[Pages H449-H459]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

{time} 1415
IMPEACHING ALEJANDRO NICHOLAS MAYORKAS, SECRETARY OF HOMELAND SECURITY,
FOR HIGH CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS

Mr. GREEN of Tennessee. Madam Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution
996, I call up the resolution (H. Res. 863) impeaching Alejandro
Nicholas Mayorkas, Secretary of Homeland Security, for high crimes and
misdemeanors, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the resolution.
The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

H. Res. 863

Resolved, That Alejandro Nicholas Mayorkas, Secretary of
Homeland Security of the United States of America, is
impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors, and that the
following articles of impeachment be exhibited to the United
States Senate:
Articles of impeachment exhibited by the House of
Representatives of the United States of America in the name
of itself and of the people of the United States of America,
against Alejandro N. Mayorkas, Secretary of Homeland Security
of the United States of America, in maintenance and support
of its impeachment against him for high crimes and
misdemeanors.

article i: willful and systemic refusal to comply with the law

The Constitution provides that the House of Representatives
``shall have the sole Power of Impeachment'' and that civil
Officers of the United States, including the Secretary of
Homeland Security, ``shall be removed from Office on
Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or
other high Crimes and Misdemeanors''. In his conduct while
Secretary of Homeland Security, Alejandro N. Mayorkas, in
violation of his oath to support and defend the Constitution
of the United States against all enemies, foreign and
domestic, to bear true faith and allegiance to the same, and
to well and faithfully discharge the duties of his office,
has willfully and systemically refused to comply with Federal
immigration laws, in that:
Throughout his tenure as Secretary of Homeland Security,
Alejandro N. Mayorkas has repeatedly violated laws enacted by
Congress regarding immigration and border security. In large
part because of his unlawful conduct, millions of aliens have
illegally entered the United States on an annual basis with
many unlawfully remaining in the United States. His refusal
to obey the law is not only an offense against the separation
of powers in the Constitution of the United States, it also
threatens our national security and has had a dire impact on
communities across the country. Despite clear evidence that
his willful and systemic refusal to comply with the law has
significantly contributed to unprecedented levels of illegal
entrants, the increased control of the Southwest border by
drug cartels, and the imposition of enormous costs on States
and localities affected by the influx of aliens, Alejandro N.
Mayorkas has continued in his refusal to comply with the law,
and thereby acted to the grave detriment of the interests of
the United States.
Alejandro N. Mayorkas engaged in this scheme or course of
conduct through the following means:
(1) Alejandro N. Mayorkas willfully refused to comply with
the detention mandate set forth in section 235(b)(2)(A) of
the Immigration and Nationality Act, requiring that all
applicants for admission who are ``not clearly and beyond a
doubt entitled to be admitted...shall be detained for a
[removal] proceeding...''. Instead of complying with this
requirement, Alejandro N. Mayorkas implemented a catch and
release scheme, whereby such aliens are unlawfully released,
even without effective mechanisms to ensure appearances
before the immigration courts for removal proceedings or to
ensure removal in the case of aliens ordered removed.
(2) Alejandro N. Mayorkas willfully refused to comply with
the detention mandate set forth in section 235(b)(1)(B)(ii)
of such Act, requiring that an alien who is placed into
expedited removal proceedings and determined to have a
credible fear of persecution ``shall be detained for further
consideration of the application for asylum''. Instead of
complying with this requirement, Alejandro N. Mayorkas
implemented a catch and release scheme, whereby such aliens
are unlawfully released, even without effective mechanisms to
ensure appearances before the immigration courts for removal
proceedings or to ensure removal in the case of aliens
ordered removed.
(3) Alejandro N. Mayorkas willfully refused to comply with
the detention set forth in section 235(b)(1)(B)(iii)(IV) of
such Act, requiring that an alien who is placed into
expedited removal proceedings and determined not to have a
credible fear of persecution ``shall be detained...until
removed''. Instead of complying with this requirement,
Alejandro N. Mayorkas has implemented a catch and release
scheme, whereby such aliens are unlawfully released, even
without effective mechanisms to ensure appearances before the
immigration courts for removal proceedings or to ensure
removal in the case of aliens ordered removed.
(4) Alejandro N. Mayorkas willfully refused to comply with
the detention mandate set forth in section 236(c) of such
Act, requiring that a criminal alien who is inadmissible or
deportable on certain criminal and terrorism-related grounds
``shall [be] take[n] into custody'' when the alien is
released from law enforcement custody. Instead of complying
with this requirement, Alejandro N. Mayorkas issued
``Guidelines for the Enforcement of Civil Immigration Laws'',
which instructs Department of Homeland Security (hereinafter
referred to as ``DHS'') officials that the ``fact an
individual is a removable noncitizen...should not alone be
the basis of an enforcement action against them'' and that
DHS ``personnel should not rely on the fact of
conviction...alone'', even with respect to aliens subject to
mandatory arrest and detention pursuant to section 236(c) of
such Act, to take them into custody. In Texas v. United
States, 40 F.4th 205 (2022), the United States Court of
Appeals for the Fifth Circuit concluded that these guidelines
had ``every indication of being `a general policy that is so
extreme as to amount to an abdication of...statutory
responsibilities' '' and that its ``replacement of Congress's
statutory mandates with concerns of equity and race is
extralegal...[and] plainly outside the bounds of the power
conferred by the INA''.
(5) Alejandro N. Mayorkas willfully refused to comply with
the detention mandate set forth in section 241(a)(2) of such
Act, requiring that an alien ordered removed ``shall [be]
detain[ed]'' during ``the removal period''. Instead of
complying with this mandate, Alejandro N. Mayorkas issued
``Guidelines for the Enforcement of Civil Immigration Laws'',
which instructs DHS officials that the ``fact an individual
is a removable noncitizen...should not alone be the basis of
an enforcement action against them'' and that DHS ``personnel
should not rely on the fact of conviction...alone'', even
with respect to aliens subject to mandatory detention and
removal pursuant to section 241(a) of such Act.
(6) Alejandro N. Mayorkas willfully exceeded his parole
authority set forth in section 212(d)(5)(A) of such Act that
permits parole to be granted ``only on a case-by-case
basis'', temporarily, and ``for urgent humanitarian reasons
or significant public benefit'', in that:
(A) Alejandro N. Mayorkas paroled aliens en masse in order
to release them from mandatory detention, despite the fact
that, as the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth
Circuit concluded in Texas v. Biden, 20 F.4th 928 (2021),
``parol[ing] every alien [DHS] cannot detain is the opposite
of the `case-by-case basis' determinations required by law''
and ``DHS's pretended power to parole aliens while ignoring
the limitations Congress imposed on the parole power [is] not
nonenforcement; it's misenforcement, suspension of the INA,
or both''.
(B) Alejandro N. Mayorkas created, re-opened, or expanded a
series of categorical parole programs never authorized by
Congress for foreign nationals outside of the United States,
including for certain Central American minors, Ukrainians,
Venezuelans, Cubans, Haitians, Nicaraguans, Colombians,
Salvadorans, Guatemalans, and Hondurans, which enabled
hundreds of thousands of inadmissible aliens to enter the
United States in violation of the laws enacted by Congress.
(7) Alejandro N. Mayorkas willfully exceeded his release
authority set forth in section 236(a) of such Act that
permits, in certain circumstances, the release of aliens
arrested on an administrative warrant, in that Alejandro N.
Mayorkas released aliens arrested without a warrant despite
their being subject to a separate applicable mandatory
detention requirement set forth in section 235(b)(2) of such
Act. Alejandro N. Mayorkas released such aliens by
retroactively issuing administrative warrants in an attempt
to circumvent section 235(b)(2) of such Act. In Florida v.
United States, No. 3:21-cv-

