desperately worried
about him and said that he had not eaten, not had anything to drink, or
used the bathroom since they arrived 1\1/2\ days prior. He said that he
was afraid to use the toilet in the cell where he was held with older
boys and men. All of this was mumbled in whispers to his mother while
laying limp in her arms. His clothes were still wet because they had
been caught in a rainstorm when they were apprehended. He was shaking
with cold. She begged me to ask the officers to let them be together.
She said some mothers were allowed to be with their children and did
not know why she and her son had been separated. She could talk of
nothing else. Before I left, I was able to explain to the guards that
the child seemed particularly traumatized and should at least be held
in the same cell with his mother. He indicated that they would be
separated eventually but when I left, I saw that they were together, at
least temporarily.
In another case, I was interviewing a father and his 9-year-old
daughter (who was also in wet clothes and shaking), when an agent
knocked on the door and told us he had to take the girl. The father and
daughter looked at me stone-faced. I asked the agent where they were
taking her to which he responded, ``I don't know, ma'am. To a shelter
or processing center. I just have her on my list.'' I asked if he could
wait a moment so that the father and his daughter could talk and say
goodbye. They had been separated into separate cells since arriving at
the station and had only had the brief time talking to me to be
together. The officer simply responded by reiterating that he was just
taking her to the bus to be processed. ``I am not separating them
ma'am, I am just taking her to the bus, to a shelter,'' he said. I
explained to him what we all knew to be happening--that this 9-year-old
girl was about to be separated from her father and taken to ORR
custody. I explained this to the father and daughter and asked the
officer to give them a moment to say goodbye or quickly exchange any
words, the last they would share for an uncertain but long amount of
time. It was clear that the officer had no intention of permitting them
to say goodbye without my intervention. After about a minute, the guard
opened the door again. The girl walked out. She hugged me. Then, I went
back into the interview room with her father. He burst into tears.
No official took responsibility. No one admitted to what was
happening in that facility. No one told the parents or the kids what
was going to happen to them, but everyone detained there knew to be
afraid. In some cases, children clung to their mothers or fathers but
in many cases I saw them quietly and obediently follow instructions as
they were led to separate cells. What struck me the most was the
calmness--the stoic attitude of the children--until you were alone with
them. The mothers wailed. Fathers tried to suppress tears. But most of
the children who were over 5 just sat there. They did not cry. They
barely moved.
When we arrived at the Ursula Processing Center the next day, the
officials gave us a list with hundreds of names on it. These were the
children in custody we were authorized to speak to pursuant to the
Flores Settlement Agreement. On the day we visited, the facility had
1,200 people detained in it. It is a giant warehouse divided into what
can only be referred to as cages. The adults were in the front--packed
into chain-linked cages like sardines, lying side-by-side wrapped in
mylar (foil) sheets. According to the lists, there were over 500
children who had been separated from a parent who were being held in
cages in the back section. In some cases, the parent was also detained
at Ursula (but usually held in a separate cage), while in others, the
parents had been sent away for criminal prosecution or to ICE adult
custody. Children filled the cages--sleeping on thin mats on the floor
and wrapped in mylar blankets. Some children sat on the floor, others
on benches. There were no toys, no books, and generally nothing for the
children to do. Some televisions hung from the fencing in some of the
cages, but they were not on when I was there. Children were not
permitted to run around or play, and in fact were scolded by guards if
they tried. The lights were on 24 hours a day, as in all Border Patrol
facilities. Despite the summer Texas heat outside, the warehouse was
extremely cold. There were no windows. The children had access to
porta-potties set up in a central station in the middle of a set of
cages. There was no plumbing in this section of the warehouse. There
were tanks of water for washing hands, but the children told me that
the water usually ran out by mid-morning. Air was piped in through
large, loud HVAC tubing. One of the younger children I met with pointed
at the tubes and said they were monsters.
Children in cages next to where we stood were looking at us through
the fencing, curious as to who we were. I looked through the list we
were given. I had to pick out which children I wanted to speak with.
Several of the children were listed as being very young--1 or 2 years
old. Others had their ages listed as zero. Zero. I asked who was caring
for those babies and toddlers--the officers told me that they did not
know. I asked to see some of these babies and speak to whoever was
caring for them. They left with the list and came back a few minutes
later. The officer told me they couldn't find them, that they had
called their names, but they did not answer. I stared at him and told
him that they were babies who, of course, would not answer when called.
``I can't find them ma'am. I called their name, but they did not
answer,'' he said. I insisted to the officer that there had to be
someone caring for them who can respond on their behalf when called.
``Who is taking care of these babies?'' I asked. Again, the officer
told me, ``I don't know. They are probably with a relative or someone
who is not responding when I call the name because it is not their
name.'' I remained incredulous. I asked him to please bring a baby--any
baby in custody--along with the person caring for them. But the officer
insisted that I had to give him a name, so I picked several names and
suggested that they approach adults caring for babies to see if they
are the ones on the list. After a long wait, they brought me a child
whose date of birth was listed as January 1, 2016, meaning the child
would be 2 years old. This stood out because 1-1 is a DOB often used
when the actual date is unknown. A 16-year-old girl was holding the
child. When I asked her if she was the child's mother, she said ``no,''
and told me that she did not know the child. When she arrived, after
having been separated from her own mother, she was in a cage with
several other girls her age. This toddler was in the cage with them.
She followed the girls around, indicating for her diaper to be changed,
for a bottle, for food. No official took any responsibility for the
toddler who had apparently been separated from an adult. The girl said
that other girls in the cage told her that the toddler was just 2 years
old, and that this seemed right to her. The toddler did not speak
Spanish. She seemed to only know a few words that she repeated, but the
girls did not understand them. They assumed it was the indigenous
language Quiche. The toddler just pointed, grunted, and cried. After
the other girls were transferred away from the cage, the 16-year-old
girl had been the one the child clung to. She taught other kids how to
change diapers so that she had help. When the toddler cried, no guard
or officials helped. At bedtime, the teenager put the toddler girl to
sleep. At mealtime, she helped her get in line to get her food. She had
been there for at least 3 days, but she told me it was hard to know
because the lights were always on and there were no clocks or
calendars. She told me she was worried about what would happen to and
who would care for the little girl when she was transferred away from
her.
After I brought this to the attention of the officials at the
facility, they eventually looked into the toddler's case and discovered
that the child had been separated from her aunt. Border Patrol had
separated them 4 days earlier. The aunt was sent for prosecution and
left the toddler behind--eventually transferring her to Ursula. Upon
pressing, it was discovered that the aunt had also been transferred to
Ursula. For 4 days this little girl's aunt had been asking what
happened to the child. No one would tell her. In the mean time, she was
being held in a cage just yards away from her niece. Seeing her aunt
transformed the little girl, who until now had been lethargic and
nearly asleep in the teenager's arms. The toddler lit up and her entire
demeanor changed. I learned from the aunt that Border Patrol had not
only incorrectly recorded her name, but also had a date of birth that
was off by several years. Indeed, the toddler was actually almost 4
years old. We will never know what would have happened to this child if
I had not been there that day, or if a 16-year-old girl had never met
nor cared for her. What's worse is that we will never know what other
cases like hers--cases of incorrectly recorded biographical
information, and of separation from a relative only a few cages or
cells away--existed that day or on any other because DHS did not and
still does not meaningfully track separations.
Later, I spoke to another 9-year-old. She sobbed as soon as I
explained to her who I was and that I was there to understand how she
was doing and how she was being treated. She could hardly speak. She
did not want to talk about who she was, or where she came from, or what
had happened to her. All she wanted talk about was that she had to find
her mother. She said to me, ``I have to hug her and tell her I love
her. I need her to know I love her very, very much.'' She was obsessed
with staying put at this facility. She was worried that she would be
taken away to a shelter like other children who were being taken away,
and she was concerned that if she moved from the place where we were--
the last place her mother saw her--that her mother would not be able to
find her again. ``I don't want to be lost,'' she told me. Like so many
children whose parents tell them that if they get lost or separated at
a mall or fair to stay put because they will find them, this little
girl was trying her best to do what she was supposed to do. But in this
situation, no one knew how her mother would ever find her. Certainly,
it appeared that the officials in charge had no plan for reunifying her
with her mother. Based on what I had just observed, that 9-year-old
little girl was right. She had every reason to think they might lose
her.
In front of the desk where I was interviewing children, there was a
cage filled with very young boys. As I waited for the next child to be
brought to me, I went to the cage and spoke to them. I asked them how
old they were: ``5'', ``5'', ``10'', ``9'', ``5'', ``5'', ``5.'' I
scanned my list of unaccompanied children, picked out a 5-year-old and
asked to speak to him. The officer brought me a little boy, who grabbed
my hand as soon as he saw me. We walked to the desk where I could talk
to him and I lifted him onto the chair. He started to shake as the
tears came. He just cried and cried, climbed onto my lap, hugged me,
and cried for his mommy. He said there was a boy in the cage who was
mean to him, that this boy was teasing him and saying he will never see
his mother again. The boy was clutching a rolled-up piece of paper. It
was a photocopy of the picture on his mother's ID. Someone must have
made it and given it to him before they took her away. It was falling
apart, and he was clutching it desperately. There was no way to expect
this child to tell me about his situation, so I just comforted him as
best I could. I could not tell him honestly that he would be with his
mommy again--all I could say is that I thought they would take him to a
place that was warmer than this warehouse with cages, where there would
be people who would take care of him and help him find his mommy. When
we finished, he walked back to his cage. The boy pointed to another boy
in the cage to tell me he was the one who was mean to him. I told the
guard and was told someone would look into it.
Later, after the children were called into line to get their
dinner, I noticed another one of the 5-year-olds sitting on a bench
crying. No one paid attention to the crying boy. I went to talk to him.
He was shaking and saying something I could not understand though his
sobs. I put my fingers through the fence of the cage he was in. He
stopped crying and held my hand. He asked me where his daddy was. I
told him that I did not know, but that his daddy was probably at court.
He cried some more. He asked if he was going to go to court too, and if
he would be alone. I did not have answers for him. I did not know what
would happen. If he went to a children's shelter with ORR, he would
likely go to court, and like so many children, he would go alone. Only
if he was one of the lucky ones would he go to court accompanied by a
relative or attorney. I asked him if he knew where he was going next
and whether he knew anyone here in the United States--he said he did
not.
Soon, several other boys gathered around the fence to talk to me.
The boy repeated to me, ``My father is in court,'' as if asking me a
question. One by one the other boys said, ``Mine too.''
Each child and each parent in that facility, and all those who came
before them and after them, had stories. They were all traumatized. The
meaningless, confusing terms of who would go where, when, were
dizzying. The response to almost any question was simply to refer to
the matter as someone else's responsibility or a small step of a larger
process. ``I am just taking their information.'' ``I don't know where
they are taking her daughter--I just know she needs to get on the
bus.'' ``I am not separating her from her father, I am just taking her
to the processing center.'' ``I don't know why her 7-year-old son is
being kept in a separate cell.''
The outrageous and traumatizing separations I have described and
that we heard about all spring and summer of 2018 did not just happen
to these families. This was not a natural disaster that happened. This
was an affirmative decision and instruction given by and to Government
actors and was done to these families. This reality was being
implemented through the affirmative actions of officers right there in
front of me; agents of the U.S. Government, representing all taxpaying
residents.
And despite the public outrage, despite the Congressional efforts
to monitor and conduct oversight, and despite a court injunction on
separations and an order to reunify separated families, there is still
no meaningful tracking or system to facilitate communication or
reunification in place. Even today, ORR continues to receive
traumatized children who have been separated without critical
information \20\ about the separations or the reasons for the
separation, there continue to be problems with communication between
separated children and their parents, and WRC continues to have cases
brought to our attention of families being separated without cause.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ OIG report.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I thank the committee for holding this hearing and for asking
critical questions.
We must ask,
``How did this happen?''
Whether the policy is called a ``zero tolerance prosecution
policy'' or a ``separation policy'' is only part of the issue.
Regardless of the policy's name or even its official intent, there is
no question that it resulted in the separation of thousands of children
from their parents, and that it was clear from the start that this
policy would result in these separations. It was clear that a physical
separation would take place.
Judge Sabraw in Matter of Ms. L stated:
``The government readily keeps track of personal property of detainees
in criminal and in immigration proceedings. Money, important documents,
and automobiles to name a few, are routinely catalogued, stored,
tracked, and produced upon a detainees' release, at all levels--State,
Federal, citizen, and alien. Yet the Government has no system in place
to keep track of, provide effective communication with, and promptly
produce children. The unfortunate reality is that under the present
system migrant children are not accounted for with the same efficiency
and accuracy as property.''\21\ ``A practice of this sort implemented
in this way is likely to be ``so egregious, so outrageous, that it may
fairly be said to shock the conscience.''\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ Ms. L. v. U.S. Immigration & Customs Enforcement (Ms. L. v.
ICE), Supra.
\22\ Ibid.
We must ask,
``When deciding on such a policy, and when actually
implementing such a policy, how is it possible that no
procedures were implemented?'' Either the Government considered
but did not care about the consequences of separation--a
shocking and disturbing conclusion--or, the Government did not
even consider the consequences of the implementation of their
policy--a conclusion that is just as shocking and disturbing in
its negligence.
It appears that there was no plan. It appears that there were no
guidelines for how to implement this policy. So, the question is then:
``Why were no such plans made or guidance given, despite the
existence of a pilot that tested this very practice, and that
clearly resulted in a dramatic increase in family separations
due to prosecutions?''
``What did the administration, the Secretary of Homeland
Security, the Commissioner of CBP, the Chief of Border Patrol,
the chief of each Border Patrol station, and all the others in
the chain of command, instruct their staff to do? How did they
envision the policy would be carried out? What did they think
would happen to these families?'' and,
``Why did they not take appropriate steps to ensure even the
most basic due process and human considerations?''
``Why, even after all the outrage and the difficulties in
reunifying children and parents, why after a court order, are
there still no policies in place to track separations?''
``Why would DHS and the administration seek to replace the
harm and cruelty of family separation with the equally
inappropriate and wildly costly use of family detention,
especially when such detention has not been able to comply with
the most basic child protection standards set out in law, and
especially when the administration knows it has cost-effective
options proven to support families while ensuring their
compliance with immigration requirements?''
We must ask these critical questions and take action. Policies that
uphold our values while protecting our borders and up-holding our
commitments to human rights and due process can be implemented. But in
order to achieve this, we must address this crime against our values as
Americans. There must be consequences. We cannot let DHS's actions and
implementation of these and similarly harmful policies go unchecked. It
is essential in order to ensure that this does not happen again.
Miss Rice. Thank you, Ms. Brane.
I now recognize Dr. Linton to summarize her statement for 5
minutes.
STATEMENT OF JULIE M. LINTON, CO-CHAIR, IMMIGRANT HEALTH
SPECIAL INTEREST GROUP, AMERICAN ACADEMY OF PEDIATRICS
Dr. Linton. Chairwoman Rice, Ranking Member Higgins, and
Members of the Homeland Security Committee, thank you for the
opportunity to testify here today.
I am Dr. Julie Linton, a practicing pediatrician in
Greenville, South Carolina, where my work is focused on the
care of children in immigrant families. I am the co-chair of
the American Academy of Pediatrics Immigrant Health Special
Interest Group and co-author of the 2017 AAP Policy Statement,
Detention of Immigrant Children.
On behalf of the American Academy of Pediatrics, or the
AAP, and our 67,000 members, thank you for holding today's
hearing. The AAP is nonpartisan and pro-children. Pediatricians
care about the health and well-being of all children, no matter
where they or their parents were born.
As pediatricians, we know that children do best when they
are together with their families. After reading media reports
in March 2017 that the Department of Homeland Security was
considering a policy that would separate mothers from their
children upon arriving at the U.S. border, we immediately spoke
out against this proposed policy.
We subsequently wrote to DHS 6 times to urge the agency to
reject such a policy. The AAP also issued roughly half a dozen
statements about why family separation devastates the most
basic relationship we know, the relationship between a child
and a parent.
We have said repeatedly that separating children from their
parents contradicts everything we stand for as pediatricians
protecting and promoting children's health.
Today I will underscore the harmful effects of separation,
processing, and detention based on what we know from the
scientific literature and what I know from caring for patients.
Prolonged exposure to serious stress, known as toxic
stress, can disrupt a child's brain architecture and adversely
impact short- and long-term health. When little bodies are in a
constant fight or flight response, stress hormones, such as
cortisol, remain elevated, continuously activating the nervous
system and suppressing the immune response.
A critical role of a parent or known caregiver is to buffer
stress. Separation from a parent robs children of this buffer.
Separated children can, thus, face immediate health problems,
including physical symptoms like headaches and stomach pain,
changes in body functions like, eating, sleeping, and
toileting, behavior problems like, anger, irritability, and
aggression, and difficulty with learning and memory.
Children who have been separated may also experience
feelings of mistrust, embarrassment, guilt, and shame.
In the long term, children who have been separated may be
susceptible to chronic diseases, such as depression, post-
traumatic stress disorder, diabetes, and heart disease.
I have personally witnessed the impact of family
separation. In June 2018, I cared for an 8-year-old boy who,
with his pregnant mother, had fled violence and direct personal
threats in Central America to seek safe haven in the United
States.
Since the zero tolerance policy was in effect at the time,
I gently asked the boy and his mother if they had been
separated at the border. With my question, a chilling silence
arose. The boy began to breathe quickly and his mother
tearfully whispered, 7 days.
For 7 days this boy and his pregnant mother did not know
about the other's location or safety. Their separation was
shorter than many children harmed by the zero tolerance policy
and he still suffered the consequences.
That day in my office his mother reported he could no
longer sleep through the night. He had trouble being away from
her for even short periods of time. His mother shared that he
was a shell of his previous self.
Children are not little adults. To untrained eyes they can
appear quite healthy, even when their systems begin to shut
down. Tragically, this was the case for Jakelin Caal Maquin and
Felipe Gomez Alonzo who died in the custody of Customs and
Border Protection in December.
