The Senate Judiciary Committee held a hearing on Tuesday morning where the Chairman, Chuck Grassley, had the opportunity to question DHS chief Jeh Johnson for the first time since Obama’s executive amnesty last November. Senator Grassley used the opportunity to quiz Johnson directly about a case of a man, Emmanuel Rangel-Hernandez, who received the President’s DACA benefit despite being a known gang member. The alien later went on to murder four people, authorities contend.
Below, illegal alien gangster Rangel-Hernandez (r) is accused of murdering Mirjana Puhar, a contestant in the TV show America’s Top Model, among others.
Senator Grassley has been very persistent in pursuing the Rangel-Hernandez case, recognizing how it signifies the sloppiness by which the administration “investigates” — perhaps too strong a word — the illegal aliens which it intends to reward with citizenship. In February Grassley reported on information he had received about the criminal background of the accused killer, and in March sent a letter to the DHS demanding to know the truth. A week ago, the agency admitted its mistake in awarding the gangster alien with a DACA.
In Tuesday’s hearing, Senate Committee on the Judiciary Hearing on Oversight of the Department of Homeland Security, Chairman Grassley mentioned the gangster case just a few sentences into his opening statement (see below) and got quickly to that subject in his questioning.
GRASSLEY: I want to ask you about Mr. Rangel-Hernandez, a gang member that committed those murders I referred to. According to your April 17 response to me and Mr. Tillis, Mr. Rangel-Hernandez’ application should have gone through several layers of review, including by U.S. Citizenship Immigration Services’ background check unit.
Because of his gang affiliation, the department’s headquarters should also have reviewed the case. Thus, the adjudicator would only be able to approve such an application after a sign off from Washington leadership. There was obviously a lapse, but it’s unclear who dropped the ball.
First question, why was Mr. Rangel-Hernandez approved for deferred action despite his known gang ties. In other words, which office was responsible for approving the DACA applicant, and was it the adjudicator, the background check unit or USCIS headquarters?
JOHNSON: The answer to the Why question is simply he should not have received DACA. I believe on balance DACA is a good program. I also believe that this case is a tragic case, and this individual should not have received DACA. I cannot state that in stronger terms. . .
We’ve gone back and retrained the entire workforce that deals with these cases to make sure that they identify trouble signs, such as suspected membership in criminal gangs. . .
I’m interested in deporting criminals, sir.
Johnson never did get around to specifying the office that screwed up, claiming he didn’t know the name of the unit. (Lame!) Holding people accountable is not the government style. Johnson’s using the word “sir” was the closest to an apology the committee got.
Now, back to the beginning of the hearing for the first part of Chairman Grassley’s opening statement which was rather blunt:
Oversight is a critical function and a constitutional responsibility of the legislative branch. Every year, this committee tries to invite the Secretary of Homeland Security to brief us on the state of affairs of the department. It’s an opportunity to question the administration’s policies as well as an opportunity for the department to take responsibility for its actions.
It’s a pleasure to have Secretary Johnson here today. This is the first opportunity for our committee to question him publicly since the President’s executive actions on immigration announced last November.
Even though there is an injunction against the executive actions, we can still get a good idea of what to expect from the enjoined programs based on the way the department has implemented the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or “DACA” program.
It appears, for example, that applications for deferred action are being rubberstamped, evidenced by the fact that criminals and gang members are receiving this special benefit despite supposed policies against it.
Take, for example, the case of a DACA recipient in North Carolina, Emmanuel Rangel-Hernandez, who is accused of murdering four people, including a former reality TV model.
Last week, the department admitted Rangel-Hernandez had received DACA despite his gang membership, which was known to adjudicators, and despite already being in deportation proceedings.
The agency response indicated a lapse in the processing of Rangel-Hernandez’s application. However it’s not yet clear who ultimately made the decision to approve the application. We need to get to the bottom of it. We know that the agency has terminated 282 DACA requests because of gang and/or criminal issues. So, this appears to be a bigger problem.
This tragedy compels the question: What background checks are in place and are they adequate to ensure that benefits are not being provided to those who pose a threat to the homeland and public safety? And, does this administration truly have a zero-tolerance policy for the granting of immigration benefits to criminals and gang members, as suggested by the President?
The committee will also want to hear from the Secretary about the proposed expansion of DACA and why the department provided over 100,000 DACA work authorization extensions despite assurances its lawyers gave the federal court that it would not implement any aspect of the President’s executive action until February 18, 2015.
Whether discussing the 2012 DACA program or the 2014 executive actions, there remain questions about the legality of the President’s actions. There are also questions about how the department will fund the programs, and whether legal immigrants will suffer due to the prioritization for benefits of people in the country illegally.
The Secretary must also answer as to why this administration is allowing people here illegally to be put on a path to citizenship, which is clearly a constitutional responsibility of Congress. This path to citizenship is afforded through the administration’s use of advance parole, which they are encouraging DACA applicants to take advantage of. This loophole will set a dangerous precedent that will allow lawbreakers to obtain the benefits of lawful permanent residence and citizenship after showing a total disregard for American law.
One thing seems very clear: there is little will or desire by this administration to enforce the laws on the books and to back up agents in the field who swore to uphold the law.
This administration needs to answer for the release of criminal aliens into our communities. In fiscal year 2013, the department released from detention over 36,000 convicted criminal aliens in removal proceedings or after they had been ordered removed. Then in fiscal year 2014, it released 30,558 convicted criminal aliens. They had convictions ranging from homicide to sexual assault to kidnapping to aggravated assault to drunk driving.
According to ICE statistics, 56.8 percent of the 30,558 releases in 2014 were purely discretionary. The remainder were due to court mandates and the inability to obtain travel documents. Why did this administration release almost 60 percent of criminals in their custody, and what are they going to do about it? I expect the Secretary to address this today.
I expect the Secretary to also address the problems with the EB-5 immigrant investor program. Not only are there gaping holes that risk our national security, there are serious management problems that were highlighted by the Inspector General.
The Inspector General laid out how preferential treatment was granted to those well connected. It is very clear that the Secretary does not plan to hold the former Director, who now sits at the number two post, accountable for his actions. Instead, it appears that the violations of ethical conduct will go unpunished – all while agents and adjudicators in the field are being reprimanded and threatened if they don’t “get to a yes” or follow the President’s lawless policies.
I’d also like to hear Secretary Johnson’s thoughts on combatting the array of national security threats the country faces.
(continues)