[[Page H450]]

1066-TKW-ZCB (N.D. Fla. Mar. 8, 2023), the United States
District Court of the Northern District of Florida noted that
``[t]his sleight of hand - using an `arrest' warrant as a de
facto `release' warrant - is administrative sophistry at its
worst''. In addition, the court concluded that ``what makes
DHS's application of [236(a)] in this manner unlawful...is
that [235(b)(2)], not [236(a)], governs the detention of
applicants for admission whom DHS places in...removal
proceedings after inspection''.
Alejandro N. Mayorkas's willful and systemic refusal to
comply with the law has had calamitous consequences for the
Nation and the people of the United States, including:
(1) During fiscal years 2017 through 2020, an average of
about 590,000 aliens each fiscal year were encountered as
inadmissible aliens at ports of entry on the Southwest border
or apprehended between ports of entry. Thereafter, during
Alejandro N. Mayorkas's tenure in office, that number
skyrocketed to over 1,400,000 in fiscal year 2021, over
2,300,000 in fiscal year 2022, and over 2,400,000 in fiscal
year 2023. Similarly, during fiscal years 2017 through 2020,
an average of 130,000 persons who were not turned back or
apprehended after making an illegal entry were observed along
the border each fiscal year. During Alejandro N. Mayorkas's
tenure in office, that number more than trebled to 400,000 in
fiscal year 2021, 600,000 in fiscal year 2022, and 750,000 in
fiscal year 2023.
(2) American communities both along the Southwest border
and across the United States have been devastated by the
dramatic growth in illegal entries, the number of aliens
unlawfully present, and substantial rise in the number of
aliens unlawfully granted parole, creating a fiscal and
humanitarian crisis and dramatically degrading the quality of
life of the residents of those communities. For instance,
since 2022, more than 150,000 migrants have gone through New
York City's shelter intake system. Indeed, the Mayor of New
York City has said that ``we are past our breaking point''
and that ``[t]his issue will destroy New York City''. In
fiscal year 2023, New York City spent $1,450,000,000
addressing Alejandro N. Mayorkas's migrant crisis, and city
officials fear it will spend another $12,000,000,000 over the
following three fiscal years, causing painful budget cuts to
important city services.
(3) Alejandro N. Mayorkas's unlawful mass release of
apprehended aliens and unlawful mass grant of categorical
parole to aliens have enticed an increasing number of aliens
to make the dangerous journey to our Southwest border.
Consequently, according to the United Nations's International
Organization for Migration, the number of migrants intending
to illegally cross our border who have perished along the
way, either en route to the United States or at the border,
almost doubled during the tenure of Alejandro N. Mayorkas as
Secretary of Homeland Security, from an average of about 700
a year during the fiscal years 2017 through 2020, to an
average of about 1,300 a year during the fiscal years 2021
through 2023.
(4) Alien smuggling organizations have gained tremendous
wealth during Alejandro N. Mayorkas's tenure as Secretary of
Homeland Security, with their estimated revenues rising from
about $500,000,000 in 2018 to approximately $13,000,000,000
in 2022.
(5) During Alejandro N. Mayorkas's tenure as Secretary of
Homeland Security, the immigration court backlog has more
than doubled from about 1,300,000 cases to over 3,000,000
cases. The exploding backlog is destroying the courts'
ability to administer justice and provide appropriate relief
in a timeframe that does not run into years or even decades.
As Alejandro N. Mayorkas acknowledged, ``those who have a
valid claim to asylum...often wait years for a...decision;
likewise, noncitizens who will ultimately be found ineligible
for asylum or other protection--which occurs in the majority
of cases--often have spent many years in the United States
prior to being ordered removed''. He noted that of aliens
placed in expedited removal proceedings and found to have a
credible fear of persecution, and thus referred to
immigration judges for removal proceedings, ``significantly
fewer than 20 percent...were ultimately granted asylum'' and
only ``28 percent of cases decided on their merits are grants
of relief''. Alejandro N. Mayorkas also admitted that ``the
fact that migrants can wait in the United States for years
before being issued a final order denying relief, and that
many such individuals are never actually removed, likely
incentivizes migrants to make the journey north''.
(6) During Alejandro N. Mayorkas's tenure as Secretary of
Homeland Security, approximately 450,000 unaccompanied alien
children have been encountered at the Southwest border, and
the vast majority have been released into the United States.
As a result, there has been a dramatic upsurge in migrant
children being employed in dangerous and exploitative jobs in
the United States.
(7) Alejandro N. Mayorkas's failure to enforce the law,
drawing millions of illegal aliens to the Southwest border,
has led to the reassignment of U.S. Border Patrol agents from
protecting the border from illicit drug trafficking to
processing illegal aliens for release. As a result, during
Alejandro N. Mayorkas's tenure as Secretary of Homeland
Security, the flow of fentanyl across the border and other
dangerous drugs, both at and between ports of entry, has
increased dramatically. U.S. Customs and Border Protection
seized approximately 4,800 pounds of fentanyl in fiscal year
2020, approximately 11,200 pounds in fiscal year 2021,
approximately 14,700 pounds in fiscal year 2022, and
approximately 27,000 pounds in fiscal year 2023. Over 70,000
Americans died from fentanyl poisoning in 2022, and fentanyl
is now the number one killer of Americans between the ages of
18 and 45.
(8) Alejandro N. Mayorkas has degraded public safety by
leaving wide swaths of the border effectively unpatrolled as
U.S. Border Patrol agents are diverted from guarding the
border to processing for unlawful release the heightening
waves of apprehended aliens (many who now seek out agents for
the purpose of surrendering with the now reasonable
expectation of being released and granted work
authorization), and Federal Air Marshals are diverted from
protecting the flying public to assist in such processing.
(9) During Alejandro N. Mayorkas's tenure as Secretary of
Homeland Security, the U.S. Border Patrol has encountered an
increasing number of aliens on the terrorist watch list. In
fiscal years 2017 through 2020 combined, 11 noncitizens on
the terrorist watchlist were caught attempting to cross the
Southwest border between ports of entry. That number
increased to 15 in fiscal year 2021, 98 in fiscal year 2022,
169 in fiscal year 2023, and 49 so far in fiscal year 2024.
Additionally, in United States v. Texas, 599 U.S. 670
(2023), the United States Supreme Court heard a case
involving Alejandro N. Mayorkas's refusal to comply with
certain Federal immigration laws that are at issue in this
impeachment. The Supreme Court held that States have no
standing to seek judicial relief to compel Alejandro N.
Mayorkas to comply with certain legal requirements contained
in the Immigration and Nationality Act. However, the Supreme
Court held that ``even though the federal courts lack Article
III jurisdiction over this suit, other forums remain open for
examining the Executive Branch's enforcement policies. For
example, Congress possesses an array of tools to analyze and
influence those policies [and] those are political checks for
the political process''. One such critical tool for Congress
to influence the Executive Branch to comply with the
immigration laws of the United States is impeachment. The
dissenting Justice noted, ``The Court holds Texas lacks
standing to challenge a federal policy that inflicts
substantial harm on the State and its residents by releasing
illegal aliens with criminal convictions for serious crimes.
In order to reach this conclusion, the Court...holds that the
only limit on the power of a President to disobey a law like
the important provision at issue is Congress' power to employ
the weapons of inter-branch warfare...''. As the dissenting
Justice explained, ``Congress may wield what the Solicitor
General described as `political...tools'--which presumably
means such things as...impeachment and removal''. Indeed,
during oral argument, the Justice who authored the majority
opinion stated to the Solicitor General, ``I think your
position is, instead of judicial review, Congress has to
resort to shutting down the government or impeachment or
dramatic steps...''. Here, in light of the inability of
injured parties to seek judicial relief to remedy the refusal
of Alejandro N. Mayorkas to comply with Federal immigration
laws, impeachment is Congress's only viable option.
In all of this, Alejandro N. Mayorkas willfully and
systemically refused to comply with the immigration laws,
failed to control the border to the detriment of national
security, compromised public safety, and violated the rule of
law and separation of powers in the Constitution, to the
manifest injury of the people of the United States.
Wherefore Alejandro N. Mayorkas, by such conduct, has
demonstrated that he will remain a threat to national and
border security, the safety of the United States people, and
the Constitution if allowed to remain in office, and has
acted in a manner grossly incompatible with his duties and
the rule of law. Alejandro N. Mayorkas thus warrants
impeachment and trial, removal from office, and
disqualification to hold and enjoy any office of honor,
trust, or profit under the United States.