The AAP, joined by 13 National medical and mental health
provider organizations, wrote to Secretary Nielsen and
Commissioner McAleenan, urging they take specific, meaningful
steps to ensure that all children in CBP custody receive
appropriate medical and mental health screening and necessary
follow-up care by trained providers.
We urge our Federal agencies to apply a child-focused lens
when considering policies that could have an impact on child
health.
Additionally, children should not be placed in unlicensed
facility whether run by HHS or DHS. The findings of the HHS
Office of Inspector General about Tornio and family separation
are alarming and should be addressed.
As separations continue to occur we must compel all Federal
agencies to put the best interest of the child ahead of any
other priority. Child welfare experts, not law enforcement
agents, are best-positioned to make the determination of what
is in a child's best interest.
It is critical that all reunified children receive
appropriate medical and mental health care in the community to
support healing from the traumatic experiences of family
separation, processing, and detention.
Thank you for the opportunity to testify today.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Linton follows:]
Prepared Statement of Julie M. Linton
March 26, 2019
Chairwoman Rice and Ranking Member Higgins, thank you for the
opportunity to speak here today. I am Dr. Julie M. Linton, a practicing
pediatrician in Greenville, South Carolina, and my clinical work is
focused on the care of children in immigrant families. I am testifying
today on behalf of the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) where I
serve as co-chair of its Immigrant Health Special Interest Group (SIG)
and as a member of the executive committee for the AAP Council on
Community Pediatrics. I am also a co-author of the AAP's 2017 policy
statement entitled Detention of Immigrant Children. The AAP is a non-
profit professional membership organization of 67,000 primary care
pediatricians and medical and surgical pediatric subspecialists
dedicated to the health and well-being of all infants, children,
adolescents, and young adults.
The AAP is non-partisan and pro-children. Pediatricians care about
the health and well-being of all children--no matter where they or
their parents were born. The AAP supports comprehensive health care in
a medical home for all children in the United States. As pediatricians,
we know that children do best when they are together with their
families. When we read media reports in March 2017 that the Department
of Homeland Security (DHS) was considering a policy that would separate
immigrant mothers from their children when they arrived at the U.S.
border, we were compelled to immediately speak out against this
proposed policy. We urged Federal authorities to exercise caution to
ensure that the emotional and physical stress children experience as
they seek refuge in the United States is not exacerbated by the
additional trauma of being separated from their siblings, parents, or
other relatives and caregivers.
We subsequently wrote to DHS 6 times to urge the agency to reject a
policy that would separate immigrant children from their parents at the
border. In addition to these letters, the AAP issued roughly half a
dozen statements, and pediatricians across the country, myself
included, penned countless op-eds about why family separation
devastates the most basic human relationship we know--that of child and
parent.
The AAP has said repeatedly that separating children from their
parents contradicts everything we stand for as pediatricians--
protecting and promoting children's health. In fact, highly stressful
experiences, like family separation, can cause irreparable harm,
disrupting a child's brain architecture and affecting his or her short-
and long-term health. This type of prolonged exposure to serious
stress--known as toxic stress--can carry lifelong consequences for
children. Today I would like to speak more about the health effects of
separation, both what we know from the scientific literature and what I
know from caring for my patients. I will also emphasize the harmful
impact of detention on the health and well-being of immigrant children
and underscore the critical need to avoid retraumatizing children and
families with detention or separation.
observations of pediatricians
Writing about her experience visiting a ``tender age'' shelter run
by the Department of Health and Human Services' Office of Refugee
Resettlement (ORR) in April 2018, then-president of the AAP Dr. Colleen
Kraft described a little girl:
``A toddler, her face splotched red from crying, her fists balled up in
frustration, pounding on a play mat in the shelter for unaccompanied
children run by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)'
Office of Refugee Resettlement. No parent was there to scoop her up, no
known and trusted adult to rub her back and soothe her sobs. The staff
members at the center tried their best, and shared my heartbreak while
watching this child writhe on the floor, alone.
``We knew what was wrong, but we were powerless to help. She wanted her
mother. And the only reason she could not be with her mother was
because immigration authorities had forcibly separated them when they
crossed the border into the United States. The mother was detained, and
the little girl was handed over to the shelter as an `unaccompanied'
child.''\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Kraft C. Separating parents from their kids at the border
contradicts everything we know about children's welfare. LA Times.
https://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-kraft-border-separation-
suit-20180503-story.html. Published May 3, 2018. Accessed February 1,
2019.
The co-chair of AAP's Immigrant Health, SIG Dr. Marsha Griffin, and
SIG member Dr. Rita Agarwal, told the story of a child they encountered
during a visit to an ORR shelter for unaccompanied children in the
spring of 2018. This child had been separated from her mother. They
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
wrote:
``In a walled-in courtyard, we saw a 5-year-old girl chasing iridescent
bubbles blown by two adults. Staff said she tried to run away any time
she played outside, so she was limited to the courtyard. She would bite
anyone who approached her, so she was kept away from other children and
distracted with bubbles. Biting and seeking to run are signs of acute
distress in a child of this age--a normal reaction to extreme fear.
This girl did not need bubbles and a walled courtyard but rather her
mother or her father to calm her--someone who could hold her and make
her world right again.''\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Agarwal R, Griffin M. Taking immigrant kids from parents shows
contempt for families. Houston Chronicle. https://
www.houstonchronicle.com/opinion/outlook/article/Taking-immigrant-kids-
from-parents-shows-contempt-12963039.php. Published June 3, 2018.
Accessed February 1, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
evidence of the harms of family separation
Studies overwhelmingly demonstrate the irreparable harm caused by
breaking up families.\3\ We know that children who have been separated
can have a host of health challenges, including developmental delays
like those in gross and fine motor skills, regression in behaviors like
toileting and speech, as well as constant stomach and headaches.
Prolonged exposure to highly stressful situations--known as toxic
stress--can disrupt a child's brain architecture and affect his or her
short- and long-term health. A parent or a known caregiver's role is to
mitigate these dangers. When robbed of that buffer, children are
susceptible to a variety of adverse health impacts including learning
deficits and chronic conditions such as depression, post-traumatic
stress disorder, and even heart disease.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Shonkoff JP, Garner AS. The Lifelong Effects of Early Childhood
Adversity and Toxic Stress. Pediatrics. 2012;129(1):e232-46. Masten AS.
Global perspectives on resilience in children and youth. Child Dev.
2014;85(1):6-20. Bouza A, Camacho-Thompson DE, Carlo G, et al. Society
for Research in Child Development. The Science Is Clear: Separating
Families Has Long-Term Damaging Psychological and Health Consequences
for Children, Families, and Communities. https://www.srcd.org/policy-
media/statements-evidence/separating-families. Published June 20, 2018.
Accessed February 1, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Government's practice of separating children from their parents
at the border counteracts every science-based recommendation I have
ever made to families who seek to nurture and protect their children's
physical, intellectual, and emotional development. Children, who have
often experienced terror in their home countries and then additional
trauma during the journey to the United States,\4\ are often re-
traumatized through processing and detention in Customs and Border
Protection (CBP) facilities not designed for children. This trauma is
profoundly worsened by forced separation from their parents. It can
lead to long-term mental health effects such as developmental delays,
learning problems, and chronic conditions such as hypertension, asthma,
cancer, and depression. Children who have been separated may also be
mistrusting, questioning why their parents were not able to prevent
their separation and care for them. A child may show different
behaviors in response to exposure to traumatic events like separation
from parents depending on their age and stage of development. Some of
these signs of distress are listed in the chart below:\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Kadir A, Shenoda S, Goldhagen J, Pitterman S. The Effects of
Armed Conflict on Children. Pediatrics. 2018;142(6).
\5\ The National Child Traumatic Stress Network. Effects. https://
www.nctsn.org/what-is-child-trauma/trauma-types/refugee-trauma/effects.
Published September 4, 2018. Accessed February 1, 2019.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Elementary School Middle and High
Preschool Children Children School-Aged Youth
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bed wetting.................... Changes in their A sense of
behavior such as responsibility or
aggression, anger, guilt for the bad
irritability, things that have
withdrawal from happened.
others, and
sadness.
Thumb sucking.................. Trouble at school.. Feelings of shame
or embarrassment.
Acting younger than their age.. Trouble with peers. Feelings of
helplessness.
Trouble separating from their Fear of separation Changes in how
parents. from parents. they think about
the world.
Temper tantrums................ Fear of something Loss of faith.
bad happening.
Aggressive behavior like ................. Problems in
hitting, kicking, throwing relationships
things, or biting. including peers,
family, and
teachers.
Not playing with other kids ................. Conduct problems.
their age.
Repetitive playing out of
events related to trauma
exposure.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
detention of children is not a solution to separation
Some have suggested that an alternative to separating families is
to increase the use of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) family
detention. However, family detention is neither a safe nor effective
solution to address the forced separation of children and parents at
the border. I co-authored the AAP Policy Statement entitled Detention
of Immigrant Children, which recommends that immigrant children seeking
safe haven in the United States should never be placed in ICE detention
facilities. There is no evidence that any amount of time in detention
is safe for children.\6\ In fact, even short periods of detention can
cause psychological trauma and long-term mental health risks for
children.\7\ Studies of detained immigrants have shown that children
and parents may suffer negative physical and emotional symptoms from
detention, including anxiety, depression, and post-traumatic stress
disorder.\8\ Detention itself undermines parental authority and the
capacity to respond to their children's needs; this difficulty is
complicated by parental mental health problems.\9\ Parents in detention
centers have described regressive behavioral changes in their children,
including decreased eating, sleep disturbances, clinginess, withdrawal,
self-injurious behavior, and aggression.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Linton JM, Griffin M, Shapiro AJ. Detention of Immigrant
Children. Pediatrics. 2017;139(5).
\7\ Ibid.
\8\ Ibid.
\9\ Ibid.
\10\ Ibid.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Specifically, detention of youth is associated with physical and
mental health symptoms that appear to be caused and/or worsened by
detention. A study of children ages 3 months to 17 years in a British
immigration detention center revealed physical symptoms that included
somatic complaints (e.g., headaches, abdominal pain), weight loss,
inability to manage chronic medical problems, and missed follow-up
health appointments including those for vaccinations, developmental and
educational problems, and mental health symptoms including anxiety,
depression, and reemergence of post-traumatic stress disorder.\11\ In a
systematic review that explored risk and protective factors for the
psychological well-being of children and youth who were resettled in
high-income countries, the authors indicate that adverse events during
and after migration may be more consequential than pre-migration
events. Specifically, the authors conclude that detention of immigrant
children and youth is particularly detrimental to mental health and an
example of trauma for which impact is cumulative.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ Lorek A, Ehntholt K, Nesbitt A, et al. The Mental and Physical
Health Difficulties of Children Held within A British Immigration
Detention Center: A Pilot Study. Child Abuse Negl. 2009;33(9):573-85.
\12\ Fazel M, Reed RV, Panter-Brick C, Stein A, Mental health of
displaced and refugee children resettled in high-income countries: risk
and protective factors, Lancet, 379(9812):266-282 (2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
first-hand observations at cbp processing centers and from children in
the community
In November 2016, I toured the CBP's Ursula Central Processing
Center in McAllen, Texas as part of a team of pediatricians from the
AAP and the Texas Pediatric Society. The building, hidden behind a
fence, was a warehouse-like facility identifiable only with a white
placard stating that this was property of the U.S. Government. Our CBP
tour guide demonstrated empathy toward the detainees and recognized
that the setting was not designed for children.
Upon entering the holding area, we saw rows of children lying on
mats on the floor, wrapped in silvery Mylar blankets. We saw clusters
of children huddled in cages created by chain-link fences that extended
toward the ceiling. Within this 55,000-square-foot space, there were
four giant cages holding boys, girls, and mothers with young children.
There was one small area that held adult men. The children ranged from
infants to older adolescents. Most of the detainees appeared to be
exhausted and frightened. Extremely bright lights shone from the high
ceilings, the smell of porta-potties infiltrated the air, and the
chilling sound of crinkling Mylar blankets echoed through the
warehouse. The windowless environment was particularly disorienting
because the lights were kept on 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, which we
were told was for ``safety reasons.''
In the Ursula facility (as it is known), there are private toilets,
showers, and a clean, dry change of clothes if detainees arrive before
7 p.m.; the detainees who arrive late sit in wet clothes until the
morning. Old clothes, shoes, and other belongings, like backpacks and
stuffed animals, are sealed away in individual plastic bags. Our guide
told us 3 meals were provided each day.
The medical care we saw provided at Ursula was cursory at best and
took place in the open, behind curtained screens. Detainees were
checked for scabies, lice, and obvious signs of infectious disease,
such as active chicken pox lesions. Vital signs (temperature, blood
pressure, respiratory rate, heart rate) and height and weight were not
routinely taken. Those who needed more detailed exams were taken to a
small, cold ``medical room.'' There was a small cabinet with over-the-
counter medications, and pictures of infectious diseases adorned the
walls. We were told that emergency responders were called for those who
appeared ill or injured after presenting to CBP officials in the field.
We were not permitted to speak with children during our tour of the
Ursula facility. However, I can speak to my patients' experiences who
were processed at Ursula and other CBP facilities. As a pediatrician in
both North and South Carolina, I have learned through taking medical
histories from dozens of children who have been processed at Ursula,
that children and families have been held there for up to 8 days.
Although they are offered food, the sandwiches have at times been kept
so cold that they were frozen. Several families have shared that their
belongings have been ``lost'' during processing, including vaccination
records and medical documents that they have brought from their
countries of origin. Families have also shared with me their gratitude
when treated kindly by CBP officials, and this gratitude is
particularly striking given the conditions to which they are exposed.
Separation of children from siblings, parents, and caregivers are
routine during processing. One set of siblings fled Central America
with their mother after experiencing persecution in their community.
When they presented to CBP officials to seek refuge and face
processing, the younger child was held in one cage with her mother, and
the older child, a teenager, was kept separately from her mother and
sister for 3 days. After thousands of miles of travel with the
proximity and support of her family, this child no longer had the
buffering support of her family. When she recounted her story, she
became tearful and withdrawn. She shared with me that she was
incredibly frightened during the time in the processing center, unable
to eat or sleep. Even this brief period of time in a CBP processing
center was re-traumatizing for this child, placing her at risk for
short- and long-term health effects.
children are not little adults
As pediatricians, we know that children are not little adults.
Children's vital signs (breathing rate, heart rate, blood pressure)
have different normal parameters than adults, and these parameters vary
by age. When children begin to get sick, they present with subtle
findings, and they tend to get sick more quickly. For example, children
can become dehydrated more quickly than adults. They require greater
amounts of fluid per pound of body weight than adults, and high fevers
and fast breathing can cause children to lose fluid quickly. Children
also need encouragement to drink when they are ill, and this
encouragement is exceedingly difficult to provide to frightened
children.
The flu can be particularly serious for children and can escalate
quickly. Signs differentiating a child with mild illness from a child
with severe illness are quite subtle. A child can be happily playing,
even running around, while her body systems begin to shut down. When a
child is having difficulty breathing, she may breathe more quickly or
her ribs may pull in with each breath; these signs would often not be
easily visible, especially not to an untrained eye. Additionally,
children are more prone to muscle fatigue, including the breathing
muscles, and are thus at greater risk for respiratory failure.\13\ Even
the dosing of common medications is different in children than it is in
adults; rather than standard dosing, children are dosed based on their
weight.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ Woollard M, Jewkes F. 5 Assessment and identification of
paediatric primary survey positive patients. Emergency Medicine
Journal. 2004;21:511-517.
\14\ Palchuk MB, Seger DL, Recklet EG, Hanson C, Alexeyev A, Li Q.
Weight-based pediatric prescribing in ambulatory setting. AMIA Annu
Symp Proc. 2006;2006:1055.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sepsis, for example, must be treated early in children. According
to the Society of Critical Care Medicine (SCCM), sepsis is a
complicated disease causing the body to be compromised by serious
systemic infection leading to multiple organ failure.\15\ The
importance of recognizing and treating sepsis early in children cannot
be underestimated; each hour of delay in treatment dramatically
increases mortality. Because sepsis can be so serious and so difficult
to recognize in children, the SCCM has a separate set of guidelines for
recognizing and treating sepsis in children that are different than for
adults.\16\ For these reasons, it is essential that the individuals who
interact with children apprehended at the border are trained to
recognize signs and symptoms of distress and know when to urgently
refer children to additional care.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ Weiss SL. Five Important Things to Know about Pediatric
Sepsis. Society of Critical Care Medicine. https://www.sccm.org/
Communications/Critical-Connections/Archives/2018/Five-Important-
Things-to-Know-About-Pediatric-Seps. Accessed March 4, 2019.
\16\ Dellinger RP, Levy MM, Rhodes A, et al: Surviving Sepsis
Campaign: International guidelines for management of severe sepsis and
septic shock: 2012. Crit Care Med. 2013; 41:580-637.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
aap recommendations
We urge Federal agencies to apply a child-focused lens when
considering policies that could have an impact on child health and
well-being. The deaths of 7-year-old Jakelin Caal Maquin and 8-year-old
Felipe Gomez Alonzo while in the custody of CBP are tragedies that
demand systematic improvements. AAP remains committed to working with
Federal agencies to offer its expertise as medical providers for
children, in an effort to protect and promote child well-being. In that
vein, we offer the following recommendations:
1. Children should never be separated from their parents unless
there are concerns for the safety of the child at the hand of
the parent and a competent family court makes that
determination. Nowhere is that more important than in the case
of a child needing medical screening and treatment. Parents
know their child's medical history and are often better able to
share that history than the child him or herself. Separation
from a parent is traumatic to children, causes stress, and has
the potential to negatively impact the child's short- and long-
term health.
2. Family detention threatens the health of children and their
parents and is not a safe or effective solution to address the
forced separation of children and parents at the border. The
AAP has said that no amount of time in detention is safe for
children.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ Ibid.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Instead of detention, AAP recommends the use of community-based
alternatives for children in family units. Community-based case
management should be implemented for children and families,
thus ending both detention and the placement of electronic
tracking devices on parents. Community release with case
management has been shown to be cost-effective and can increase
the likelihood of compliance with Government requirements.\18\
\19\ \20\ We urge Congress to provide funding to support case
management programs. AAP also advocates for expanded funding
for post-release services to promote the safety and well-being
of all previously-detained immigrant children and to facilitate
connection and access to comprehensive services, including
medical homes, in the community.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ Edwards, A. Measures of first resort: alternatives to
immigration detention in comparative perspective. The Equal Rights
Review. 2011;7:117-142.