article ii: breach of public trust

[[Page H451]]

and information, hampering OIG's ability to effectively
perform its vital investigations, audits, inspections, and
other reviews of agency programs and operations to satisfy
the OIG's obligations under section 402(b) of title 5, United
States Code, in part, to Congress.
Additionally, in his conduct while Secretary of Homeland
Security, Alejandro N. Mayorkas has breached the public trust
by his willful refusal to fulfill his statutory ``duty to
control and guard the boundaries and borders of the United
States against the illegal entry of aliens'' as set forth in
section 103(a)(5) of the Immigration and Nationality Act.
Alejandro N. Mayorkas inherited what his first Chief of the
U.S. Border Patrol called, ``arguably the most effective
border security in our nation's history''. Alejandro N.
Mayorkas, however, proceeded to abandon effective border
security initiatives without engaging in adequate alternative
efforts that would enable DHS to maintain control of the
border and guard against illegal entry, and despite clear
evidence of the devastating consequences of his actions, he
failed to take action to fulfill his statutory duty to
control the border. According to his first Chief of the U.S.
Border Patrol, Alejandro N. Mayorkas ``summarily rejected''
the ``multiple options to reduce the illegal
entries...through proven programs and consequences'' provided
by civil service staff at DHS. Despite clear evidence of the
devastating consequences of his actions, he failed to take
action to fulfill his statutory duty to control the border,
in that, among other things:
(1) Alejandro N. Mayorkas terminated the Migrant Protection
Protocols (hereinafter referred to as ``MPP''). In Texas v.
Biden, 20 F.4th 928 (2021), the United States Court of
Appeals for the Fifth Circuit explained that ``[t]he district
court...pointed to evidence that `the termination of MPP has
contributed to the current border surge'...(citing DHS's own
previous determinations that MPP had curbed the rate of
illegal entries)''. The district court had also ``pointed out
that the number of `enforcement encounters'--that is,
instances where immigration officials encounter immigrants
attempting to cross the southern border without
documentation--had `skyrocketed' since MPP's termination''.
(2) Alejandro N. Mayorkas terminated contracts for border
wall construction.
(3) Alejandro N. Mayorkas terminated asylum cooperative
agreements that would have equitably shared the burden of
complying with international asylum accords.
In all of this, Alejandro N. Mayorkas breached the public
trust by knowingly making false statements to Congress and
the American people and avoiding lawful oversight in order to
obscure the devastating consequences of his willful and
systemic refusal to comply with the law and carry out his
statutory duties. He has also breached the public trust by
willfully refusing to carry out his statutory duty to control
the border and guard against illegal entry, notwithstanding
the calamitous consequences of his abdication of that duty.
Wherefore Alejandro N. Mayorkas, by such conduct, has
demonstrated that he will remain a threat to national and
border security, the safety of the American people, and to
the Constitution if allowed to remain in office, and has
acted in a manner grossly incompatible with his duties and
the rule of law. Alejandro N. Mayorkas thus warrants
impeachment and trial, removal from office, and
disqualification to hold and enjoy any office of honor,
trust, or profit under the United States.

The SPEAKER pro tempore (Ms. Malliotakis). Pursuant to House
Resolution 996, the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended
by the Committee on Homeland Security is adopted.
The resolution shall be debatable for 2 hours equally divided and
controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on
Homeland Security or their respective designees.
The gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Green) and the gentleman from
Mississippi (Mr. Thompson) each will control 1 hour.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Tennessee.

{time} 1445

General Leave

Mr. GREEN of Tennessee. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that
all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend
their remarks and include extraneous material on H. Res. 863.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Tennessee?
There was no objection.
Mr. GREEN of Tennessee. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I
may consume.
Madam Speaker, I rise today to present two Articles of Impeachment
against Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas.
Article I charges him with willful and systemic refusal to comply
with the law, and Article II charges him with breach of public trust.
Since Secretary Mayorkas took office, we have all watched the
unprecedented crisis at our borders unfold. We have seen the chaos.
Under Secretary Mayorkas' watch, CBP has reported more than 8.5
million encounters at our borders, including more than 7 million
apprehensions at the southwest border. Even more terrifying is the
approximate 1.8 million known got-aways that Border Patrol agents
detect but are unable to apprehend.
Millions of those inadmissible aliens who are encountered are
eventually released into our communities. This has never happened
before in the history of the country, and it doesn't happen by
accident.
For nearly a year, the House Committee on Homeland Security conducted
a thorough, fair, and comprehensive investigation into the causes,
costs, and consequences of the border crisis. Our Members saw firsthand
numerous parts of the southwest border, spent time with law enforcement
officers on the front lines, and spoke with real Americans about how
the crisis is affecting them.
We also conducted a field hearing and roundtable on the border that
our Democrat colleagues refused to attend, burying their heads in the
sand as if there wasn't a crisis. We published seven total reports,
totaling nearly 400 pages, to which Democrats never had a single
substantive response.
Instead, their only response was to simply shout MAGA louder and
louder, as if that is a meaningful response to the millions of
Americans suffering from this crisis.
We held many hearings at the subcommittee and full committee level,
and we heard from a variety of witnesses, including former senior DHS
enforcement officials, State attorneys general, and victims who have
been impacted by Secretary Mayorkas' border crisis. Democrats
consistently claimed these hearings were a waste of time. Tell that to
the families of the 150,000 Americans who died from fentanyl poisoning
in 2021 and 2022 alone.
Throughout this investigation and subsequent impeachment proceedings,
we found that Secretary Mayorkas' willful and systemic refusal to
comply with the law and his breach of public trust are responsible for
this historic crisis. However, for almost a year, Democrats have turned
a blind eye to the victims of the border crisis while berating us for
spending what they believed was too much time investigating Secretary
Mayorkas' lawless handling of our sovereign borders.
Keep that in mind when you hear them claim now this impeachment is
somehow rushed. The truth is this process has been painstakingly
thorough. Unlike House Democrats, we take the use of impeachment
extremely seriously.
While I do not wish to be standing here presenting these Articles of
Impeachment today, we have exhausted all other options. Our oath to the
Constitution now requires us to exercise this solemn duty.
Secretary Mayorkas has explicitly refused to comply with the law. His
refusal to obey the law has led to the death of our fellow citizens,
and he no longer deserves to keep his job.
What is unique here in the history of impeachments is that the
Supreme Court, just this summer, denied the affected States judicial
review on many of these issues, but with the understanding that the
result of doing so could mean the impeachment of a Secretary.
In oral argument, Justice Kavanaugh explained how he understood the
position of the Biden administration if judicial review was denied,
saying: ``I think your position is, instead of judicial review,
Congress has to resort to shutting down the government or impeachment
or dramatic steps if . . . some administration comes in and says we're
not going to enforce laws or at least not going to enforce the laws to
the degree that Congress by law has said the laws should be enforced .
. . `'
In response, the Biden administration's solicitor general agreed,
saying: ``Well, I think that if those dramatic steps would be
warranted, it would be in the face of a dramatic abdication of
statutory responsibility by the executive.''

[[Page H452]]

Today's Articles of Impeachment outline exactly that; a dramatic
abdication of statutory responsibility by Secretary Mayorkas has
occurred.
Of the Articles of Impeachment's 20 pages, 6 are solely dedicated to
the laws Secretary Mayorkas has violated, while 4 more document his
lies to Congress and the American people and the violation of his
statutory duty to control and guard our borders.
We identify numerous unambiguous provisions of the Immigration and
Nationality Act he has refused to enforce, laws requiring him to detain
inadmissible aliens and limit his ability to grant parole. We also
highlight how programs he has created, such as various mass parole
programs, are void of congressional authority.
Secretary Mayorkas is the very type of public official the Framers
feared: someone who would cast aside the laws passed by a coequal
branch of government and replace those with his own preferences,
hurting his fellow Americans in the process.
He has directed the release of millions of inadmissible aliens into
the country in violation of the INA, which requires them to be
detained.
He has abused the statute limiting parole to be issued only on a
case-by-case and temporary basis for very specific and limited
reasons--instead overseeing more than 1.5 million paroles.

He has created new categorical parole programs in defiance of the
statute to further his mass release agenda, and he has directed
Immigration and Customs Enforcement personnel not to detain all manner
of illegal aliens, including criminal aliens. In his September 2021
enforcement guidance, the Secretary even directed that unlawful
presence in the country was no longer sufficient grounds for removal
and that criminal convictions alone were not enough to warrant ICE
attention.

This is not about policy differences. We certainly object
to Secretary Mayorkas' policies, but this goes far deeper.
According to the Democrat-led committees that investigated
Iran-Contra: ``Government officials must observe the law,
even when they disagree with it,'' or when they think that,
``Congress is to blame for passing laws that run counter to
administration policy.''

Again, we are here because our oath and our duty compel us to be
here. The actions and decisions of Secretary Mayorkas have left us with
no other option than to proceed with Articles of Impeachment. That is
why we must remove him from office. The time for accountability is now.
Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time
as I may consume.
Madam Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to H. Res. 863 and the
Republicans' sham impeachment of Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas.
Madam Speaker, what is happening here today is a travesty. It is an
affront to the United States Constitution, it will do nothing to solve
challenges at our border, and it is a baseless attack on a dedicated
public servant.
Republican Members of Congress, sworn to support and defend the
Constitution, are rejecting the Framers' intent and over two centuries
of precedent in favor of a politically motivated sham impeachment.
Republicans have failed to make a constitutionally viable case for
impeachment.
Neither of the impeachment charges in H. Res. 863 are a high crime
and misdemeanor under Article II of the Constitution. Impeachment over
mere policy disputes was deliberately rejected by the Framers, and
those disputes are best settled in our court system.
In fact, the policy disputes identified in the Articles of
Impeachment have already been addressed by the courts. The courts have
either decided in the Biden administration's favor, or the disputes are
still working their way through the system.
Republicans are trying to relitigate court decisions through a sham
impeachment, but the Constitution doesn't allow that.
Constitutional experts testified before the Committee on Homeland
Security that, for a breach of public trust to rise to a high crime and
misdemeanor, it would require conduct intended to serve an official's
own benefit or the benefit of a foreign power.
Secretary Mayorkas has done nothing of the sort.
Republicans have misrepresented the law and Secretary Mayorkas'
record to justify this sham impeachment.
Secretary Mayorkas has served our country honorably over 30 years as
a prosecutor and in leadership roles at the Department of Homeland
Security. He has been a tireless advocate for the more than 260,000 DHS
employees working to secure the homeland every day. He has leveraged
all the authorities at his disposal while using every resource provided
by Congress to secure the border.
Under Secretary Mayorkas' leadership, DHS removed record levels of
migrants from the U.S., detained even more people than Congress had
provided funding for, and prevented record levels of fentanyl from
entering our communities.
If House Republicans were serious about improving conditions along
the border, they would provide the Department the funding necessary to
do so. They have not. At every opportunity, Republicans have refused to
provide resources to the Department of Homeland Security.
If House Republicans were serious about improving conditions at the
border, they would support the bipartisan Senate border bill. They have
not.
Republicans take their orders from Donald Trump, and he told them to
reject the Senate bill. Republicans have been trying to kill the bill
before they even knew what was in it.
The Republican majority is running a do-nothing Congress.
This sham impeachment effort isn't really about border security. It
will do nothing to solve the border challenges we face. The truth is
the extreme MAGA Republicans running the House of Representatives don't
want solutions; they want a political issue.
House Republicans want to distort the Constitution and the
Secretary's record to cover up their inability and unwillingness to
work with Democrats to strengthen border security. It is about
Republican politics and subversion of the Constitution.
Bipartisan constitutional law and impeachment experts agree the
Secretary has not committed an impeachable offense. Former Secretary of
Homeland Security Michael Chertoff agrees, and even some of my
Republican colleagues here in the House agree.
The gentleman from California (Mr. McClintock) said in a memorandum
to House Republican colleagues:

The problem is that [the impeachment articles] fail to
identify an impeachable crime.

The gentleman from California is right. I suspect some of his
Republican colleagues agree, even if they won't admit it.
Secretary Mayorkas has faithfully implemented the administration's
border policies consistent with the funding Congress has provided, just
like every other Secretary of Homeland Security before him, Democrat or
Republican.
During consideration in the Homeland Security Committee last week,
Republicans improperly shut down the markup and blocked Democrats from
offering amendments to the resolution.

Republicans couldn't bear to consider amendments to their poorly
drafted Articles of Impeachment. They silenced Democrats who attempted
to inject a dose of reality into the chaotic proceedings.
Yesterday, before the Rules Committee, Republicans again failed to
make their case, relying on partisan rhetoric and obvious
misinformation, because neither the law, nor the facts are on their
side.
The truth is Republicans' actions show they don't have faith in their
own case against the Secretary. That is why they lack the courage of
their convictions to see their markup to the end.
This nonsense has to stop, and it should stop here. Republicans need
to start doing the work Americans sent them here to do.
Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to honor their oath to the
Constitution, listen to the constitutional experts, listen to your own
Republican colleagues who know H. Res. 863 is baseless. Drop this sham
impeachment.
Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. GREEN of Tennessee. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the
gentlewoman from Georgia (Ms. Greene).
Ms. GREENE of Georgia. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for
yielding.

[[Page H453]]

Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of H. Res. 863, impeaching
Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas.
Alejandro Mayorkas is guilty of aiding and abetting the complete
invasion of our country by criminals, gang members, terrorists,
murderers, rapists, and over 10 million people from over 160 countries
into American communities all across the United States.
His willful refusal to secure the border has bankrupted communities,
closed down U.S. schools that our children attend, drowned hospitals,
and incapacitated law enforcement, while empowering criminal cartels
and illegal aliens.
My Democrat colleagues argue that one cannot be impeached over policy
differences. Well, I argue that breaking our laws is more than just
policy differences. Mr. Speaker, 300 dead Americans every day from
fentanyl poisoning is more than just a policy difference; it is murder.
Today, in my own office, narcotics law enforcement officers from
Georgia told me that 7 out of 10 doses of Oxycontin or Percocet sold on
the street are laced with fentanyl, and that comes directly across the
border from Mexico.
Secretary Mayorkas has violated numerous provisions in the
Immigration and Nationality Act, including unlawfully directing DHS to
mass-parole illegal aliens into the U.S. when Federal law specifically
prohibits this, and unlawfully implementing catch and release policies
when Federal law specifically mandates the detention and removal of
inadmissible aliens.
In fact, detention facilities under Mayorkas have been mostly vacant
because of such unlawful policies. The largest detention facility in
California, which can house almost 2,000 illegals, is currently housing
only 6 illegal aliens. He has violated his oath of office and breached
the public trust by willfully refusing to ensure the laws passed by
Congress and signed into law by the President are faithfully executed
as required by Article II of the Constitution.
He has allowed over 10 million illegal border crossers to invade our
country, approximately 2 million of whom are known got-aways. These are
people who have completely evaded U.S. authorities and are roaming the
interior of American communities, assaulting, raping, and murdering
Americans. God help us if we have a terrorist attack on our land.