\19\ U.S. Immigration Customs and Enforcement. Report of the DHS
Advisory Committee on Family Residential Centers. https://www.ice.gov/
sites/default/files/documents/Report/2016/ACFRC-sc-16093.pdf. Published
September 30, 2016. Accessed February 1, 2019.
\20\ Lutheran Immigration & Refugee Service, Women's Refugee
Commission. Locking Up Family Values, Again. https://
www.womensrefugeecommission.org/resources/document/1085-locking-up-
family-values-again. Published October 28, 2014. Accessed February 1,
2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. All immigrant children seeking safe haven in the United States
should have comprehensive health care and insurance coverage,
which includes access to qualified medical interpretation
covered by medical benefits, pending immigration proceedings.
Children and families should have access to legal counsel
throughout the immigration pathway. Unaccompanied children
should have free or pro bono legal counsel with them for all
appearances before an immigration judge. As such, the AAP
strongly supports the ``Fair Day in Court for Kids Act''.
5. Because conditions at CBP processing centers are inconsistent
with AAP recommendations for appropriate care and treatment of
children, children should not be subjected to these
facilities.\21\ The processing of children and family units
should occur in a child-friendly manner, taking place outside
current CBP processing centers and conducted by child welfare
professionals, to provide conditions that emphasize the health
and well-being of children and families at this critical stage
of immigration proceedings.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ Linton JM, Griffin M, Shapiro AJ. Detention of Immigrant
Children. Pediatrics. 2017;139(5).
\22\ Ibid.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
6. CBP agents, including those who are not trained as EMTs or
paramedics and those who work in remote areas along the border,
should be trained to know how to identify the signs of a child
who is in medical distress and needs immediate medical
attention. Ideally, such training would be both on-line and in-
person. While it may not be possible to provide pediatric
medical training to all CBP agents, we can work to ensure that
they are better prepared to identify a sick child and to get
that child into appropriate care. We must also ensure that CBP
provides its agents with necessary basic supplies such as oral
hydration, food, first-aid kits, and other supplies that could
be life-saving should those agents encounter a sick child. The
AAP is pleased to support S. 412, the Remote, Emergency,
Medical, On-line Training, Telehealth, and EMT (REMOTE) Act,
which addresses many of these recommendations.
7. The Academy is urging CBP to ensure that all children under 18
years of age receive evidenced-based medical screening and care
from professionals trained in pediatric care. We must have
medical professionals who are trained in the care of children
screening and treating vulnerable children who are in the
custody of our government. CBP recently released an Interim
Enhanced Medical Efforts Directive which states that all
children under 18 years of age will receive a health interview
and medical assessment. The success of the Interim Directive
will be in how it is implemented.
Children who are identified as needing additional medical care
should be immediately referred for evaluation and treatment, at
a children's hospital if there is one available. Procedures
should be in place to ensure that when children need treatment,
they are quickly able to receive appropriate care and have
access to professionals trained in the care of critically ill
children during transport.
8. Screening and treatment should occur in the child or parent's
preferred language so as to ensure the family is able to
understand what is happening and accurately answer questions.
This means that trained medical interpreters should be used in
all clinical encounters with children and their families.
9. Sick children, children who have been hospitalized, or children
with special health care needs should never be returned to a
CBP processing facility. When a child is diagnosed with an
illness in a pediatrician's office or is discharged from an
emergency room or a hospital, he or she is sent home to recover
with plenty of rest and a parent to care for them. Parents of
children being detained in CBP processing centers do not have
that luxury; rather, the conditions in the centers themselves
exacerbate children's suffering, and without medical
professionals who understand the signs and symptoms to look for
to assess a child's condition, these children are at further
risk. A sick child should recover in the comfort of a home or
child-friendly setting under the care of a parent or caregiver,
not on a cold, concrete floor in Federal custody.
10. Independent oversight of locations in which children are
temporarily housed, detained, or sheltered is critical.
Licensure of those locations is important to ensure appropriate
care and oversight. As these locations are selected, we
encourage DHS and HHS to consider their remoteness as that can
impact proximity and access to trained pediatric providers. The
AAP has called for a thorough, independent investigation of the
Government's detention practices, including the appointment of
an independent team comprised of pediatricians, pediatric
mental health providers, child welfare experts, and others to
conduct unannounced visits to Federal facilities including CBP
processing centers, ICE family detention centers, and ORR
shelters to assess their conditions for children, capacity to
respond to medical emergencies involving a child, and to ensure
that immigrant children receive optimal medical and mental
health care. These experts need unfettered access to sites
where children are held in Federal custody to ensure that they
receive suitable care while there.
11. We must remember that immigrant children are, first and
foremost, children. Protections for children in law or by the
courts exist because children are uniquely vulnerable and are
at high risk for trauma, trafficking, and violence. The Flores
Settlement Agreement (FSA) and the William Wilberforce
Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act (TVPRA)
provide critically important and necessary protections for
children in the custody of the Federal Government. They are not
``loopholes''. They are legal protections that account for the
fact that children are uniquely vulnerable and need to be
protected. The FSA set strict National standards for the
detention, treatment, and release of all minors detained in the
legal custody of the Federal Government. It requires that
children be held in the least restrictive setting appropriate
for a child's needs and that they be released without
unnecessary delay to a parent, designate of the parent, or
responsible adult as deemed appropriate.
Pending regulations proposed by DHS and Health and Human Services
(HHS) are inconsistent with the FSA by allowing DHS to expand
family detention centers, increase the length of time children
spend in detention, and create an alternative licensure process
that undermines State child welfare laws and basic protections
for children. Proposals, such as the pending regulations that
would pave the way for the longer-term detention of children
with their parents or to weaken Federal child trafficking laws
like TVPRA, serve to strip children of protections designed for
their unique circumstances. We urge Congress to reject these
proposals.
conclusion
As a pediatrician, my professional responsibility is to apply
science to advocate for and support children's health. Evidence affirms
that parental separation and family detention are dangerous for the
short- and long-term health of children.
It is critical that all children who have been reunited with their
parents receive appropriate medical care to help them recover from the
traumatic experience of separation from their families. As a
pediatrician, I also know that children and families who have faced
trauma, with trauma-informed approaches and community support, can
begin to heal. As such, immigrant children seeking safety should have
access to health care, education, legal representation, and other
essential services that support their growth, development, and capacity
to reach their full potential. We must continue to support all
immigrant children and families seeking safe haven in the United States
and treat them with dignity and respect.
Miss Rice. Thank you, Dr. Linton.
I now recognized Mr. Ballard to summarize his statement for
5 minutes.
STATEMENT OF TIM BALLARD, FOUNDER AND CEO, OPERATION
UNDERGROUND RAILROAD
Mr. Ballard. Thank you, Chairwoman Rice, Ranking Members
Higgins, and Members of the subcommittee. My intention today is
to focus on the millions of children who are caught in the
horrific web of child trafficking. Many of these children are
sexually exploited as subjects of child pornography and as
victims of rape for money here in the United States.
Any conclusions I offer are based on real child trafficking
cases that I have worked directly on over the past 17 years. I
started in the CIA and then for 12 years I worked as a special
agent and undercover operator for Homeland Security
Investigations.
Ten of those years I worked combatting sex trafficking on
the Southern Border. For the last 5 years I have served as the
founder and CEO of the anti-trafficking organization Operation
Underground Railroad.
Working hand-in-hand with law enforcement agencies in 20
countries and 22 States here, we have rescued over 2,000
victims and assisted in the arrest of nearly 1,100 traffickers.
Much of my work has been based on simple economics. The
United States is one of the highest, if not the highest,
consumers of child pornography in the world. We are the demand
for child sex.
As such, traffickers around the world seek to bring
children to the United States where they can sell them for sex
and make a lot of money. My No. 1 personal and professional
goal has been to keep these children out of the sick hands of
American pedophiles.
I want to share one case in which we failed to do this. The
victim was a foreign-born child around 12 years old, who we
will call Lily. Lily was kidnapped south of our border.
She was then taken, along with several other children her
age, and smuggled into the United States. Not through a port of
entry but rather through parts of the Southern Border without
significant barriers.
Lily's traffickers easily transported her to New York City
where she and the other children were raped for money; Lily, 30
to 40 times a day for 5 years. She believes that she was raped
in New York City over 20,000 times.
She eventually escaped and my foundation is now caring for
her as she prepares to testify in Federal court against her
captors. In accordance with U.S. laws as a survivor of sex
trafficking in America, Lily has been granted legal status and
we are helping her complete the process of becoming a U.S.
citizen.
The U.S. Attorney's Office has requested that we not
publicly share any more information until this case is
completed, the trial is completed, later this year.
Recounting her experience, Lily has often asked me a simple
yet profound question. Why was there no wall along the Southern
Border for me? A wall would have saved me, she says. What is
she talking about?
It is very simple, really. During a time of crisis or
emergency any of us knows to call 9-1-1 because that number
bridges the gap between bad guys trying to hurt us and good
guys, police officers, who can help us.
Lily knows that strong barriers would have likely forced
her captors to take their chances at a port of entry, thus
placing her face-to-face with well-trained and well-equipped
U.S. officers who are specifically looking for her, looking for
victims of sex trafficking. I would have yelled out to one of
them, Lily has told me regretfully. Instead, I was raped over
20,000 times.
Contrast that case with another case I worked. I was a lead
agent on this case. The trafficker was an American named Earl
Buchanan. He kept children, both little boys and girls, in San
Bernardino, California where he lived and where he repeatedly
raped them and filmed his rape of these children for his
pornography collection.
On the night of July 3, 2006, Buchanan was attempting to
smuggle a 5-year-old Mexican boy through the Calexico,
California port of entry. Fortunately for the boy, he was
coming from the Mexicali, Mexico region which is blocked by
miles and miles of significant border barriers.
This compelled Buchanan to take his chances at the Calexico
port of entry where a U.S. officer had the opportunity to look
Buchanan in the eye, recognize that something was off, then
liberate that child and arrest Buchanan.
This led directly to the rescue of almost a dozen other
children that were sex victims held by this American monster,
who will now spend the rest of his life in jail.
As I compare these two cases and dozens just like them that
I have added to my written testimony and submitted to this
committee, my conclusion is that we have a much greater chance
of catching human traffickers and liberating their victims at a
port of entry than we do where there is no barrier.
I have been quite surprised of late to see politicians and
others who are opposed to building barriers, hail the successes
of drug seizures and rescues at the ports of entry and using
those successes to say see? We don't need barriers. We have
ports of entry. Bad guys come through ports of entries.
In fact we don't have ports of entry without walls. The
walls and the barriers are the thing that compelled Buchanan to
take the child into the port of entry in the first place.
From his vantage point on the night of July 3, 2006, with
this poor child captive in his van, he only had one choice, the
port of entry. That was thanks to barriers that existed where
he happened to be working his evil works.
Currently with hundreds of miles of open border, too many
traffickers have a choice. Sadly, we as a Nation are providing
them that choice.
In the end, the boy was liberated and Buchanan was locked
up. In Lily's case, the traffickers were liberated while she
was locked up and raped thousands of times in our country. The
difference? The boy had barriers to save him; Lily did not.
Paola Felix is a former Mexican Congresswoman and current
senior Mexican administration official working on anti-
trafficking policies directly from Mexican President Manuel
Lopez Obrador. I work very closely with her to find children in
Mexico who are en route to being smuggled into the United
States.
Responding to the debate over barriers in this country,
Felix declared, ``It is very disappointing to me that people in
the United States would ignore or downplay the many Hispanic
children being smuggled into the United States outside of legal
ports of entry and forced''----
Miss Rice. Mr. Ballard.
Mr. Ballard [continuing.] ``Into the hell of sex slavery.''
Miss Rice. Mr. Ballard, I am sorry. You have to wrap up.
Mr. Ballard. OK. I think my point has been made. I agree
with all my colleagues on this panel. I just hope we give voice
to all the other children who are being brought through
barrier-less parts of the border. We need to focus on them as
well and help them as well. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Ballard follows:]
Statement of Tim Ballard
March 26, 2019
Chairwoman Rice, Ranking Member Higgins, and Members of the Border
Security, Facilitation, and Operations Subcommittee, it's an honor to
present this written statement. Human trafficking is real, it's tragic,
and I am grateful this subcommittee is willing to learn more and to
understand more about this horrific practice occurring along our
Southern Border.
The focus of my testimony will be on the children who are caught in
this terrible web of human trafficking. Although I will discuss varying
aspects of trafficking and border security, but I hope we will always
bring the focus back to helping the rescuing the children who are the
victims.
To that end, I strongly desire not to sound political or partisan
in my tone or my substance. Regardless of ideology or party label, I
believe every Member of this committee, and good people everywhere, can
agree that human trafficking is a plague and an evil that must be
eradicated. Because this is such an important and tragic issue, it's
not fair and it's not right for these modern-day slaves to be caught in
the middle of a political battle.
The conclusions I offer in this testimony are based on my
professional experience as an anti-trafficking operator and based on
actual cases that have occurred along our Southern Border. After
starting my professional career with the CIA, I transferred to the
Department of Homeland Security. At the DHS, I spent 12 years as a
special agent and undercover operator for Homeland Security
Investigations. For 10 of those years, I was combating sex trafficking
on the Southern Border and became one of the country's foremost experts
on the issue of trafficking through years of undercover work, research,
and investigation.
Since leaving the Federal Government, I have continued the fight
against human trafficking as the founder and CEO of the anti-
trafficking organization Operation Underground Railroad, or O.U.R.
Working hand-in-hand with law enforcement agencies around the world,
Operation Underground Railroad has rescued 1,765 victims and assisted
in the arrest of nearly 900 traffickers. O.U.R. continues the fight to
end human trafficking with full-time operations in 20 countries and 22
States.
Through my experience as a Federal agent and as CEO of O.U.R., I
have worked closely with the heads of every U.S. agency whose job it is
to find and rescue children being trafficked across the Southern
Border. These agencies under the jurisdiction of the Department of
Homeland Security include Customs and Border Patrol, Immigration and
Customs, and Homeland Security Investigations.
Our Federal agents who work our Southern Border are women and men
of the highest integrity and dedication. Their efforts protect us daily
from the myriad of different dangers found coming into our country. Our
agents exist to protect, not to judge, not to discriminate, and not
carry out a political motive. They follow the laws they have sworn to
uphold and they deserve a debt of gratitude from each of us as they
help keep us safe.
Part of the job of these Federal agents, as was my job for a
decade, is to recognize and fight human trafficking. To understand just
a little about the issue it important to understand that there are an
estimated 40 million modern-day slaves world-wide with children making
up an estimated 10 million of these victims.\1\ These children may be
sexually exploited through prostitution and child pornography, many
victims are being forced into involuntary servitude, and many are used
for the heinous practice of organ harvesting.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Guardian, Feb. 25, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Traffickers use our Southern Border to bring slaves into our
country for the sex industry because the United States is one of the
highest consumers of child sex abuse content in the world.\2\ The
United States is also one of the wealthiest nations in the world,
creating fertile ground for child traffickers who are trying to get
their product to this lucrative illicit market.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ THORN website, Accessed March 4, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The State Department has reported that roughly 17,500 people are
smuggled into the United States annually, many of which are women and
children that are forced into the commercial sex trade.\3\ About 10,000
children a year suffer the horrors of commercial sexual exploitation in
the United States.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Trafficking in Persons Report, U.S. Department of State, June
14, 2004.
\4\ Indianapolis Star, Feb. 1, 2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The most recent data from the Department of Homeland Security
should also cause alarm:\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ U.S. Department of Homeland Security; DHS Press Release March
6, 2019, ``Humanitarian and Security Crisis at Southern Border Reaches
`Breaking Point'.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In fiscal year 2018, ICE made more than 1,500 human
trafficking arrests with over 97 percent of those for sex
trafficking.
It's estimated that 20,000 children were illegally smuggled
in the the United States just during the month of December
2018.
Since 2017 there has been a 136 percent increase in illegal
immigrants bringing children into the United States illegally.
There has been a 314 percent increase in adults bringing
children across the border who are not part of their family
unit.
In December 2018 5,121 children were recovered being brought
into the United States illegally:
4,766 of these children were recovered at barrier-less
sections of the border outside points of entry.
Only 355 of these children were recovered at points of
entry.
For those of us who are fighting to save children from being
victims, we should be alarmed. These statistics are staggering and
paint a realistic and tragic picture of what is really happing along
our Southern Border.
Through my decade on the border as a human trafficking expert for
the Federal Government, I participated in dozens of cases and
operations that uncovered human trafficking rings and discovered human
smuggling processes across the border. We were fortunate to rescue many
victims and I'm proud that we put so many criminals behind bars.
There are many stories of survivors, those who were rescued, that
must be told. The experiences of these survivors are horrifying, but
their stories must be heard to help understand the reality of the
battle we are fighting and their testimony must be used to help us
formulate how we will proceed forward to stop the tragedy that is human
trafficking.
To fight the human trafficking battle most effectively, we must put
aside politics. Although critics reject the idea of a physical barrier
along the Southern Border for a number of different reasons, my
experience leads me to the conclusion that physical barriers are a tool
that we must utilize in the fight against human trafficking. Walls,
barriers, physical deterrents, it doesn't matter what they're called,
they work. I know they work based on years of experience. Based on my
professional career in this field, I know that we are more likely to
effectively fight human trafficking if we close open border crossings
and drive traffickers to points of entry.
At our points of entry, trained law enforcement officials have the
ability to look into the eyes of traffickers and victims. They have
technology, training, and instinct on their side to identify victims
and hopefully rescue them.