{time} 1500

His subversion of the law has resulted in the highest number of
illegal alien encounters in a single day, the highest number of illegal
alien encounters in a single month, and the highest number of illegal
alien encounters in a single year, surpassing every national record on
each account.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
Mr. GREEN of Tennessee. Madam Speaker, I yield an additional 15
seconds to the gentlewoman from Georgia.
Ms. GREENE of Georgia. Madam Speaker, his willful refusal to enforce
the law has resulted in the most egregious national security crisis in
the history of our country.
Democrats are in a quandary. Either they must own the policies of
murder and crime of American citizens, or they can admit Secretary
Mayorkas has broken Federal laws and vote to impeach Secretary
Mayorkas.
Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Madam Speaker, though she sits on the
Homeland Security Committee, Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene has
raised doubts about 9/11 to the false assertion that 9/11 was done by
our own government. She said that is all true. She also thinks Jewish
space lasers cause wildfires. She fundraises off defunding the FBI. She
is a person whose advice Republicans are taking today on this
impeachment.
Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California (Mr.
Schiff).
Mr. SCHIFF. Madam Speaker, I welcome my colleagues to another week of
impeachment unlimited.
Having no legislative accomplishments to show for their 14 months in
power, Republicans are voting on yet another pointless resolution.
Unable to provide any evidence against President Biden, they have now
decided to impeach someone else instead. We have serious challenges at
the border--no one denies that--but these are not serious people.
By this standard put forward by this hapless majority, every single
DHS Secretary would have been impeached. This is a policy and political
dispute, not a high crime or misdemeanor.
When an administration official tries to extort a foreign leader into
helping them cheat in an election or leads an insurrection against our
government, then impeach them. Until then, stop wasting everyone's
time.
I have known Ale Mayorkas since we were prosecutors together. He is a
person of great integrity and devotion to this country.
This impeachment is baseless, it is unconstitutional, and it should
be defeated.
Mr. GREEN of Tennessee. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the
gentleman from Texas (Mr. McCaul).
Mr. McCAUL. Madam Speaker, Secretary Mayorkas took an oath to protect
our Nation from all enemies, foreign and domestic. He has violated that
oath and the public trust.
Today, I intend to personally uphold the oath of office that I swore
to my country.
In my 25 years of dealing with the border as a Federal prosecutor and
the former chairman of this committee, I have never seen it this
broken. That is because of one man's actions: his refusal to enforce
the law, his rescission of successful policies like remain in Mexico,
and his breach of public trust. His dereliction of duty has led to 8
million encounters, 300 on the terror watch list, and 2.3 million
aliens released into the interior, enough to fill 13 States. Another
200,000 young Americans have died due to fentanyl poisoning.
These numbers are clear. Secretary Mayorkas is the architect of
destruction, and the legal justification for his impeachment is strong.
In the Supreme Court decision The United States v. The State of
Texas, the Court examined a statute that mandated the government shall
take into custody any alien that has committed an aggravated felony. It
is not discretionary. It is mandatory. By failing to uphold this law,
he has released dangerous and violent criminals into our communities
and has put every American life at risk.
Supreme Court Justice Story in 1833 said: ``Where a lord admiral has
neglected to safeguard the seas, that shall be deemed an impeachable
offense.'' That is exactly the case we have here. Secretary Mayorkas,
charged with the defense of air, land, and sea, has failed to defend
our borders.
The Founders clearly believed impeachable offenses included neglect
of duty, violation of public trust, and injury to society.
When asked before the Supreme Court if impeachment is a proper
remedy, President Biden's own solicitor general said: In the face of a
dramatic abdication of statutory responsibility by the executive
branch, such steps would be warranted.
Secretary Mayorkas is guilty of those impeachable offenses. He is
destroying the fabric of this Nation. Americans agree.
Today, I will proudly stand up for our Nation by voting to remove him
from office.
Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Madam Speaker, Secretary Mayorkas has
invested significantly in stopping dangerous drugs, like fentanyl, from
entering the country and launched several efforts targeting smugglers,
gangs, and cartels.
Under Secretary Mayorkas' leadership, we have more personnel,
technology, infrastructure, and resources on our borders than ever.
Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Nevada (Ms.
Titus).
Ms. TITUS. Madam Speaker, considering this impeachment resolution is
the fastest I have seen the House GOP move all session. That is because
there has been no collection of evidence, only the manipulation of it.
There has been no meaningful bipartisan engagement, only partisan
political stunts. There has been no due process. Instead, it is a
deliberate disregard for the basis of our legal system.
It has no constitutional precedent or basis, no real backing by
Senate GOP counterparts who are going to hold the trial, no meaningful
engagement with policy, and no support from respected legal scholars,
political pundits, nor former DHS directors.

[[Page H454]]

History will remember this for what it is, an appeasement of the most
extreme members of the MAGA base, and put very simply, the brownnosing
of a man with 91 indictments, several convictions, and two
impeachments.
Mr. GREEN of Tennessee. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the
gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Brecheen).
Mr. BRECHEEN. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of this impeachment
resolution.
As Chairman Green of the Homeland Security Committee has reminded our
committee often in recent weeks, James Madison, the father of our
Constitution, said: ``If an unworthy man be continued in office by an
unworthy President, the House of Representatives can at any time
impeach him, and the Senate can remove him, whether the President
chooses or not.''
This impeachment is not about policy difference, though we have them.
It is absolutely because Secretary Mayorkas refuses to enforce the laws
that are a part of our Nation's fabric. The rule of law matters. Nobody
is above it, including Secretary Mayorkas.
Contrary to what he and the President publicly claim, no new laws are
needed to stop this crisis. They have created it. Section 212 of the
Immigration and Nationality Act already grants them the authority to
holler halt.
We know Secretary Mayorkas is aware of this provision. On day 5 of
the Biden administration, the President suspended entry by those coming
from the U.K., Ireland, Brazil, and South Africa. Secretary Mayorkas
has left us with no other option other than impeachment because he
refuses to enforce the law.
Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Madam Speaker, Republicans say this
impeachment is not about policy disagreements, but every argument they
make is about policies.
Secretary Mayorkas has taken action to secure the border, but he has
used different, more humane policies that are not impeachable.
Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from
Massachusetts (Ms. Clark), our Democratic whip.
Ms. CLARK of Massachusetts. Madam Speaker, we all agree that
something needs to be done to fix our broken immigration system, but
when it comes to doing the work, finding the solutions, House Democrats
have come to the table, President Biden has come to the table, and the
Senate has come to the table. Then there is the House GOP.
The MAGA extremists hold up our national security priorities, our
commitment to our allies, and to our own readiness, supposedly to
strike a deal on immigration. The President says let's get it done and
then he did.
Instead of pursuing a bipartisan compromise, instead of strengthening
the security of our border, advancing humane solutions, and doing their
jobs, they are now impeaching the Secretary of Homeland Security
without a single allegation of any impeachable crime, not one.
Impeaching a cabinet member without any evidence of high crimes or
misdemeanors, that is the breach of public trust here.
The plan is to impeach the Secretary. Then what? Will the majority
invest in Border Patrol? No. Their dream budget fires 2,000 Border
Patrol agents. Just yesterday, Speaker Johnson ridiculed the men and
women of Border Patrol for supporting the Senate bill saying it is
probably because it would give them a fair wage. This majority's
contempt for working people, even those whose mission is to carry out
border security, has no bounds.
This extreme MAGA majority has repeatedly rejected funding for
technology that is needed to stop the flow of fentanyl.
Here we are. The extreme MAGA majority, what are they going to do
about the border? Only this sham impeachment.
They have told us what the future holds. As one Member across the
aisle put it, they oppose action on immigration, because it would boost
Biden against Trump. That is all they care about. That is what this
sham is about, choosing extremism over country, stunts over solutions,
and politics over people. That is a breach of trust we all must reject.
Mr. GREEN of Tennessee. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the
gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Lee).
Ms. LEE of Florida. Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of the
resolution to impeach Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas.
We are here today to address one of the most serious responsibilities
that we can undertake as Congress, the impeachment of Secretary
Alejandro Mayorkas.
The Committee on Homeland Security has worked diligently to
investigate and consider the causes and the consequences of the
catastrophe at our southern border, and it has concluded that it is
necessary and appropriate to pursue this impeachment.
Since President Biden and Secretary Mayorkas took office, there have
been over 8.3 million illegal crossings nationwide. We have seen the
devastating effects of human trafficking, of fentanyl trafficking, and
what happens when we cede operational control of our southern border to
the Mexican drug cartels.
Secretary Mayorkas has refused to enforce the duly enacted laws
passed by this Congress. By doing so, he has endangered our homeland, a
direct violation of his oath of office. Even in the face of irrefutable
evidence to the contrary, he has given false testimony to Congress,
claiming that the border is secure. He has defied court orders ordering
the Secretary to abandon the illegal programs and policies that he has
implemented, which incentivize illegal immigration.
House Republicans know that border security is national security, and
the crisis at our border is a critical threat to our national security
and the safety of the American people.
Secretary Mayorkas has willfully and deliberately refused to uphold
the laws of the United States, he has violated his oath of office, and
he has breached the public trust.
Congress has a constitutional duty to secure our border and to ensure
our communities are safe. We cannot allow an executive branch agency
head to defy the lawful authority of Congress and the courts in pursuit
of policies that are contrary to law and endangering Americans. That is
why Secretary Mayorkas must be impeached.
Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Madam Speaker, the border is not open.
In fact, under Secretary Mayorkas' leadership, this administration has
removed, returned, or expelled more migrants in 3 years than the Trump
administration did in 4 years.
Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California
(Mr. Correa), who is the ranking member on our Border Security and
Enforcement Subcommittee.