One point-of-entry rescue I had the opportunity to be a part of
took place at the Calexico port of entry. On July 3, 2006, my team and
I rescued a 5-year-old boy who had been taken by American child
pornographer Earl Buchanan. Buchanan sexually abused his victims, while
filming his grotesque acts for distribution. Fortunately for this boy,
and the 11 other children subsequently received justice from his
torture, there is a significant border wall between Mexicali, Mexico
and Calexico, California.
Buchanan was compelled to take his chances at the Calexico port of
entry because of a large wall that runs along the border in this
geographic location. This port of entry is armed with high-tech
monitoring equipment and well-trained officers. Not surprisingly,
Buchanan was singled out, arrested, and charged with kidnapping and
sexual exploitation of a child. He was later convicted of Sexual
Exploitation of a Child and Criminal Forfeiture (Case 06CR1612-H). The
boy is now breathing free with a loving family in America, thanks to
the wall, which did its job by driving Buchanan to a point of entry.
I compare this case and experience to a survivor who we will call
``Liliana.'' Because Liliana's case is still pending, the U.S.
Attorney's Office has requested that we not share too many details
about this case until the trial is completed later this year, but we
have been approved to share the following details regarding her
experience.
Liliana was kidnapped at age 11 from her village in Central
America. After 2 years of grooming her for commercial sex, she was
taken by her captors across the Southern Border at a location where no
wall existed. This wasn't extremely difficult as approximately 80
percent of the border is barrier-less.\6\ Lilian's traffickers easily
transported her to New York City where she was sold and raped for money
up to 30-40 times a day for 5 years. She eventually escaped this hell
on earth and my foundation is now caring for her as she prepares to
testify in Federal court against her captors. In accordance with U.S.
laws, as a survivor of sex trafficking in America, Liliana has been
granted legal status and will soon be a U.S. citizen.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Arizona Republic, Sept. 20, 2017.
\7\ Victims of Human Trafficking: T Nonimmigrant Status, U.S.
Citizenship and Immigration Services website, Accessed March 2, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As we have Liliana and I have discussed her tragic plight and
reflected on her horrific experience, she recently weighed in with her
feelings on the current National debate surrounding physical barriers.
``Had there been a wall for me,'' she declared, ``my captors would have
been forced to take me to a port of entry. A U.S. officer might have
seen my distress. I might have yelled out to them. I am currently
working with Homeland Security agents on my case. I love them. I think
they would have rescued me at the port of entry.''
Liliana concluded, ``I know many girls who came in like me . . . we
know a wall could have saved us . . . ''.
Would Liliana have been rescued at a port of entry? In the spirit
of complete honesty and complete transparency, we don't know. But,
would Liliana have had a greater opportunity to be rescued by trained
law enforcement had physical barriers pushed her captors to a point of
entry? The honest answer is ``yes.'' She would have had greater chance
of being rescued, much like the 5-year-old boy with Earl Buchanan.
Several anti-trafficking cases I have personally worked along the
border shine additional light on the issue of physical barriers. In
March 2011, Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) obtained
intelligence that U.S. resident Leonel Gonzalez was attempting to
smuggle children into the United States from Mexicali, Mexico, for the
purposes of selling them to Americans for sex. Information we received
made it clear that because of the large wall separating Mexicali and
the United States, Gonzalez was having a hard time figuring out a way
to get the children in. HSI preempted his smuggling actions by sending
undercover operators posing as American traffickers to negotiate for
the purchase of the children. I personally led the undercover team on
this operation. Thanks to the wall in place, it bought us time to
coordinate with Mexican authorities, who arrested the Mexican
traffickers and liberated the children who were being held in a house
near the border. The U.S. Government arrested Gonzalez and charged him
with 18 USC 1591(a) Sex Trafficking of Children (Case 11CR1192). He
pleaded guilty to Foreign Travel in Aid of Racketeering Enterprise and
went to jail.
In May 2012, our team at HSI along with local authorities, rescued
a 14-year-old girl who had been smuggled into Texas outside of a port
of entry. The American trafficker who kidnapped her and sold her for
sex was later arrested and convicted (Case 12CR2259). Unfortunately,
there was no significant wall or barrier that might have pushed the
child to be brought through a port of entry, where her chances of being
rescued before being sex trafficked inside the United States would have
increased exponentially.
Based on my experience where there was a wall there was a greater
chance of a successful outcome for good. With barriers in place,
traffickers were either pushed to a port of entry or required to be
stagnate as they planned for entry which created opportunities for us
to execute operations that rescued children and put criminals behind
bars.
These are just a few examples from one operator. There are hundreds
of agents working the border each day that could also share their
examples and case studies that would show similar results and outcomes.
I believe the majority of my former colleagues would agree and their
assessment of the need for the need of physical barriers would be the
same as mine.
Please also note that these cases and examples I have provided span
through the presidencies of George W. Bush and Barack Obama, hopefully
illustrating this is not a partisan issue, but a human issue and a
moral issue. For those of us who fight human trafficking, our desire
for physical barriers is no stronger today than it was in 2006 or 2012
or 2016. This isn't a political game to us. It's a matter of life and
death.
I'd also like to be clear on this important point. I know that
smuggling takes place through our points of entry. I know that
immigration laws are abused, that victims have fake passports and visas
and airports are used as well for smuggling victims. I realize all of
this. But, I also know based on my extensive experience along the
Southern Border, working with every Federal agency that operates there,
we are much more likely to slow the flow of trafficking into our
country if it's through a port of entry compared to a barrier-less
border. And I know that barriers push people to points of entry.
Paola Felix backs up this claim regarding physical barriers. Paola
Felix is a former Mexican congresswoman and current senior Mexican
administration official working on anti-trafficking policies for
President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador. After studying what the so-
called experts have said about how a wall does little to stop child
trafficking into the United States, Felix declared, ``It is very
disappointing to me that people in the United States who claim to be
anti-trafficking advocates would ignore or downplay the many Hispanic
children being smuggled into the United States outside of legal ports
of entry and forced into the hell of sex slavery. Mexican authorities
have uncovered at least 19 different land-based smuggling routes where
victims are taken and trafficked for sex in the United States.
Downplaying the crisis with disinformation puts our children in grave
danger. It discourages U.S. officials from employing every tactic
available to rescue them during the small window of time that they
can--that is, while they are being crossed into the United States.
After that they are gone, maybe forever.''
``Every tactic available.'' I can't agree with Mrs. Felix more. Why
wouldn't we use every tactic available to safe children from a life of
slavery and sexual abuse?
Another argument for physical barriers is the sexual violence along
our border that occurs among those who illegally cross barrier-less
points of entry not under the control of a trafficker, but under the
direction of a smuggler. A smuggler they have paid to bring them across
the border, someone these soon-to-be victims are trusting to get them
into the United States. The New York Times recently reported about this
issue in a brilliant yet heart-breaking article titled, `` `You Have to
Pay With Your Body': The Hidden Nightmare of Sexual Violence on the
Border.''
The Times accurately reported how migrant women, both young girls
and grown women, are victims of violent sexual assault along the
Southern Border often during their journey across the barrier-less
regions of the border, or when they are picked up after crossing the
border by smugglers on this side of the border. These women are often
enslaved, beaten and raped by they very people these women trusted to
bring them across the border. The Times reports, `` . . . women making
their way into American border towns have been beaten for disobeying
smugglers, impregnated by strangers, coerced into prostitution,
shackled to beds and trees and--in at least a handful of cases--bound
with duct tape, rope, or handcuffs.''\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ New York Times, March 3, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The stories of these women, who are just searching for a better
life, are heart-wrenching. One woman by the name of Melvin was locked
in a room on the U.S. side of the border for weeks where she was
drugged and sexually abused. Melvin stated, ``I think that since they
put me in that room, they killed me . . . They raped us so many times
they didn't see us as human beings anymore.''\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ New York Times, March 3, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lucy, a 45-year Honduran told how she and other migrant women were
led into a house in McAllen, Texas. There she was raped repeatedly over
a series of days by multiple men. Lucy explains that, ``Because I
didn't want to let them, they tied my feed together and my hands behind
my back.''\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ New York Times, March 3, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Another 45-year-old, a Guatemalan mother of 4, was kidnapped by
armed smugglers after already crossing into the United States at
barrier-less portion of the border. She tried to escape her captors by
jumping from a car, however she was recaptured and held in a stash
house for days. There she was raped by 6 men. The victim, Gladys, said
``I thought it would be better if I died when I fell from the
car.''\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ New York Times, March 3, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
No one should be forced into the hell of sexual slavery or human
bondage. Nobody should go through what all of these victims have had to
endure. And based on my extensive experience fighting human trafficking
both as a Federal law enforcement official and with O.U.R, I believe
barriers along our border will be able to save children from slavery
and significantly decrease the horrific sexual assaults along our
border.
I believe barriers will be able to save thousands of lives. But
just for a moment, I'd like to ask anyone reading this testimony to see
the world through my eyes for a moment and focus on ``the one.''
Let me explain: I realize that United States Senators who sit on
this committee represent everyone that lives in their respective
States. I realize that as Senators consider policy, they must view the
needs of all 327 million Americans and the country at large.
But my view to the world is focused on ``the one.''
What I mean by this is, I know there are an estimated 40 million
slaves throughout the world. I know that even though I have dedicated
my life to saving as many as I can, we won't be able rescue all those
who need rescuing. I know that we can't stop all the attacks and sexual
assaults. That's the harsh reality.
But, what keeps me going and what keeps me motivated to fight this
fight, is this simple fact:
To the one we do rescue, it means everything to them.
And ``the ones'' add up quickly. ``Ones'' turn into hundreds and
hundreds turn into thousands and those thousands can turn into tens of
thousands of lives saved.
So as a committee, as a United States Senator, and as a part of the
human family, as you think about the human smuggling that occur at our
Southern Border, I would ask you for a moment to please realize, we can
save thousands, but also don't forget ``the one.'' And to the one we do
rescue, it means everything to them.
In conclusion, I would plead with the esteemed Members of this
committee, especially for those critical and in opposition of physical
barriers along our border, to honestly consider the years of work and
the experiences behind my conclusions. I would ask you to consider the
conclusions of all the anti-child trafficking experts who have worked
the Southern Border and who support the construction of physical
barriers based on their extensive experience.
I will end this testimony as I started this testimony by
reiterating that this should, in no circumstance, be a partisan issue.
Human trafficking is a plague and an evil that must be eradicated.
Because this is such an important and tragic issue, it's not fair and
it's not right for these modern-day slaves to be caught in the middle
of a political battle. Let us always keep our focus on victims and
ultimately do what's right for them.
Miss Rice. I thank all the witnesses for their testimony.
I will remind each Member that he or she will have 5
minutes to question the panel. I will now recognize myself for
questions.
Ms. Brane, I want to start with you. Secretary Nielsen
testified before the full committee of this Homeland Security
Committee, a couple of weeks ago. She testified that every
single parent who had been separated from a child had been
given the opportunity to take their child back with them before
they were deported.
She testified that actually they were given that
opportunity, I believe she said almost an exact quote, on
multiple occasions. Is that true?
Ms. Brane. No. I mean, in my experience I have spoken
directly to parents who actually begged to have their children
returned with them when they were deported but did not have
that opportunity. In some cases, parents even signed voluntary
removals and agreed to leave the country after being told that
was the only way they would get their children back, and yet,
they were still deported without their child.
Miss Rice. So that would not be an accurate, truthful
statement?
Ms. Brane. Correct.
Miss Rice. OK. Now, can you tell me, briefly can you
explain, I know briefly, but I only have 5 minutes. Can you
explain the family case management program and can you explain
what DHS's justification was for ending it?
Ms. Brane. The program was an alternative to detention that
involved case managers assigned to families who were seeking
asylum generally. The case manager worked with the family to
ensure that they had a place to live, that they knew when their
appointments were, when their hearing were, maybe connected
them to pro bono attorneys if they could.
The program was by all accounts extremely successful. The
Government itself found that it was 100 percent successful.
Later studies have found that it was 99 percent successful in
ensuring appearance to all hearings and appointments. It only
costs about $35 a day as compared to many hundreds and hundreds
of dollars for detaining or separating families.
The administration terminated it early in June 2017 before
it was intended to end. It had already been sort-of approved
for many more years. They gave no reason as far as I know.
Miss Rice. Dr. Linton, before zero tolerance was formally
announced, what actions did the AAP take to warn the Department
of Homeland Security about the dangers of family separation?
Dr. Linton. Given the limited time I will refrain from
going through the entire time line of contacts, but we, as I
mentioned in my opening statement, communicated 6 times by
letter regarding the concerns, as well as a number of
statements that were made both in the press, as well as letters
to the Department of Homeland Security specifically expressing
our concerns beginning as early as March 2017.
Miss Rice. Ms. Podkul, it is my understanding, and tell me
if this is accurate, that DHS has not hired any social workers
or child welfare experts. Is that true?
Ms. Podkul. I have seen 1 or 2 child welfare workers who
were hired on contract to work in the Ursula facility, for
example, when they have a baby there. But it has not been
consistent and those people are not responsible for any of the
important screening that takes place.
Miss Rice. Now, you also stated in your written testimony
that ICE arrested more than 400 potential sponsors of
unaccompanied minors. By the way, we know that that is the term
given to kids who were taken away from their parents. They then
became unaccompanied minors even though they weren't, for
charges the agency claimed were related to Federal smuggling
crimes.
New subsequent news reports have stated that these charges
were not, in fact, related to smuggling. Are you aware of what
these individuals were charged with?
Ms. Podkul. We are not. Once the potential sponsor was
taken by ICE and then detained by ICE and put into removal
proceedings we are not sure what happened to them. What we do
know is it resulted in children languishing in detention and
not having anyone to provide care for them, at no cost to the
Government, while they went through their court process.
Miss Rice. You also stated in your written testimony that
migrants must wait months to present their asylum claims at the
border. Has CBP or USCIS cut back, as far as you know, on the
number of asylum claims they are processing at legal ports of
entry? If they have, have they given any justification for
that?
Ms. Podkul. I don't know of any justification, but I can
tell you just last week I was crossing the bridge in
Brownsville, Texas and the agent who processed me, because I
had a U.S. passport, said, you know, we used to just let them
all come in and present themselves, you know? Right behind me
was a huge encampment of 50 people sleeping in tents on the
bridge.
Miss Rice. Dr. Linton, I just want to go back to you
quickly for the last question. You have observed families and
children staying in CBP custody longer than the 72-hour limit.
How long are most families and children reporting being kept in
CBP holding facilities since October 2018?
Can you just briefly give us some examples of the health
implications of staying in those conditions for extended, and
by the way, we are talking about cages with Mylar coverings,
sometimes in wet clothing, separated from family members. Can
you just give us a brief explanation?
Dr. Linton. Yes, so the children that I care for in the
community, previously in North Carolina and now South Carolina,
report stays of anywhere between 2 days and 8 days in CBP
processing facilities. That is in the past several months those
are the numbers that I have heard from the families I take care
of.
The conditions place the same risks that I discussed in my
opening statement regarding the risks of toxic stress in the
short term from being in the conditions of lights being on 24/
7, which is incredibly disorienting, the cage-like fencing that
extends from the floor to the ceiling and children lying on
concrete floors with a mat and a Mylar blanket, include
physical symptoms such as headaches and stomach aches, include
changes in memory and learning and in the long run, place them
at risk for complex medical problems such as depression,
anxiety, heart disease, and diabetes.
Miss Rice. Thank you.
I now recognize the Ranking Member for his questions.
Mr. Higgins. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman.
America should be reminded that 20 years ago most
individuals illegally crossing the border were single adult
males from Mexico. They'd take temporary jobs in the United
States and send their money home. They'd go back to Mexico.
Today the majority of apprehensions at the Southwest Border
are families and unaccompanied children arriving from Central
America because of a current legal precedent that it is the job
of this Congress to fix. Unaccompanied minors and members of a
family unit must be released into the United States after 20
days to await immigration proceedings.
As a result, 98.9 percent of families and 98.2 percent of
unaccompanied children apprehended in fiscal year 2017, who
originated outside of Mexico, remain in the United States.
Family apprehensions for the first five units of fiscal year
2019 are 800 percent higher than the total number in 2013.
We all concur that we have to take care of the children
that end up on American soil. But we should agree in a
bipartisan manner that this is a problem that begins with
trafficking far south of our border with Mexico.
Mr. Ballard, based on your experience do you think more
children are separated in the process of attempting to reach
our Southwest Border or by our Government once they get here?
Are they separated from their families before they get here or
when they get here?
Mr. Ballard. I don't know exact numbers, but the separation
of children before they get here is astronomical because we
have policies that encourage cartels to take children and use
them in the smuggling process because there is an incentive to
have a child in your hand because of our current policies.
So I worry tremendously about these children who are being
used as pawns. Then you understand the cartels are the ones who
are doing the smuggling and they are smuggling these children,
80 percent to 90 percent of them are being recovered outside of
our ports of entry. They are choosing to go outside.
What about the ones that didn't get recovered?
Mr. Higgins. Based on your professional experience, why are
the children being brought across the Southwest Border between
ports of entry instead of legally at ports of entry?
Mr. Ballard. Because our ports of entry are armed with
well-trained and well-equipped officers who are looking for
children and looking for cases of abuse.
Mr. Higgins. Do you concur that enhanced physical barriers
and enhanced technology to detect attempted crossings along our
Southwest Border would help victims of human trafficking?
Mr. Ballard. Absolutely. It would drive them to the ports
of entry where there are good guys there to help them.
Mr. Higgins. I am a proponent of addressing this problem
that we face with an all-of-the-above approach: Technology to
detect an attempted illegal crossing, enhanced physical
barriers to delay or deter an attempted illegal crossing,
enhanced capacity to respond to that illegal crossing by
increasing boots on the ground, all-weather roads and vehicles,
and enhanced capacity to process these children of God that do
end up on American soil after a treacherous and criminal
journey, we need an enhanced capacity to process these human
beings.
It is an incredible challenge because of the change in the
demographic of the folks that are trying to cross into America
illegally.
Ms. Linton, I respect your testimony, Madam, and I respect
your passion and your love for children. But I would ask you,
have you interviewed the children that have experienced trauma
on the journey to our Southwest Border at the hands of criminal
organizations, coyotes, and human traffickers?
Dr. Linton. I believe you are referring to me?
Mr. Higgins. Yes, ma'am.
Dr. Linton. Correct. So thank you for the question,
Congressman. I take care of children who have experienced
trauma in countries of origin and during the journey. At the
time they arrive on our border is when the trauma should stop.
What I am witnessing in the kids that I take care of is
that----
Mr. Higgins. Do you concur? I have limited time----
Dr. Linton. They are re-traumatized.
Mr. Higgins. Do you believe that this Congress should
provide the professional law enforcement men and women that are
tasked with securing our Southern Border and protecting those
who have illegally entered our country and processing these
human beings, do you believe that this Congress should provide
the necessary funding that has been requested by our border
security professionals so that we can protect these children?
Dr. Linton. As a pediatrician I have prioritized the health
and well-being of every child in my care, and I believe that
the trauma should only end when they arrive on our border and
we should process every child with compassion, dignity, and
respect.
Mr. Higgins. I concur, Madam, and I believe that my
colleagues and I are responsible for providing the needed
funding for border security in all phases so that we can serve
these children of God entering our country illegally.
I think we should stop them before they get here by working
closely together to provide the needed funding and enhanced
technology and physical barriers that border security has
requested.
Madam Chairwoman, thank you for indulging me. I yield back.
Miss Rice. Thank you, Mr. Ranking Member.
I now recognize Mr. Thompson for his questions.
Mr. Thompson. Thank you very much, Madam Chairman.
As a father and grandfather I am very concerned with how we
treat children when they get to our border. We should not
separate them from their parents. We should not put them in
cages. We should provide adequate medical and other care that
they need.
As Americans, we are a Nation of laws. Our value system
says that we should take care of people. Our laws say if you
get here and ask for asylum it is not a go to the end of the
line or remain in Mexico until your number is called. We have
to accept you.
So part of what I hear from the witnesses, the majority of
the witnesses, is that our system is not adequate. This hearing
today is to talk about the separation policies and what
perspectives we see from the border.
So I think it is clear that we have to fix it. Now for the
record, we have never provided any less money than the
Department has ever requested for anything. So it has never
been that we haven't provided the money. We have always
provided the money.
There are some 5,000 vacancies right now within CBP because
Congress has been generous to fund them. We just have not been
able to employ the people to do that.
So I think we need to at least put on record that if the
children of God get to this border we have to clearly take care
of them. Children should not be used as anything other than who
they are, human beings.
So Dr. Linton, you have had experience with it. So is it
your testimony before this committee that with the present
policies in place children have a higher percentage of issues
because the policies are inadequate and that those 67,000
members of your organization have already been on record
expressing their concern?
Dr. Linton. The American Academy of Pediatrics has
expressed concerns about the current policies at the border
that include separation of children from their parents without
clear recognition that that child is at risk at the hand of the
parent and without determination by a family court that that is
justified.
We are on record with our concerns about detention and
family detention centers. We are on record with concerns
regarding the conditions in the current Customs and Border
Protection processing centers.
Mr. Thompson. So for the record, those 6 letters, did they
get responded to?
Dr. Linton. We have had no meaningful engagement with DHS
regarding family separation.
Mr. Thompson. Will you provide the committee with copies of
those 6 letters that you sent to DHS?
Dr. Linton. Thank you, Congressman. I would be happy to
provide the committee with any record of the communications we
have had with DHS.
Mr. Thompson. Thank you very much.
Ms. Brane, you have had experience working with migrants'
rights and justice. What is your opinion of the present system
with respect to family separation at the border?
Ms. Brane. Well, I am extremely concerned that even after
everything that we have described here today and all the public
outcry, Congressional outcry and orders from a court, from
Federal court, to my knowledge, there is still no system in
place for tracking the separations of families.
We still, as Ms. Podkul testified, have seen families who
are separated without proper information being given about why
or any plan for how to reunify if that ends up being the proper
outcome.
Mr. Thompson. Thank you.
Madam Chair, I think at the hearing you referenced we asked
the Secretary to provide us some data on how many children we
had in custody and what have you. It is my understanding that
we have yet to receive the formal reply.
So I would like to go on record reaffirming the committee's
interest in getting the information so if we have to do
legislation we at least need to know from a statistical
standpoint what we are addressing.
Miss Rice. I agree, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Thompson. Thank you. I yield back.
Miss Rice. Thank you.
The Chair recognizes for 5 minutes the gentlewoman from
Arizona, Mrs. Lesko.
Mrs. Lesko. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. First for the
record, I want to say when Secretary Nielsen came here she
testified that of the children that were separated from their
families under the zero tolerance policy only 6 children
remained in ORR custody and there were legitimate reasons for
that.
I do want to get to this, and I think all of you have
compelling testimony. But I think what we are missing here is,
what is the root of this problem? What is the cause of this
problem?
I contend the cause of this problem is our loose
immigration laws. Laws that are asylum laws that actually
incentivize migrants to travel thousands and thousands of miles
to get here with their children.
So my question actually, and I just want to add that
Secretary Nielsen testified that these cartels are paid $6,000
a person to come here. It is caused partially by our loose
asylum laws that incentivize people to come here.
So my question to Ms. Podkul, would you support legislation
that would revise our asylum laws so that this incentivization
of cartels to bring children and women here that are getting
raped, would you agree with legislation to curtail that?
Ms. Podkul. I think it is really important that we maintain
the protections that we have in our system now. What I would
support is increased refugee processing in home country. There
are a lot of kids who might be able to ask for protection in
their home country and we could revise their case and that
would avoid them having to make the dangerous journey here.
Mrs. Lesko. Thank you.
Mr. Ballard, thank you for your testimony. I guess from
your experience I would like to know if you could contrast the
treatment of children by cartels and smugglers as they are
traveling thousands of miles versus the treatment they get once
they get to the border and they are in United States' hands?
Mr. Ballard. Yes. Well, I will answer that by saying,
again, I agree with this panel, with my colleagues here, and in
no way would I want to, you know, distract or detract from the
plight of these children and what they are going through that
are recovered.
However, from my experience talking to the children who
didn't get recovered, who are largely, I think, are being
ignored in this overall debate, I just gave you an example of
one who was raped 20,000 times.
So she----
Mrs. Lesko. Awful.
Mr. Ballard. They went through hunger and loneliness and
all these horrible things outside of the care of CBP because
they never got that opportunity. Instead, they were taken to
the pedophiles of America and raped and abused in this way.
We are working on several cases like this that our
prosecutors are prosecuting these trafficking rings right now.
You know, the cartels you have to go to a cartel to smuggle. So
in some cases your best case, as bad as it is, your best case
is you get recovered by CBP, and it can be bad because of our
policies that need to be fixed.
But much worse than that is the cartels flip them into a
trafficking victim, which they do. We have reports of this.
They abuse these children. They get them past the ports of
entry and sell them for sex to our American pedophiles. We have
to talk about this as well.
Mrs. Lesko. Thank you.
My next question is for Ms. Podkul. I believe you said in
your testimony that you don't agree that our Government when
they are vetting the sponsors of unaccompanied children, that
if they find out that these sponsors are here illegally and
that some of them may have committed crimes as well, that that
should be turned over to ICE. Is that what you testified?
Ms. Podkul. My point is when ORR does the vetting of
sponsors what they are looking for is someone who is going to
be safe and who is willing to care of that child while they go
through our enforcement process. That is the priority.
So when ORR is looking at information, that information
should really focus on the child welfare. I think ICE has its
own mission of immigration enforcement but using children as
bait for immigration enforcement is what I am concerned about.
I think ICE needs to figure out how they want to prioritize
their limited resources and that ORR should stay in its lane
and really focus on its mandate that Congress gave it, which is
to prioritize child welfare and make sure----
Mrs. Lesko. So excuse me.
Ms. Podkul [continuing]. Kids go through the courts.
Mrs. Lesko. So then that is a yes, that you don't want our
Government, ORR, to basically if they find out that the sponsor
is here illegally or has committed a crime to turn that over to
authorities, correct?
Ms. Podkul. I believe that information should not be used
for immigration enforcement purposes. ORR should be making
their decision based on what they think is in the best interest
of the child. Then ICE has its own job to conduct and
prioritize its own resources.
Mrs. Lesko. Thank you.
Miss Rice. So I just want to say, you know, I think it is
important that we not conflate these two issues. Family
separation is a completely separate issue from human
trafficking.
Everyone who is sitting up here wants to address the issue
of human trafficking, and I would, with the Chairman's
indulgence, maybe in the future we could do a panel on that.
But I think it is disingenuous to conflate the two when they
really have nothing to do with each other.
Not every family unit that presents itself at a port of
entry or in between a port of entry is a human trafficker. So I
just think we need to make that clear.
The Chair recognizes for 5 minutes the gentleman from
California, Mr. Correa.
Mr. Correa. Thank you, Madam Chair and I thank the Ranking
Member as well for holding this most important hearing. I would
concur with you, Ms. Rice, that family separation, let us not
mix that with other issues.
I think family separation is part of implementing a policy
of keeping refugees away from this country. When we talk about
loopholes that is really the law of the United States, which is
our refugee law. You know, by separating families we are
essentially saying don't come.
I just got back from Tijuana where I spent a few days
looking at the refugee camps. What I found, Mr. Ballard, what
you said about those sex victims, those children, you haven't
even started to scratch the surface.
I saw girls as young as 4 years old being trafficked and in
those brothels big, big business. Customers are the Americans
coming across the border and doing whatever it is that they are
paying to do. One young girl, 6 years old, for $100 a night,
she was used at brothels as much as they could use her.
Terrible. You see this story repeated over and over again.
But let us not get caught up in the weeds here because a
lot of refugees now in Tijuana, Mexico, a lot of non-
governmental organizations going in to help, the churches, not
only Catholic but others, other NGO's. You have got refugees
from all over the world, OK?
You are not seeing this on the television sets anymore
because a lot of them are essentially becoming very invisible,
starting to get jobs in the area. But refugee crisis will
continue to be the case.
I will tell you how much our Government is not really not
recognizing this issue. Do you know what happens? You can walk
up to the border and say I want to claim refugee status. Do you
know what happens? There is a book. There is a book.
I walked up to them. I walked across the border, said, I
want to come in. I want to see where that book is. I said, Who
keeps this book? Nobody would answer the question.
I asked the U.S. consulate. I asked the Mexicans. Who keeps
this sacred book? Nobody could answer. When I asked the U.S.
consular general there she said we have no jurisdiction in
Mexico.
Bottom line is a bunch of folks keep a book. If you walk up
and say I want refugee status they will give you a number and a
piece of paper and say come back when we call you.
This is about a legal process, a U.S. legal process that
starts with somebody that has been unappointed, somebody out of
the blue that is keeping this book.
I am running out of time, but Madam, I also, 2 weeks ago,
went into Central America. I visited Guatemala, Honduras, El
Salvador. The president of Honduras told me, Lou, the reason we
have so many refugees is folks are looking for hope. They are
looking for a job.
Says, the U.S. exports three things to this area: Drug
money, gangs, and weapons. When I went and I started to visit
their centers of training their youth to get a job in the area
so they could have hope, that is what it is about.
I believe that contrary to my vote, contrary to my wishes,
the President will build a wall between us and Mexico. I
predict in 5 to 10 years we will be back debating the issue of
drug smuggling and refugees. The bottom line is in Latin
America today we have a refugee crisis.
It is Central America right now. We haven't even begun to
look at Venezuela. There are about 2 million to 3 million
Venezuelans right now in South America under refugee status.
Until we figure out in this country that for the last 200
years under President Monroe's famous Monroe Doctrine, we told
the world the Americas are our jurisdiction. Stay away. The
problem is we didn't finish our job: 1823, Monroe Doctrine, 200
years we forgot to administer. We forgot to work Central
America on the economic side.
Madam Chair, this is not going away. We will build a wall.
We will address security in this country, but it is not going
to stop Fentanyl from coming in from China, cocaine from
Colombia, and heroin from Mexico because there is just too much
money in the business that will corrupt Mexicans. It will
corrupt Canadians the way it corrupts Americans.
Finally, let me say when it comes to the issue of mixing
refugees, drugs, cartels, it doesn't work. The president of
Honduras told us that those big groups of folks coming over,
OK, they are organized essentially by the same folks, because,
like, one of our colleagues said, it is not $6,000. It is
$6,000 to $10,000 per person that they will charge you to
smuggle you to the United States.
The way you get a discount is you all work together, you
get together and you walk a few hundred miles to get to the
United States. Then when they get here they find out that there
is no line to come into the United States so they stay in
Mexico. They stay in Tijuana.
Madam Chair, I would love to talk to you about my journeys
to Central America this last month, but that is in another
story in another time. I yield the remainder of my time.
Miss Rice. Thank you, Mr. Correa.
The Chair recognizes for 5 minute the gentleman from
Mississippi, Mr. Guest.
Mr. Guest. Thank you, Madam Chairman.
Mr. Ballard, first I want to thank you for your service to
your country, both in CIA and working for the Department as it
relates to the work you have performed across our border.
Two weeks ago, Secretary Nielsen was here. During her
testimony before this committee she classified the current
conditions along our Southwest Border and she said that she
believed that there was a human trafficking crisis. Do you
agree with her assessment?
Mr. Ballard. Yes, I do.
Mr. Guest. She also testified that she believed that there
was a drug trafficking crisis. Do you believe that her
assessment that there is a drug trafficking crisis across our
Southwest Border?
Mr. Ballard. Yes, I do.
Mr. Guest. Finally, she testified that she believed that
there was an immigration crisis along our border. Do you
believe that as well?
Mr. Ballard. Yes, I do.
Mr. Guest. Now, I want to focus, Mr. Ballard, and the other
witnesses, just specifically here today on human trafficking.
You in your report I believe you properly describe human
trafficking. You say, human trafficking is a plague and an evil
that must be eradicated.
Because this is such an important and tragic issue it is
not fair and not right for these modern-day slaves to be caught
in the middle of a political battle. Then throughout your
testimony you set forth what you believe is a method in which
we can combat human trafficking.
You say on page 7 of you report, you say that barriers
along our border will be able to save children from slavery and
significantly decrease the horrific sexual assaults along our
border.
You say on page 6 of your testimony, based on my extensive
experience along the Southwest Border, working with every
Federal agency that operates there, we are much more likely to
slow the flow of trafficking into our country if it is through
a port of entry compared to a borderless border. I know that
barriers push people to points of entry.
On page 5 you say, with borders in place traffickers are
either pushed to a port of entry or required to be stagnant as
they plan for entry which creates opportunities for us to
execute operations that rescue children and put criminals
behind bars.
Then finally on page 4 you say, I know that we are more
likely to effectively fight human trafficking if we close open
border crossings and drive traffickers to ports of entry.
Mr. Ballard, is it your testimony that if we close our
borders and we funnel all traffic through the ports of entry
that you, based upon your experience and the work that you have
done, you believe that this will be an effective tool in
fighting our battle against human trafficking? Is that correct?
Mr. Ballard. That is correct.
Mr. Guest. I want to ask the other witnesses on this panel,
Dr. Linton, and again, we are talking just on the human
trafficking portion of this hearing. Do you believe that if
individuals are forced to enter the country through ports of
entry that we will be more effective in our ability to identify
and fight human trafficking?
Dr. Linton. As a pediatrician I can only comment that we
support the protections as outlined in the Trafficking Victims
Protection Reauthorization Act or TVPRA, that would recommend
screening all children for human trafficking. But I can't
comment on border security, thank you.
Mr. Guest. All right. Would we have a more effective
approach of screening all children that are entering if they
are entering through a port of entry versus entering across the
unsecured portion of our border?
Dr. Linton. The majority of children that I take care of in
my clinic are presenting themselves and asking for asylum when
they arrive at our border.
Mr. Guest. Same question to you, Ms. Brane. Do you believe
the same thing, that if we are able to have individuals come
across through ports of entry versus the unsecured portion of
the border that we will do a better job?
Again, I am focusing only on human trafficking. So I just
want to make sure that we are not clouding one issue with the
other. Both are very important, but my questions are relating
specifically to human trafficking. Do you believe that that
would help us in our fight against human trafficking?
Ms. Brane. Absolutely, and that is why I very strongly
believe that we need to stop turning children away who present
themselves at ports of entry. We currently have a system in
which this administration is turning away people from ports of
entry and telling them to wait or go away. That is resulting in
driving them into much more dangerous situations and risk of
trafficking.
Mr. Guest. All right, but as far as what we are talking
about or what specifically I am talking about, is where we have
individuals who are bringing children into our country for the
purpose of using them in the sex trafficking.
This human trafficking I believe, and I agree with Mr.
Ballard, and I think each of the three of you would agree that
anytime that one child enters the country and is forced into
prostitution that that is a tragedy. That is a crisis and that
is something that we as a country should do everything within
our power to stop.
So I want to thank each of you for appearing before you
today. I want to thank each of you for your testimony.
Madam Chairwoman, I yield back.
Miss Rice. OK. Thank you, Mr. Guest.
The Chair now recognizes for 5 minutes the gentlewoman from
Illinois, Ms. Underwood.
Ms. Underwood. Thank you, Madam Chair. I am a nurse so when
Secretary Nielsen testified 3 weeks ago I asked her about how
family separation impacts children's health. When I asked her
she claimed to be unaware of basic facts on the subject, like
the concept of toxic stress.
I found it totally unacceptable that she came to the
hearing completely unprepared to answer basic questions like
the number of children currently in detention. She couldn't
even tell us a time line of the investigations into the deaths
of Felipe and Jakelin, the 2 children who died in CBP
custodies.
So it has been almost 3 weeks and she looks all of us, the
Members on the committee, in the eye and promised to provide us
with all kinds of follow-up information, but I have yet to
receive any word or follow-up from her office.
From a medical perspective, if you wanted to purposely
design a policy to be cruel to hurt children, you would design
it to look a lot like this administration's family separation
policy.
So my questions are for you, Dr. Linton. Thank you for
being here. You are here representing the American Academy of
Pediatrics and so when Secretary Nielson was here she claimed,
again, to be unaware of this toxic stress. But you are a
pediatrician and so if you were on the panel with her how would
you explain toxic stress?