{time} 1515

Mr. CORREA. Madam Speaker, we have something in common with my
colleagues on the other side of the aisle.
This country, Main Street, and every one of our districts have a
challenge with fentanyl. We have all witnessed the deaths in our
communities of good, young men and women from this scourge of fentanyl.
Nonetheless, Secretary Mayorkas is doing his job.
Madam Speaker, I want you to look at this graph. The seizures at the
border of fentanyl: 2019, 2,800 pounds; 2023, 27,000 pounds of fentanyl
were seized.
Madam Speaker, I just got back again from visiting the border. I went
to San Ysidro, and, again, I asked the men and women in uniform: What
do you need from us to double these numbers?
It was a simple answer: We want more resources. We want more
personnel, more drug-sniffing dogs, and we want more equipment.
Some of those agents were struggling. They were working double
shifts. Women, moms, men, and fathers were saying: We don't have time
for families. We are going to have to find another job.
Right now we have a solution. We have legislation that the Senate has
worked on with Senate Republicans, Senate Democrats, and the President
supporting a solution that will bring resources to the border, and the
majority party here refuses to bring that legislation forward for a
vote.
Who is derelict in their duty?
We must step up and make sure that we protect Main Street and we help
Secretary Mayorkas do his job and double these numbers.
Mr. GREEN of Tennessee. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the
gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Strong).

[[Page H455]]

Mr. STRONG. Madam Speaker, today's legislation is about delivering
accountability on behalf of the local and State leaders unable to bear
the weight of thousands of illegal immigrants flooding their
communities, hospitals, and schools; on behalf of the thousands of
families who have lost loved ones at the hands of illegal immigrants;
and on behalf of hundreds of Border Patrol agents stripped of their
tools to do their job.
The situation at the border cannot continue. I have seen it firsthand
during my trips to the southern border. Mayorkas' refusal to enforce
the laws of our Nation has encouraged millions of illegal aliens from
160 different countries to cross the border. Over 85 percent of them
are being released into the United States.
This is in clear violation of Federal immigration law. Failure to act
is not an option. The yearlong investigation held by the committee
confirmed what every American already knew to be true.
The actions that we will take today against Secretary Mayorkas are
warranted and utterly urgent. Our country is under attack, and the
Secretary of Homeland Security is working against America.
Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to act at this critical time.
Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Madam Speaker, if my Republican
colleagues were serious about the border, then they would drop this
baseless impeachment and bring up the Senate's bipartisan border
agreement for debate.
Be that as it may, they aren't serious about reform. Speaker Johnson
made it clear that the bill was dead on arrival before he saw the text
of the bill.
Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Illinois
(Mrs. Ramirez).
Mrs. RAMIREZ. Madam Speaker, on the first Homeland Security Committee
hearing, Professor Bowman, an expert in impeachments, made it clear
that policy differences are not a legitimate basis for impeachment.
There is no legitimate basis for impeachment, yet here we are.
Why?
It is because Republicans believe persecution is a substitute for
policymaking.
I guess when you can't legislate, you punish, right?
Persecution has become the go-to strategy to score political points.
We have seen that on Congresspersons Omar, Schiff, Tlaib, and even
their own Speaker McCarthy, government employees, immigrants, and now
Secretary Mayorkas.
While great for political theater, persecution and punishment do not
solve problems. Policy does. Nonetheless, Republicans are not
interested in policy. They shut us down for presenting policy. They
even killed a supplemental they had negotiated for months.
They are just desperately deflecting attention from their failure to
govern to secure their own empty reelections.
If they were serious, then we would be debating policies to address
the humanitarian crisis and the root causes of migration and fentanyl.
Clearly they are not.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Madam Speaker, I yield an additional 15
seconds to the gentlewoman from Illinois.
Mrs. RAMIREZ. Clearly, they are not serious about solutions, just
chaos.
Mr. GREEN of Tennessee. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the
gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Bishop).
Mr. BISHOP of North Carolina. Madam Speaker, many have said what the
issue is. Many have mischaracterized it, in my judgment.
The issue presented by the Articles of Impeachment and why they
should be adopted by the House is not a matter of policy, it is not a
matter of maladministration, it is not a matter of incompetence, it is
not a matter of neglect, and it is not even a matter of refusal to
enforce the law.
It was stated succinctly and aptly in the District Court opinion that
ultimately led to the United States Supreme Court last summer in the
United States v. Texas.
The core of the dispute is whether the executive branch may require
its officials to act in a manner that conflicts with a statutory
mandate imposed by Congress.
It may not.
You see, Madam Speaker, the Secretary of Homeland Security, Alejandro
Mayorkas, issued guidelines--administrative law--instructing the
Department of Homeland Security not to detain criminal aliens nor those
ordered finally removed. That is what he did, and that was flatly
contradictory to statutes passed by the Congress in the mid-1990s.
We are a nation of laws. The Supreme Court has said it cannot referee
this dispute, it is up to Congress, and the Congress has but one means
in this situation to vindicate the law. It cannot help the situation by
shutting down the government or by cutting off funding. There is no new
Cabinet Secretary to refuse to confirm in the Senate.
There is but one means: the impeachment of the Secretary who
purported to issue law defying the Congress. That must result in his
impeachment if the law is to have any force and if the Congress is to
remain of any significance in the jurisprudence in the law of the
United States.
Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Madam Speaker, the Republicans highlight
the Secretary's enforcement guidelines as an example of breaking the
law. They fail to mention that the conservative Sixth Circuit Court of
Appeals said: ``The guidance does not necessarily violate a single word
of the statute.''
The Sixth Circuit also found that the provision of immigration law
that Republicans frequently cite does not ``. . . creates a judicially
enforceable mandate that the Department arrest or remove certain
noncitizens.''
Madam Speaker I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr.
Ivey).
Mr. IVEY. Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for yielding.
The power to impeach is one of the greatest constitutional powers
granted to the House of Representatives. This awesome responsibility
should be reserved for high crimes and misdemeanors.
Nonetheless, House Republicans have decided to abuse that
responsibility for a cheap political stunt.
House Republicans have not alleged an impeachable offense. Policy
disagreements are not impeachable. Even if you strongly believe border
security should be improved, Madam Speaker, that does not provide
grounds to remove a Cabinet official.
That is why former Republican Secretary Michael Chertoff said that
Mayorkas hasn't committed an impeachable offense. Even law professor
Jonathan Turley has said that Secretary Mayorkas' alleged actions are
not impeachable and fail to amount to high crimes and misdemeanors
warranting his impeachment.
Republicans offered no constitutional scholars as witnesses during
their two impeachment hearings, but rather relied on Republican States
attorneys general's testimony, one of which didn't even mention the
word ``impeachment'' in his prepared statements.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Madam Speaker, I yield an additional 30
seconds to the gentleman from Maryland.
Mr. IVEY. This unconstitutional impeachment process has been
predetermined and unjust since it began. It will lower the
constitutional bar for future impeachments, and it will not make our
border more secure. Therefore, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no.''
Mr. GREEN of Tennessee. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the
gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Crane).
Mr. CRANE. Madam Speaker, Article IV, Section 4 of the Constitution,
often known as the invasion clause, says that this government will
protect every State from invasion.
That is something that clearly this Secretary is in complete
dereliction of duty of, and I know that he swore an oath to protect and
defend the Constitution.
Now, I am not sure how many Americans have to die of fentanyl or have
their kids raped and murdered by MS-13 gang members. We had one in
Homeland Security just a couple weeks ago begging us to do something
about this absolutely atrocious leadership from the Secretary.
Nonetheless, it is high time that this individual be held accountable
for his