Dr. Linton. Thank you, Congresswoman. Toxic stress is
serious, prolonged stress in the absence of a buffering support
of a parent or loving caregiver. What we know about stress is
that each of us responds to stress. I am stressed right now. My
heart is racing.
[Laughter.]
Dr. Linton. I probably have goosebumps. That is what we
call tolerable stress. So there is positive stress, which is a
wedding, very stressful but exciting, wonderful. There is
tolerable stress where I have the loving support of my family
to cope with. And there is toxic stress.
The family separation policy that was implemented by this
administration was a form of toxic stress, which we know
threatens the short- and long-term health of children.
Ms. Underwood. Can you describe for us the impact of family
separation on the child's physical health?
Dr. Linton. Yes. So we know that toxic stress in the short
term can cause changes in body function, so children may have
changes in their eating. They may not be hungry. Children will
frequently have difficulty sleeping. They may wet the bed or
even soil themselves.
They may have physical symptoms, headaches. They may have
stomach aches. Their immune response is lowered when there is
cortisol running through their bodies for such a long period of
time so they would be maybe more susceptible to infection in
that setting.
They also in the long run are at serious risk for problems
such as depression, heart disease, diabetes----
Ms. Underwood. OK.
Dr. Linton [continuing]. Post-traumatic stress disorder.
Ms. Underwood. Yes. So some of those you described are
emotional and mental health challenges. So can you explain how
those can be both immediate and long-term?
Dr. Linton. Yes, thank you. So in the short-term you can
see mental health difficulties both in terms of behavior, so
you may have children who are frightened. They startle easily.
They are afraid to separate from a loved one or a caregiver.
They may be withdrawn. They may be depressed. They may be
anxious.
Developmentally we see changes like developmental
regression. So a child may not be able to speak in the same way
that they could speak before. So I have seen children who have
faced situations of toxic stress who lost their speech
milestones.
We may see children have difficulty with memory. We may
have children that are not able to pay attention, what looks
like attention deficit hyperactivity disorder is, in fact,
toxic stress and then the ability to concentrate.
In the long run with those kind of chronic responses we may
see that children are at risk for depression, anxiety
disorders, and post-traumatic stress disorders, to name a few.
Ms. Underwood. Thank you. So as you mentioned in your
testimony, the toxic stress can cause permanent changes in the
child's brain. So you talked about some short-term, medium- and
long-term impacts, but can you discuss the brain changes that
we might expect to see?
Dr. Linton. Absolutely. So what we know about toxic stress
is that when you have hormones that are not supposed to be
running through the body all of the time, like cortisol, we
know that they can disrupt the architecture of the developing
brain. I can provide you with our policy statements on toxic
stress for the record if that would be helpful, to go through
the neuroplasticity and the neurobiology of toxic stress.
But what we see in behavior so that we see that children,
as a result of those brain changes, have these behavioral
symptoms, have these physical symptoms, have these emotional
symptoms and over time are at very serious risk for chronic
illness.
Ms. Underwood. Well, thank you, ma'am, so much for your
work in the community and for your work with these children,
who I am sure appreciate the therapeutic interventions that you
and your colleagues do provide.
I also would like to thank the American Academy of
Pediatrics for speaking out so boldly and with a clinical,
evidence-based grounding in response to this National policy
that has been rolled out that goes against American values in
so many ways. Thank you for appearing here.
Madam Chair, I yield back my time.
Miss Rice. Thank you, Miss Underwood.
The Chair recognizes for 5 minutes the gentlewoman from New
Mexico, Ms. Torres Small.
Ms. Torres Small. Thank you all for being here on this
important issue. Family separation should never be a solution
for our broken immigration system. It is immoral. We know it
results in traumatic and lasting effects on families,
particularly the children.
Unfortunately, DHS continues to separate families at the
border, even though the administration officially ended its
family separation policy last June.
Ms. Podkul, under what circumstances is DHS continuing to
separate a child from their family?
Ms. Podkul. We don't know. CBP does not always give
information about why they conducted the separation, what
standards they decided to use and oftentimes they are doing it
with no justification at all.
Ms. Torres Small. Dr. Linton, in your earlier remarks you
discussed recommendations for what to do regarding narrow
circumstances involving danger to a child. Does the DHS ever
communicate specific guidelines on how they would make such a
determination?
Dr. Linton. To my knowledge those guidelines do not exist
and we would recommend that there be strict policy guidance
that separation should never occur unless the safety of that
child is at risk at the hand of the parent and a competent
family court makes the decision, just like we do with every
other child when we have to consider whether they should be
separated.
Ms. Torres Small. How many children have been separated
from their parents since the termination of the
administration's zero tolerance policy?
Dr. Linton. I know what we know from the reports from the
OIG that we believe there were thousands more separated than
the nearly 3,000 that we know about. But I am not able to
comment beyond what has been reported publicly.
Ms. Torres Small. Does anyone else have any better idea?
Ms. Brane. Well, as I have said before, we don't know
because they are still not keeping track.
Ms. Torres Small. Dr. Linton, as a Member representing a
border district I have seen first-hand that CBP facilities are
not meant to handle the influx of children and families that we
are currently seeing.
You discussed previously some recommendations for screening
and follow-up care. How do you suggest CBP change its policies
to adapt to the rise of family units and to ensure that these
families are provided with quality medical care?
Dr. Linton. I believe that every child who presents to our
border upon arriving, having fled conditions of trauma in their
countries of origin, and as we have discussed, may have faced
trauma during the journey, the trauma should stop.
So we should have every child have access to being
processed in child-friendly facilities, which is not the case
of current CBP processing facilities. Children should have
access to screening, comprehensive medical screening, mental
health services, and should also have legal representation so
that their cases can be fairly heard.
Ms. Torres Small. Thank you. It is my understanding that
when parents are separated from their child that they aren't
being provided reasons for the separation. What is CBP's
process for notifying parents that they will be separated?
Dr. Brane.
Ms. Brane. To my knowledge there is no process and there
continues to be no process. So it would be great to hear if
they are developing something, but I have not heard of any
plans to do so.
Ms. Torres Small. Thank you. Are you aware of whether
parents are given an explanation or any information?
Ms. Brane. Generally from the cases I have heard of they
have not, but again, I think that is on an individual basis.
There is no policy in place so it may be inconsistent.
Ms. Torres Small. Do you know what process parents can use
to appeal the separation, particularly to explain charges on
their criminal record issued by the government from which they
are fleeing?
Ms. Brane. To my knowledge there is no process.
Ms. Torres Small. Given what you have seen from separated
families, do you have recommendations on how this process could
be improved?
Ms. Brane. Developing any process would be a step forward.
We have made several recommendations to the administration on
how they could develop better policies. One of the most
important is putting child welfare professionals at Border
Patrol stations and ports of entry to help with the screening
and the care and the processing of these children.
Ms. Podkul. If I may add, I mean, this sounds a little
basic but even just keeping track of the separations and
ensuring that the information goes to both the child and the
parent so that they can maintain communication.
What we see is a child can't oftentimes move forward with
their legal case because it is the adult who has all the
information about their case, has the documents that are
necessary, has important information.
Even when they have been able to keep track of the
separations it is taking longer than a week to make sure that
the child and the parent can speak again after the separation.
Ms. Brane. If I could just add, I think what is really
critical here is that there are some really basic common-sense
steps that could be taken that have not been taken.
Ms. Torres Small. Basic steps to save children and their
families. Thank you. I yield the rest of my time.
Miss Rice. Thank you, Ms. Torres Small.
The Chair recognizes for 5 minutes the gentlewoman from
Texas, Ms. Jackson Lee.
Ms. Jackson Lee. Let me thank the Chair and the Ranking
Member for their courtesies. I really do appreciate it. My
commitment to this committee is such that allowing me to
question is much appreciated. Thank you so very much.
Let me thank all of the witnesses who are here. A little
background, I am also on the Judiciary Committee and remember
in desperate times the formulation of this policy to transfer
the holding of children from the detention process of the
immigration agencies in order to protect them.
With that in mind, we had no vision of thousands of
children being held in facilities separated from guardians,
parents, and others. I had the non-privilege of being at the
border in the first coming of children unaccompanied, literally
holding babies coming off buses. That is how desperate parents
were, 2-year-olds, and this was no humor for the parents or no
opportunistic opportunity for them.
Then I recently was in a very limited return of children to
parents just in the last year during this recent thing. To each
of you I am setting this precedent so you can see this
landscape for you.
As we were in the room there was not a dry eye, but here is
why the eyes were not dry. Because if you are a parent you want
nothing more than to protect your children and for your
children to see you as a protector.
So these children had come and they were playing with
pretty, pretty toys and that mother would come in with a
pillowcase of her belongings to come up to a 7-year-old, 8-
year-old and to stand there and watch them play, sort-of
waiting for them to look up to acknowledge.
As they looked up and acknowledged there was no reaction
from the children. There was no breaking away and running
toward this desperate mom who had come, had been through so
much and had this pillowcase. I can see it right now. For those
of us who are parents the worst thing you can imagine is the
disassociation of your child from you, the break of the bond.
So my question that I just came out of the Budget Committee
to ask the deputy secretary of how many children there are
right now? There are about 12,000 children being held. They are
asking for $2 billion to deal with this.
So I am going to Ms. Podkul and Ms. Brane and Dr. Linton, I
come from Texas Children's Hospital territory and work a lot
with pediatricians, but give me your sense of how this
committee in its jurisdiction and all the other committees can
be effective in trying to get children united with their
parents, but more importantly, the effect?
I only have 1.35, so I am just going to call on you and
just make your quick points that you made, but I just need to
hear it again.
To Mr. Ballard, let me thank you. I have been a supporter.
I don't know if you are talking about the underground railroad
with Harriet Tubman, but in any event, certainly that was a
historic moment in history.
But I am just going to ask Dr. Linton and Brane and Podkul
based upon what I have given you. Thank you. Now it is down to
1.12, forgive me.
Dr. Linton. Thank you, Congresswoman. I think the committee
has an opportunity to ask for accountability in the processes
that include family separation, ensuring that no child is
separated without being at risk at the hand of a parent, as
well as safe conditions in Border Patrol Protection processing
centers, and not using detention as a solution.
Ms. Jackson Lee. Health care at those facilities, would
that be helpful?
Dr. Linton. Health care should be available to every child
who comes to our border and enters this country.
Ms. Jackson Lee. On-site. Thank you, Doctor.
Yes, Ms. Brane? I hope I am pronouncing your name right.
Ms. Brane. In addition to what Dr. Linton stated, I would
say child welfare professionals at ports of entry and Border
Patrol stations, facilities that comply with child welfare
standards and licensing standards and a system for tracking and
sharing information.
Ms. Jackson Lee. Thank you.
Ms. Podkul.
Ms. Podkul. You know, these are all changes that we have
been recommending today that could be done today. They could be
done by COB today, so I think this committee, you know,
conducting oversight on the agencies to ensure that they are
put into place is going to be very important in terms of making
children safe.
Ms. Jackson Lee. I have a second. Can someone comment on
the separation factor that I just described when the children
did not respond to that parent that came into the room?
Ms. Linton.
Dr. Linton. When children are separated from their parents
it is profoundly traumatizing to them and sometimes takes them
time to heal from the trauma that was imposed by our policy of
systematically separating them. Every child should be with his
or her loving and supportive parent unless that child is at
risk at the hand of the parent and the family court determines
that that child is not safe with that parent.
Ms. Jackson Lee. Thank you.
Madam Chair, thank you and I yield back. Thank you very
much.
Miss Rice. Thank you, Ms. Jackson Lee.
I recognize the Ranking Member for 2 minutes.
Mr. Higgins. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. I would like to
remind all concerned Americans that our law enforcement
professionals on the border are dealing in many cases with
families that are self-separating before they get to our
Southwest Border.
We also have quite a significant concern with fraudulent
family units. It is very challenging for law enforcement to
deal with. As Americans with love and compassion for their
children, these guys are doing their best. We need to provide
them the funding that they requested.
My colleague stated earlier that family separation is
immoral. Ms. Podkul, you stated in your submitted statement
that family unity is a fundamental human right.
Ms. Brane, you stated that family separation policy is an
extremely important matter that profoundly affects the lives of
vulnerable migrant and refugee children and families. I think
we would all concur that this is a serious concern.
I would ask you, Ms. Brane, have you interviewed any of the
children, that 750,000 to 800,000 children, American children,
that are separated from their parents that are incarcerated in
American jails?
Ms. Brane. I have not done so professionally, no.
Mr. Higgins. So----
Ms. Brane. Other than----
Mr. Higgins. But you have interviewed many immigrant
children?
Ms. Brane. I have interviewed many immigrant children.
Mr. Higgins. All right. I would remind America that there
are approximately 750,000 to 800,000 American families
separated because their----
Miss Rice. With all due respect, Mr. Ranking Member----
Mr. Higgins [continuing]. Parents have committed crimes.
Miss Rice. I yielded the time because I thought it was
gonna be on a relevant issue. It is not so we are going to end
here.
I thank the witnesses for their valuable testimony and the
Members for their questions. The Members of the subcommittee
may have additional questions for the witnesses and we ask that
you respond expeditiously in writing to those questions.
With that, I ask unanimous consent----
Mr. Higgins. Madam Chairwoman, I have a unanimous consent
request.
Miss Rice. Yes.
Mr. Higgins. I ask unanimous consent to enter into the
record the remarks of Secretary Nielsen from our recent full
committee hearing regarding the specific circumstances where
family separations may occur, very narrow and specific. I ask
unanimous consent it be entered into the record.
Miss Rice. You want the entire statement?
Mr. Higgins. Well, I believe it is appropriate to enter her
written statement which includes the details I am referring to.
Miss Rice. Oh, yes. Yes, because that will be taken also
together with the testimony that she actually gave orally
before this committee, which I think is just as relevant. So
yes, that we will do.
[The information referred to follows:]
Excerpt Submitted for the Record by Hon. Clay Higgins
[sic] may be connected with the Saudi government.
Madam Secretary, is this really happening, No. 1? Will you commit
to provide this committee any and all documentation of this program,
including training materials being shared with the Saudis and who is
being trained?
Secretary Nielsen. We are happy to provide you materials, ma'am,
and come brief you. I am happy to have the TSA administrator----
Mrs. Watson Coleman. All right, how long would I have to wait to
get this information?
Secretary Nielsen. That I can't answer, but what I can do is get
you an answer today as to when we could be able to provide that to you.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. Thank you. I don't know if I asked this--I was
talking so fast. Do you continue to separate parents from children as
they are coming across the border?
Secretary Nielsen. In three instances, when the child is at risk,
the adult accompanying them is not a parent or guardian, and the third
instance is when the parent needs to go to a custodial environment.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. So are any of these coming at the port of
entry, seeking asylum?
Secretary Nielsen. Some of--sure. Some of them might be claiming
asylum, yes, ma'am.
______
Prepared Statement of Honorable Kirstjen Nielsen
March 6, 2019
Chairman Thompson, Ranking Member Rogers, and distinguished Members
of the committee: It is an honor to appear before you today.
I want to start by thanking the men and women of the Department of
Homeland Security (DHS) for their exceptional service to our Nation.
Last week, we celebrated the Department's 16th anniversary, and we
marked the extraordinary progress that has been made to protect our
Nation against a vast array of threats and hazards. In the past year
alone, DHS has made notable strides and reached new milestones. For
example, we:
Responded decisively to record-breaking natural disasters
and helped Americans rebuild when they needed our help the
most;
Prevented the hacking of U.S. elections and guarded against
foreign interference in our democracy;
Hardened our digital defenses, organized ourselves for the
interconnected era with the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure
Security Agency, and pushed for tougher consequences against
cyber adversaries;
Created a new hub--the National Risk Management Center--to
identify and mitigate the most serious risks to our Nation's
critical infrastructure;
Thwarted terrorist plotting and helped bring dangerous
individuals to justice;
Launched new, sophisticated efforts to block terrorists and
criminals from reaching the United States, including through
our new National Vetting Center;
Ramped up security measures to protect Americans against
emerging threats--from weaponized drones to chemical and
biological weapons;
Reorganized our intelligence and science & technology
organizations to better meet the needs of front-line defenders;
Strengthened our campaigns against human trafficking and
smuggling, child exploitation, drugs, and transnational
criminal organizations;
Raised the baseline of aviation security across the board--
and around the world;
Took decisive action to enhance school safety and security
Nation-wide in order to stop attacks before they happen;
. . . and much, much more.
We have also undertaken historic efforts to secure our borders and
enforce our Nation's immigration laws. This is the subject of today's
hearing, and this morning I want to outline for you the very real
humanitarian and security crisis we face, how we are responding, and
what's urgently needed from Congress to fix the situation.
The men and women of my Department will tell you that it is no easy
task to secure the more than 7,000 miles of America's shared border
with Mexico and Canada while facilitating legal trade and travel. Each
day, dedicated DHS officers and agents inspect hundreds of tons of
cargo for illegal substances or explosives, process thousands of
individuals for admission, and patrol many miles of remote border. They
do this in order to answer a crucial question: Who and what is coming
into the country? This mission--safeguarding our territory--is one of
the most critical charges of our Department and one of the most
fundamental responsibilities of any government.
the humanitarian and security crisis at our southern border
Let me start by saying, the United States leads the world in
welcoming individuals fleeing persecution. In the 2017 calendar year,
the United States granted asylum and refugee status to more individuals
than any other country in the world. We welcome those who come to us
legally, especially those who are truly fleeing persecution and who
seek refuge in our country.
Illegal and uncontrolled migration, however, poses a serious and
growing risk to U.S. public safety, National security, and the rule of
law. This cannot be a partisan issue. Every Secretary of this
Department has sounded the alarm about our unsecured border and
highlighted the associated threats and consequences to our National
security. Today we are seeing the results of a failure to act and a
broken system.
Our Nation is facing a dire humanitarian and security crisis at our
Southern Border. In the first 4 months of the fiscal year, we saw
approximately 60,000 migrants each month cross illegally or present at
ports of entry without documents. Moreover, the numbers are rising. In
February, agents apprehended or encountered more than 76,000 aliens, a
31 percent increase over January, and CBP is forecasting the problem
will get even worse this spring. The agency is now on track to
apprehend more migrants crossing illegally in the first 6 months of
this fiscal year than the entirety of fiscal year 2017. Our capacity is
already severely strained, but these increases will overwhelm it
completely.
What's different about the current migration flow is not just how
many people are coming but who is arriving. For most of recent history,
the majority of individuals arriving illegally or without documentation
were single adults, who we could quickly detain and remove. This is how
the immigration system is supposed to work. However, in recent years we
have seen the proportion of vulnerable populations--children and
families--skyrocket. Because of outdated laws and misguided court
decisions, we are often forced to release these groups into the
interior of the United States and we have virtually no hope of removing
them.
The details here are critically important. Historically, illegal
aliens crossing into the United States were predominantly single adult
males from Mexico, and they were generally removed within 48 hours if
they had no legal right to stay. Now over 60 percent are family units
and unaccompanied alien children, and 60 percent are non-Mexican. Many
of these families are from the Northern Triangle countries (Guatemala,
Honduras, El Salvador) and claim asylum, so they are released into the
United States--as required by the Flores court decision--while they
await a court date that can be years away. Only 1 in 10 individuals
from the Northern Triangle are ultimately granted asylum by an
immigration judge. Unfortunately, when it comes time to remove the
other 90 percent--who have been determined by an immigration judge to
have no legal right to stay in the United States--they have absconded
from their last known location. And we do not have sufficient resources
to find and remove them.
Make no mistake: The problem is getting worse. The smugglers and
traffickers have caught on, realizing this is a ``free ticket'' into
America. As a result, the flow of families and children has become a
flood. In the past 5 years, we have seen a 620 percent increase in
families--or those posing as families--apprehended at the border. This
last fiscal year was the highest on record. Children are being used as
pawns to get into our country. We have even uncovered ``recycling
rings'' where innocent young people are used multiple times to help
aliens fraudulently gain entry. As a Nation, we cannot stand for this.
The phenomenon of large groups (which is defined as a group of 100
or more aliens apprehended together in a single event) of migrants
organized into caravans arriving along our Southern Border provides a
window into the wide-spread challenges faced everyday by DHS personnel.
For example, in fiscal year 2017, CBP encountered only two large
groups. By fiscal year 2018, this grew to 13 groups. And this fiscal
year through February 28, CBP has experienced 68 groups in the U.S.
Border Patrol's El Paso, Rio Grande Valley, Tucson, and Yuma Sectors.
This is not a manufactured crisis. It is real, it is serious, and it is
overwhelming our front-line personnel.
Apprehending large groups places a tremendous strain on CBP's
limited resources, pulling front-line personnel to conduct humanitarian
efforts and drawing resources away from front-line enforcement,
effectively placing border security at risk. Associated with the
increase in large groups and caravans, we saw a 21 percent increase in
the number of unaccompanied alien minors from the year prior, and a 40
percent increase in number of family units in fiscal year 2018 compared
to fiscal year 2017. To make matters worse, we know that transnational
criminal organizations (TCOs) are taking advantage of these large
groups as a distraction in order to conduct criminal activity elsewhere
on the border, as they know CBP resources will be tied up.
Today's migration flows have created a humanitarian catastrophe.
Criminals are targeting vulnerable populations along the dangerous
journey to our borders. In one study, more than 30 percent of women
reported sexual assault along the way, and 70 percent of all migrants
reported experiencing violence. Smugglers and traffickers are
exploiting these migrants. They are forcing them into inhumane
conditions, demanding large sums of money, and putting their lives in
danger every day. Vulnerable populations--especially children--are
coming into DHS custody sicker than ever before, arriving with
illnesses and injuries. In recent weeks, an average of 56 aliens a day
have required emergency medical care at the Southern Border.
The care of those in DHS custody is paramount, and the United
States Border Patrol is doing everything in its power to handle this
crisis, but our facilities along the Southern Border were not designed
to support such large vulnerable populations. These facilities are
short-term processing facilities, designed to hold individuals for 72
hours or less. I am grateful for the $415 million in humanitarian
assistance Congress provided in the most recent DHS appropriations
bill. The bottom line is that Border Patrol stations built decades ago
are not designed to handle this crisis and are not the best facilities
to house children with their parents for extended periods.
This is also a public safety and National security crisis. TCOs are
using this situation to line their pockets, fueling a rise in other
illegal activity and the spread of violent crime into our country. The
results are disturbing. Across the Nation, Immigration and Customs
Enforcement (ICE) officers made approximately 266,000 arrests of aliens
with various criminal charges or convictions in 2017 and 2018--which
included roughly 100,000 charges or convictions for assault, 30,000 for
sex crimes, and 4,000 for homicides. Many of these were individuals who
came across illegally at our Southern Border.
DHS personnel have also witnessed an increase in the trafficking of
illegal drugs into our communities. Alarmingly, CBP has reported that
fentanyl smuggling between ports of entry at the Southern Border has
more than doubled over our last fiscal year, from fiscal year 2017 to
fiscal year 2018. Although these seizures represent just a quarter of
fentanyl seizures along the border, the rate at which they have
increased is concerning. Fentanyl was responsible for more than 28,400
overdose deaths of Americans in 2017. Just a few weeks ago, CBP made
its largest fentanyl bust in U.S. history, seizing 254 pounds of
fentanyl--enough for 115 million fatal doses--in a truck trailer
compartment. These drugs are smuggled at and between ports of entry,
but our officers and agents are not able to devote the full resources
and attention they could to interdicting them because of the migration
crisis that is taxing our resources.
A tough border security posture is essential to keep other
potential threat actors out of the United States. There are thousands
of individuals on the terrorist watch list that traveled through our
hemisphere last year alone, and we work very hard to keep these
individuals from traveling on illicit pathways to our country. While
most terror suspects attempting to reach the United States do so by
air, terrorist groups are clearly interested in exploiting deficiencies
along our borders to enter the United States. We must vigilantly guard
against any such efforts.
Moreover, last year alone, DHS encountered 3,000+ ``special
interest aliens'' (SIAs)--individuals with suspicious travel patterns
who could pose a National security risk--at our Southern Border.
Foreign partners throughout the Western Hemisphere continue to share
their concerns with me about the growing volume of SIAs. Often these
partners lack the ability to determine the identities and intentions of
such individuals before they cross international borders and make their
way toward our own.
responding to the crisis
DHS is grateful that Congress was finally able to pass a budget for
the Department, but the crisis is getting worse and our current funding
neither provides adequate resources nor the additional authorities that
our DHS personnel need to gain full operational control of our border.
Congress has repeatedly failed to give DHS the resources needed to
confront this situation and to handle the influx of aliens, drugs, and
other illicit traffic into our country. That is why I strongly support
the President's decision to unlock additional funding for physical
barriers, including resources from the Department of Treasury and the
Department of Defense.
Moreover, I applaud the President's decision to declare a National
emergency. This is a crisis--pure and simple--and we need to respond
accordingly. We cannot stand idly by as our border security is further
compromised and our immigration laws are exploited. Now is the time to
act and to uphold our fundamental responsibility to our citizens and
our Nation to safeguard U.S. territory. Although we may disagree on
solutions, I hope there can be a consensus that the current system
requires immediate attention.
Despite these challenges, DHS personnel have worked hard to keep
our communities safe and have done their best to uphold our Nation's
laws. Our agents, officers, and enlisted personnel--those from CBP,
ICE, USCIS, USCG, and beyond--have done an extraordinary job of
prioritizing the highest threats and risks in their operating areas and
going after them. Whether they are apprehending illegal aliens,
interdicting smugglers, conducting life-saving rescues of migrants, or
arresting dangerous individuals sneaking between our ports of entry--
the work by our DHS personnel on the border is imperative to our
continued security and prosperity as a Nation. DHS is taking an end-to-
end approach to the humanitarian and security crisis at our Southern
Border. Below are examples of the actions we have been taking:
Constructing Border Barriers and Leveraging Technology.--The United
States has long built barriers along its Southern Border, first in 1909
and regularly since then according to need. DHS is now constructing the
first new border wall in nearly a decade, which will improve our
ability to impede and deny illegal entry. Since the first barriers were
constructed in San Diego in 1991, U.S. Border Patrol field commanders
have continued to advocate for border wall and the enduring capability
it creates to prevent illegal entry while allowing additional time for
agents to respond. At the same time, we are aggressively pursuing the
deployment of new technology at our borders to increase the situational
awareness of our agents and officers and to detect illicit activity.
Deploying the U.S. Military.--DHS is grateful for the robust
involvement of Department of Defense (DOD) and National Guard personnel
who have been deployed to support our border security mission. Every
administration since President Ronald Reagan has sent troops to the
border, and other Presidents before him, including President Woodrow
Wilson who deployed 150,000 guardsmen to secure our Southern Border in
1916. Our Nation's troops and enabling personnel are assisting with
surveillance, force protection, logistics, medical response, and much
more. Already these deployments have enabled thousands of drug
interdictions and apprehensions of illegal aliens. We are continuing to
work closely with DOD on expanding barrier protections, as well as
exploring additional ways to collaborate to ensure CBP personnel are
freed up to perform their border security mission effectively and
supported in crisis conditions.
Amplifying Regional Cooperation.--As Secretary, I engage almost
weekly with my counterparts in Mexico and the Northern Triangle
governments of Central America to work toward addressing the migration
crisis at the source. Last month, I met with security ministers from
the Northern Triangle in El Salvador to discuss an action plan to deal
with the crisis. I am pleased to report we reached a breakthrough and
agreed to negotiate a Memorandum of Cooperation (MOC) to address the
smuggling, trafficking, irregular migration, and formation of caravans.
These efforts will include a whole-of-Government approach to addressing
the security-related drivers of migration and improving border security
in the region. Our joint statement, which outlined a clear path toward
increased collaboration between the United States and Northern
Triangle, emphasized four areas of increased collaboration: Combatting
Human Trafficking and Migrant Smuggling, Countering Organized Crime and
Gangs, Expanding Information and Intelligence Sharing, and
Strengthening Border Security. I look forward to reporting back to
Congress on the signing of the final regional MOC.
Instituting the Migrant Protection Protocols.--Late last year, we
announced a major milestone--the Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP)--to
address the urgent humanitarian and security crisis at the Southern
Border. We have begun to implement MPP, which relies on long-standing
statutory authority to allow us to return migrants to Mexico to await
the conclusion of their U.S. immigration proceedings while ensuring
they receive all appropriate humanitarian protections. Ultimately, MPP
will allow us to focus more attention on individuals legitimately
fleeing persecution, dissuade those who intend to file false claims,
and bring order to a chaotic flow.
Protecting Vulnerable Populations.--At my direction, DHS personnel
have put in place new policies, procedures, and resources to protect
children and families. This includes surging medical assistance to the
Southern Border to deal with the arrival of large groups and sick
individuals, as well as protocols to ensure that unaccompanied alien
children are not held with individuals who could pose a danger to them
while in DHS custody. We have also doubled-down on our efforts to crack
down on human smuggling and trafficking, including the abuse of
children. And every day the extraordinary men and women of CBP go above
and beyond the call of duty to save lives of migrants in trouble,
including women, children, and infants found abandoned in the desert by
smugglers. These rescue missions, which take place between ports of
entry in remote locations on our Southern Border, are extremely
difficult but also demonstrate our commitment to upholding America's
values and rescuing those who need our protection.
Combating Transnational Criminals.--DHS is stepping up its efforts
to dismantle TCOs. We have reached agreements with governments in the
region to increase action against TCOs, including through greater
intelligence sharing, integrated units of U.S. personnel and partner
agencies, joint investigations, and more. Here at home, we have also
worked with other departments and agencies to take a more holistic
approach to combating TCOs, including improving interagency
coordination structures to take down nefarious groups with greater
precision and coordination.
Countering Illegal Drug Smuggling.--DHS continues to seize
thousands of pounds of illegal and dangerous drugs, including fentanyl,
as they are smuggled into the United States. We are deploying
additional technology and resources at the Southern Border both at and
between ports of entry to help detect and disrupt drug-smuggling
activity. This also includes deeper cooperation throughout the U.S.
Government and with regional partners to find and bring drug smugglers
to justice and dismantle cartels.
Confronting Asylum Fraud.--DHS is putting in place important
measures to reduce asylum fraud and frivolous filings. For example, we
have implemented a ``Last In, First Out'' approach, which means we
prioritize the most recently filed applications when scheduling
affirmative asylum interviews. The aim is to deter individuals from
using our Nation's large asylum backlogs solely to obtain employment.
By cutting down on asylum fraud, we will be able to devote more
attention to applicants who are legitimately fleeing persecution and
require U.S. protection under our laws.
Increased Local Cooperation.--DHS recognizes the inordinate impact
that the surge of illegal migration has had on our border communities,
and we have stepped up cooperation to enlist State and local officials
in our border security efforts. For instance, DHS has doubled the
number of 287(g) agreements with local law enforcement to enlist their
voluntary cooperation on immigration enforcement. At the same time, we
have increased available funds for Southwest Border localities to
provide assistance on border protection through grant programs. DHS is
also working with partner agencies in States, and especially with
county, local, and Tribal agencies to share information, provide
resources, and build communication capacity.
a comprehensive solution
Despite all of our efforts, DHS cannot fix this crisis on its own.
That is why I respectfully request, and will continue to ask, that
Congress pass legislation to fix outdated laws and gaps in our
authorities. These legal impediments hamper enforcement of the law,
weaken border security, and endanger both the American public and the
illegal aliens making the dangerous journey to the Southwest Border.
They are also ``pull'' factors that drive illegal migration and
undermine the territorial integrity of the United States. Only Congress
has the Constitutional authority to enact immigration law. We are,
therefore, completely dependent on Congress to change the outdated
statutes that impede our ability to enforce the law and that handicap
our ability to keep America safe.
There are several key legislative reforms that we need to address
this crisis. Among other actions, we ask Congress to do the following:
Promote Family Unity.--One of the main challenges is the inability
of DHS to keep families together during the immigration proceedings. In
1997, the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) entered into the
Flores settlement agreement relating to detention of minors and their
release. Since that time, litigation on this agreement has continued,
and multiple court decisions interpreting the agreement have impeded
the United States Government's ability to maintain custody of minors
and, now, based on the most recent interpretation, families. The
provisions of the settlement agreement should be superseded by
legislation. Legislation on this issue should be focused on allowing us
to keep families together during their immigration proceedings and
promoting a uniform standard of care and accommodation for minors in
custody, while ensuring our laws are enforced.
Ensure the Safe and Prompt Return of Unaccompanied Alien Children
(UAC).--We must also update our laws to ensure that all UACs who are
not victims of trafficking or persecution (regardless of their country
of origin) can be returned home and reunited with their families.
Current law has created a financial incentive for TCOs, smugglers, and
traffickers to transport UACs to and across our border. The result is
that children are exploited by criminals for their own gain, and are
put in danger. We must stop this exploitation and ensure the safe and
prompt removal of UACs. Government officials in Central America
continue to express to me their urgent desire to have their children
returned home, not harbored in the United States. This requires a
legislative fix.
Crack Down on Asylum Fraud and Protect Those Who Need It.--We have
requested that Congress reform asylum standards to deter fraud and
otherwise ensure that those truly eligible for protection have prompt
access to the judicial system to adjudicate their claim. Specifically,
Congress should legislate a standard that requires that it is more
probable than not that the statements made by the alien in support of
the alien's claims are true. Reforming this standard helps promote the
adjudication of meritorious asylum claims by ensuring those who are
statutorily ineligible for asylum are not found to have a credible fear
of removal.
Safeguard Americans from Dangerous, Criminal Aliens.--We also need
Congressional assistance to update laws that allow criminal aliens to
circumvent the removal process. Right now, the system is broken, and
because of a series of misguided court decisions, DHS is forced to
release dangerous criminal aliens from custody and is unable to remove
others from the United States even when they have been convicted of
serious criminal offenses. Specifically, we must clarify the definition
of ``conviction'' in the Immigration and Nationality Act to address
aliens who receive post-conviction relief or sentence modifications for
the purpose of flouting immigration consequences. In addition, we must
remedy U.S. Courts of Appeals and U.S. Supreme Court decisions,
including Mathis v. United States, 136 S. Ct. 2243 (2016), that have
made it increasingly difficult for ICE to remove convicted aliens on
criminal grounds of removal.
We must also urgently close loopholes created by the U.S. Supreme
Court's decision in Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678 (2001). This
decision generally requires that DHS release a criminal alien ordered
removed who has been detained for 180 days after the period for removal
began unless DHS can show that there is a significant likelihood that
removal can be effectuated in the reasonably foreseeable future. The
result is that we have been forced to release dangerous individuals--
including those responsible for terrible crimes--back into the
population. We must close loopholes created by the Zadvydas decision to
give DHS authority to keep dangerous criminal aliens who are subject to
final orders of removal off our streets and keep our communities safe.
Finally, for the safety and security of the American people, Congress
should ensure that DHS has full authority to detain and remove alien
criminal gang members, alien gang associates, and aliens who
participate in gang-related activities. We must be able to safeguard
Americans from aliens associated with criminal gangs, including
detaining and removing violent gang members such as MS-13.
conclusion
Make no mistake: Despite the challenges DHS faces, we welcome those
who come to us legally--including those who are truly fleeing
persecution. America is a beacon of hope and freedom to the entire
world, and we welcome more immigrants every year than any other nation
on earth. Nevertheless, we must be able to uphold our values and the
rule of law while also maintaining our security.
That is why I call for common-sense solutions--including physical
barriers, fixes to outdated laws, and the resources needed to bring
order to the chaos. Today, I implore Congress to listen to the
solutions offered by those who see this security crisis up close. The
humanitarian crisis can no longer be ignored. The security crisis
cannot be wished away. We must change the status quo now. It will
require bold action to address gaps in our border security that are
being taken advantage of every day.
I thank this committee again for its leadership on this issue, and
I look forward to your questions.
Mr. Higgins. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman.
Miss Rice. With that, I ask unanimous consent to insert
materials from Amnesty International into the hearing record.
[The information referred to follows:]
Letter From Amnesty International
March 25, 2019.
Rep. Kathleen Rice, Chair,
Rep. Clay Higgins, Ranking Member,
Committee on Homeland Security, Subcommittee on Border Security,
Facilitation, and Operations.
Re: Amnesty International Statement for March 26 Hearing on ``The
Department of Homeland Security's Family Separation Policy:
Perspectives from the Border''
Dear Chairwoman Rice, Ranking Member Higgins, and Members of the
Committee: On behalf of Amnesty International \1\ and our more than 2
million members and supporters in the United States, we hereby submit
this statement for the record.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Amnesty International was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in
1977.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amnesty International is an international human rights organization
with national and regional offices in more than 70 countries, including
in the U.S. and Mexico. One of Amnesty International's top global
priorities for the past several years has been the protection of the
human rights of refugees and asylum seekers.
Amnesty International welcomes the on-going oversight efforts by
Congress, including efforts to publicly investigate and establish an
exhaustive record of the administration's separation of families and
children in 2017 and 2018. We hope Congress follows these efforts with
concrete measures to pass legislation prohibiting the separation and
indefinite detention of children and families.
i. in october 2018, amnesty international found that dhs separated
thousands more families than previously disclosed
Undercounting of Families Separated
Based on over a year of in-depth research on the U.S.-Mexico
border, Amnesty International published a report in October 2018 titled
``You Don't Have Any Rights Here'': Illegal Pushbacks, Arbitrary
Detention, and Ill-Treatment of Asylum Seekers in the United States.
This was the first publication to report on how the U.S. Department of
Homeland Security (DHS) apparently undercounted by thousands the true
number of family separations conducted in 2017 and 2018, before,
during, and after the announcement of its so-called ``zero-tolerance''
policy.
Alongside its October 2018 report, Amnesty International released a
Facts & Figures overview of new U.S. Customs and Border Protection
(CBP) statistics it obtained, which appeared to demonstrate a mass
undercounting of family separations. Also in October 2018, Amnesty
International responded in an open letter to DHS Secretary Nielsen to
false claims made by a DHS spokesperson that all family separations had
been reported in the Government's submissions in the Ms. L. class
action lawsuit in 2018.
In January 2019, the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) of the
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) issued a report
confirming Amnesty International's earlier findings: HHS's Office of
Refugee Resettlement (ORR) apparently took custody of thousands more
separated children than previously disclosed, who were never included
in the Ms. L. class action lawsuit because they were released from ORR
custody before the injunction in Ms. L. was issued. In March 2019, the
Ms. L. class definition was expanded to include the potential
``thousands'' of children released from ORR custody prior to the
court's initial order, though, as of this writing, the remedy for this
class is yet to be ordered.
Separations Justified on Vague and Spurious Grounds
Amnesty International's report further demonstrated that DHS did
not include in its official statistics thousands of additional families
separated for reasons of so-called ``fraud,'' safety, security, or
medical considerations. Moreover, DHS appeared to apply arbitrarily and
en masse those vague grounds for family separations, including to
separate immediate family members who had full documentation of their
family relationships and who had requested asylum at official ports of
entry, even prior to the zero-tolerance policy.
The Intergovernmental Public Liaison in the CBP Commissioner's
office informed Amnesty International that the U.S. Border Patrol had
separated at least 6,022 ``family units''\2\ between April 19, 2018
(prior to which it claimed not to have been recording family
separations) and August 15, 2018. In contrast, CBP informed Amnesty
International that it had only separated 36 families at official Ports
of Entry from October 2017 through July 2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ DHS agencies use several conflicting definitions of the term
``family units.'' Yet even adopting a conservative interpretation that
this figure refers to individual family members and not groups of
family members, CBP still appears to have separated thousands more
children from their families than initially included in the Ms. L.
lawsuit, as was confirmed in HHS's January 2019 report. For instance,
the DHS and HHS draft regulations titled ``Apprehension, Processing,
Care, and Custody of Alien Minors and Unaccompanied Alien Children''
define ``family units'' as the whole family group: `` `Family unit'
means a group of two or more aliens consisting of a minor or minors
accompanied by his/her/their adult parent(s) or legal guardian(s).''
Id. (7 Sept. 2018), available at: https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-
2018-09-07/pdf/2018-19052.pdf. Likewise, CBP's ``National Standards on
Transport, Escort, Detention, and Search'' also define ``family units''
as whole family groups: ``Family Unit: A group of detainees that
includes one or more non-United States citizen juvenile(s) accompanied
by his/her/their parent(s) or legal guardian(s), whom the agency will
evaluate for safety purposes to protect juveniles from sexual abuse and
violence.'' Id., available at: https://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/
assets/documents/2017-Sep/CBP%20TEDS%20Policy%20Oct2015.pdf. In
contrast, CBP uses the term differently in its periodically updated
public Southwest Border Migration statistics, in which it defines
``family units'' as the total number of individuals in families, rather
than the whole family group: ``Family Unit represents the number of
individuals (either a child under 18 years old, parent or legal
guardian) apprehended with a family member by the U.S. Border Patrol.''
See ``Southwest Border Migration fiscal year 2019,'' available at:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration.) The use of
``family units'' to mean each individual arriving in a family, rather
than their whole family group, conflicts with the definition of the
term under DHS policies, and may be intended to inflate the apparent
number of families seeking to cross the U.S.-Mexico border for
political purposes. According to Internet Archive, CBP added this
definition to its statistics on September 20, 2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
CBP informed Amnesty International those numbers entirely excluded
the apparently thousands of other families separated for fraud or other
arbitrary designations--separations which, in a statement issued the
day after the June 20 Executive Order supposedly ending the family
separation policy, CBP suggested it would continue to conduct.\3\ News
media reported in late November 2018 that the frequency of family
separations by CBP for ``fraud'' or other reasons has increased
dramatically since the termination of the zero-tolerance policy.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ ``[A]s was the case prior to implementation of the zero-
tolerance policy on May 5, family units may be separated due to
humanitarian, health and safety, or criminal history in addition to
illegally crossing the border.'' CBP's Statement on Implementing the
President's Executive Order Affording Congress the Opportunity to
Address Family Separation'' (21 June 2018), available at: https://
www.cbp.gov/newsroom/speeches-and-statements/cbps-statement-
implementing-presidents-executive-order-affording.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Despite repeated requests, CBP has declined to clarify how many of
the ``family units'' separated were children versus adults, and in what
months those separations occurred (including since some appeared to
have been separated after President Trump's Executive Order). When
Amnesty International expressed alarm that the figures provided by CBP
appear to conflict with previous numbers that CBP's Legislative Affairs
Office had shared with the Congressional Research Service for its July
2018 report, CBP suggested that its previous statistical accounts were
flawed and that its ``data team'' had updated its statistics
considerably.
This suggests that the numbers CBP provided previously to the DHS
OIG may also have been flawed and have still not been updated. This
would be consistent with the OIG's findings in its damning October 2018
report about family separations that ``the data DHS eventually supplied
was incomplete and inconsistent, raising questions about its
reliability.''
Despite its supposedly improved data, in August and September 2018,
CBP informed Amnesty International that it still did not have accurate
numbers of family separations conducted by U.S. authorities. For the
period prior to 19 April 2018, CBP claimed it did not yet have ``an
official count'' of family separations. For the period after 19 April
2018, CBP also claimed it had not yet been able ``to reconcile a
complete and accurate list for separations that may have occurred
during the zero-tolerance prosecution period.'' In September 2018, CBP
informed Amnesty International that it did not have ``a full tally'' of
families it separated for reasons of so-called ``fraud'' (including
non-parental relationships, such as grandparents; or subjective doubts
about the validity of the relationship).
On October 10, the day before Amnesty International released its
report, the chief of staff of CBP's Intergovernmental Public Liaison
informed its author: ``Perhaps after your report comes out, we may be
able to release additional statistics.'' The implication was that more
statistics would only be forthcoming if there was adequate public
pressure to release them. On November 20, CBP again declined to provide
further data, instead stating that any new data would be posted on
CBP's website.
Until now, DHS has weathered the scandalous fallout of its family
separations policy--including irreparable harm caused to thousands of
children and their families--without a full accounting or a proper
reckoning of the full scale of abuses under the zero-tolerance policy.
DHS must reveal to Congress its full statistics on family
separations and expose them to public scrutiny to ensure that all those
families are reunited and to guarantee this never happens again.
ii. the policy and practice of family separations constituted torture
in some cases, imposing extreme anguish on members of separated
families--many of whom continue to be detained
In 2018, Amnesty International interviewed 15 adults whom DHS
agencies separated from their children both before and after the
introduction of the so-called zero-tolerance policy. The separations
happened in all four U.S. States along the U.S.-Mexico border
(California, Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas), at the hands of both CBP
and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) personnel. In all of
those cases, prior to being separated, the families had requested
asylum and expressed their fear of return to their countries of origin.
According to the adults, in none of these cases did DHS personnel
explain to the families the reasons for the separations at the time
that they happened or allow them to defend their custodial right to
family unity. DHS personnel simply separated the families--in some
cases through the use or threat of physical force.
Based on its research in 2018, Amnesty International found that the
Trump administration's deliberate and punitive practice of forced
family separations in some cases constituted torture under both U.S.
and international law. To meet the definition of torture, an act must
be: (1) Intentional; (2) carried out or condoned by a Government
official; (3) inflicting severe pain or suffering, whether physical or
mental; and (4) carried out for a specific purpose such as punishment,
coercion, intimidation, or for a discriminatory reason.
The Trump administration's deliberate policy and practice of
forcible family separations satisfies all of these criteria. Based on
public statements and internal memoranda by U.S. Government officials,
both the policy and practice of family separations were indisputably
intended to deter asylum seekers from requesting protection in the
United States as well as to punish and compel those who did seek
protection to give up their asylum claims. Amnesty International
researchers witnessed the extreme mental anguish these family
separations caused and documented instances of family separation being
leveraged to compel a family to abandon their asylum claim.
In January 2019, an internal DHS memo from December 2017 that was
published by a Member of Congress showed that DHS deliberately imposed
the family separations policy as a means to deter and deport children
and their families. Contrary to U.S. and international legal
obligations, DHS never considered the best interests of the children in
its cruel and unlawful family separation policy.
More than a year after being forcibly separated by DHS, several
families informed Amnesty International that they remain in dire need
of psychological support to address the deep and lasting scars and
extreme trauma of the forced family separations perpetrated against
them.
``I believe that because of all of this I'm going through--the fear of
going back to Brazil, the fear of being separated from my grandchild,
all of this together, I can't stop thinking about it--that it's making
me really sick,'' said 55-year-old Maria, who was separated from her
17-year-old grandson with disabilities, Matheus, after they requested
asylum in New Mexico in August 2017. ``I might need to go look for a
psychologist. I don't remember things and can't sleep . . . I start to
talk about something and forget what I was saying. I am crying a lot
also because I am still separated from Matheus.''
The title of the Amnesty International report, ``You Don't Have Any
Rights Here,'' directly quotes the words of CBP officials as spoken to
a Salvadoran father in California in November 2017 and to a Brazilian
mother in Texas in March 2018 as they summarily separated the two
parents from their children.
Both of those parents had presented themselves lawfully at official
ports of entry and were in possession of documentation proving their
relationships to their children. In neither case did the CBP officers
give the parents any reason for the separations or a chance to defend
their custody of their children. Amnesty International visited and
interviewed each of the parents in detention about 6 weeks after they
were separated from their respective children. In both interviews, the
parents broke down into tears, revealing the extreme aguish and
suffering they experienced because of the lawless conduct of DHS
authorities.
Amnesty International interviewed a Brazilian mother, Valquiria,
while she was in detention on May 10, 2018, 3 days before Mother's Day.
Ten months later, she remains in detention at the El Paso Processing
Center. March 17 marked 1 year since Valquiria was separated from her
8-year-old son, Abel (pseudonym). Abel has stared blankly for months at
the door where he lives, waiting for his mother to return.
``They told me, `You don't have any rights here, and you don't have any
rights to stay with your son.' '' Valquiria described to Amnesty
International. ``For me I died at that moment. They ripped my heart out
of me . . . For me, it would have been better if I had dropped dead.
For me, the world ended at that point . . . How can a mother not have
the right to be with her son?''
Valquiria should never have been detained at an adult detention
center; rather, DHS should have followed its own binding internal
policies and maintained her family's unity. Valquiria's case is also
emblematic of DHS's use of family separations to penalize individuals
seeking asylum: She was one of countless families separated by
authorities after requesting asylum at official ports of entry.
The trauma of detention has impacted separated families and
children in another way: Government submissions in on-going litigation
have revealed that some of the children separated from their families
by DHS under the zero-tolerance policy turned 18 while in ORR custody
and were thus transferred to adult Immigration and Customs Enforcement
(ICE) detention facilities. They have yet to be reunited with their
families and remain in detention--where they never would have been in
the first place had DHS not unlawfully separated their families. The
practice of transfers of 18-year-olds to to adult facilities has been
described by children and advocates alike as traumatic, and is likely
doubly so for children and youth previously who have already been
subjected to the irreversible pain of family separation.
iii. amnesty international's policy recommendations
To Congress:
Pass legislation banning the separation and detention of
families with children.
Continue to demand full and unimpeded access to the
following data to allow scrutiny of the true numbers of family
separations prior to, during, and following the announcement of
the zero-tolerance policy in 2018:
Numbers of families separated by DHS agencies (including
CBP-OFO, Border Patrol, and ICE respectively), and the
numbers of children and parents among those disaggregated
and total numbers of separated families.
Numbers of supposedly ``unaccompanied children'' (UACs)
who were separated from adults with whom they arrived at
ports of entry, or who were apprehended between ports of
entry, including based on alleged ``fraud,'' safety,
security, and/or medical reasons--as those numbers have not
been included to date in official statistics provided by
DHS.
Information contained in any DHS-HHS interdepartmental
information-sharing platforms related to separated families
and children.
Require DHS to elaborate upon how and in what circumstances
officials: (1) Request and approve the separation of children
from the adults with whom they arrive at ports of entry or are
apprehended; (2) record such separations; (3) ensure any such
family separations are conducted only in the best interests of
the child; and (4) facilitate reunifications of those families
and accountability for officials, in any cases found to have
not been in the best interests of the child.
To the Department of Homeland Security:
Immediately account for all asylum seekers whom DHS agencies
separated from their family members from January 2017 to
present, at a minimum.
Reunify, unconditionally, as quickly as possible and sparing
no costs, any and all children who remain separated from their
parents or guardians.
Release all separated parents and guardians from U.S.
immigration detention facilities who have still not yet been
reunited with their children.
Halt family separations in all circumstances, except
following a rigorous determination of best interests of the
child, which DHS officials must articulate to family members,
providing them an effective opportunity to contest and
recording that contestation in the case files of those
affected.
Strengthen mechanisms and procedures to ensure that the
separation of children of asylum seekers and migrants occurs
only when it is in their best interest, including improved
safeguards for the determination of those best interests.
Identify all individuals who were separated from their
families as children, but who have since ``aged out'' of ORR
shelters and who are now in the custody of ICE detention
facilities.
For more information, please contact Charanya Krishnaswami[.]
Sincerely,
Charanya Krishnaswami,
Advocacy Director, The Americas, Amnesty International USA.
Brian Griffey,
Regional Researcher/Advisor, Americas Regional Office, Amnesty
International.
Miss Rice. Without objection, the subcommittee record shall
be kept open for 10 days.
Hearing no further business, the subcommittee stands
adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 11:38 a.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]
A P P E N D I X
----------
Question From Ranking Member Clay Higgins for Julie M. Linton
Question. Dr. Linton, currently, CBP has a National set of
guidelines for detainment that explicitly mentions family unity,
entitled the National Standards on Transport, Escort, Detention, and
Search (TEDS) that we released in 2015. You were asked about CBP's
explicit guidelines for separation. In your oral testimony, you
responded that to your knowledge, ``those guidelines do not exist, and
we would recommend that there be strict policy guidance that separation
should never occur unless the safety of that child is at risk.''
Were you aware of these guidelines?
Answer. The AAP has said repeatedly that separating children from
their parents contradicts everything we stand for as pediatricians--
protecting and promoting children's health. In fact, highly stressful
experiences, like family separation, can cause irreparable harm,
disrupting a child's brain architecture and affecting his or her short-
and long-term health. This type of prolonged exposure to serious
stress--known as toxic stress--can carry life-long consequences for
children. Children should never be separated from their parents unless
there are concerns for the safety of the child at the hand of the
parent and a competent family court makes that determination. As such,
the AAP strongly supports S. 292, the Keep Families Together Act (and
its House counterpart H.R. 541) which prohibits separation of families
at the border without good cause, as determined by a State official or
a child welfare expert. This legislation is critically important for
ensuring that a decision as consequential as separating a child from
his or her parent or family members is made with the best interests of
the child in mind and by a trained and qualified expert in child
welfare.
Questions From Ranking Member Clay Higgins for Tim Ballard
Question 1. Mr. Ballard, do you agree with the Chairwoman of the
subcommittee that ``family separation is a completely separate issue
from human trafficking'' and that ``they really have nothing to do with
each other''?
Do you think the two issues are mutually exclusive?
From what you've seen in the field, how common is it for
human traffickers to use the guise of a ``family unit'' to
bring children into the United States?
Are human traffickers more or less likely to pose as a
family unit if detained between ports of entry? What about at
ports of entry?
Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
Question 2. Mr. Ballard, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP)
recently shared with Congress that they have discovered more than 3,100
fraudulent family units attempting unlawful entry along our Southwest
Border since April 2018. They interview the members of the family unit,
check for fraudulent documents, and run fingerprints on the migrants
they process, but there doesn't seem to be enough checks in place to
make sure the adults are biological parents or the legal guardians of
the children. This poses a major child safety risk.
Based off your experience, what do you think CBP can be
doing to enhance their ability to ensure that migrants who
present themselves as a family unit are actually a legitimate
family unit?
Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
[all]