[[Page H456]]

complete dereliction of duty at our southern border.
I urge my colleagues to support this resolution.
The last thing I want to say is that I think it tells you everything
you need to know when my colleagues say that it doesn't matter if you
impeach Secretary Mayorkas, we are just going to have somebody come in
and do the same exact job.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. GREEN of Tennessee. Madam Speaker, I yield an additional 15
seconds to the gentleman from Arizona.
Mr. CRANE. Thank you for saying the quiet part out loud.
Yes, your policies are so bad that no matter whom you put in there it
will cause the same amount of damage to the American people. The people
of this country are watching. Let's get this done.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded to direct their remarks
to the Chair.
Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Madam Speaker, 90 percent of fentanyl
seized is interdicted at ports of entry, mostly in passenger vehicles
driven by U.S. citizens and lawful residents, not migrants. If we
invest in our ports of entry instead of pursuing this sham impeachment,
we can scan more of these vehicles.
Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms.
Jackson Lee).
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Speaker, smoke and mirrors have never been the
foundation of the Constitution. That is all we have today to
misrepresent to the American people that we are doing serious work.
It comes to mind as to whether or not Secretary Mayorkas is being
charged with Articles of Impeachment because he is a Cuban immigrant
who came to the United States with his family as political refugees,
that they spent time fleeing the Nazis, and that he came here to do his
very best for the American people. Yet we attempt to charge him with
willful violation of the law.
Operational control of the border means zero persons coming across.
This has not been the case as relates to any Secretary no matter what
administration. Yet we have failed in this process of false smoke and
mirrors to allow us to be able to articulate any charge that might
constitute high crimes and misdemeanors. We failed to provide evidence
to support the charges such as they are.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Madam Speaker, I yield an additional 30
seconds to the gentlewoman from Texas.
Ms. JACKSON LEE. We have failed to name the proper target for
impeachment in a policy dispute. We have failed to process anything
against Secretary Mayorkas, and we could not, in any way, bring
anything to suggest that he violated the law or that he benefited from
any aspect of his work.
This Secretary has been denied due process. This is smoke and
mirrors. The Constitution, which is the foundation of this land, is
true. There have been no high crimes and misdemeanors or bribery. This
is an impeachment that should be immediately dismissed.
Madam Speaker, I ask my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the Articles of
Impeachment.
Madam Speaker, it is a sad day that the House has been convened to
consider an impeachment bill against the current Secretary of Homeland
Security--a measure that is without merit or consideration of the
consequences to the agency or how this action may undermine the current
challenges the nation is facing.
While this impeachment resolution bears no meaningful or serious
merits, I offered an amendment for consideration by the Rules Committee
that would strike Article 1 of H. Res 863--Impeaching Alejandro
Nicholas Mayorkas, Secretary of Homeland Security, because he is not
accused of committing any high crimes or misdemeanors.
Article I of the bill accuses him of ``Willful and Systematic Refusal
to Comply with the Law.
Secretary Mayorkas has not committed ``Treason, Bribery, or other
high Crimes and Misdemeanors''--the United States Constitution's
standard, for an impeachment.
Secretary Mayorkas is carrying out his duties faithfully.
House Republicans may not approve of the Biden administration's
policies, but policy differences are not grounds for impeachment under
the Constitution.
House Republicans are trying to distract from their inability to
govern and score political points with their extreme political base by
impeaching the Secretary.
Rather than abusing their power as the majority in the House of
Representatives with an unjustified impeachment process, they should
focus on keeping the government open and join with Democrats to provide
border personnel the funding they need to do their job.
I regret that of the two hearings held that they did not include any
majority witnesses that were Constitutional Scholars nor a minority
hearing to allow opposing views to be aired, nor the target of the
impeachment Secretary Mayorkas being allowed to come before the
committee in his defense.
This is the standard set by prior impeachment proceedings but ignored
by the majority-controlled Homeland Security Committee.
In 1776 the Framers declared the self-evident and later the universal
truth that all persons are created equal and endowed by their Creator
with the inalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of
happiness.
As important, the Framers declared that ``to secure these rights,
governments are instituted among men, deriving their just power from
the consent of the governed.''
This genius of self-government is the Framers' gift to us and
America's gift to the world, and for nearly 250 years the world has
looked upon the United States with wonder, awe, and envy not just for
its awesome powers and achievements, but for being the exemplar to
which most freedom-loving nations aspire.
But as President Lincoln reminded us at Gettysburg, the proposition
that a people can govern themselves is not to be taken for granted; it
is a proposition that will be tested time and again and it is for us,
the living, to highly resolve to commit ourselves to the great task
always before us, that government of the people, by the people, and for
the people not perish from the earth.
As Thomas Paine said in his time, the past fourteen years were times
that tried one's soul. The nation was tested, severely so, by what can
only be described as the modern-day Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse: a
deadly pandemic, economic devastation unseen since the Great
Depression, social justice unrest, and the very real threat of
authoritarianism.
While the threat posed by these challenges are still with us to
varying extent, we can all rejoice that the nation withstood the
challenge, e pluribus unum, by standing together as ``We The People.''
President Lincoln reminded us that in times of testing and challenge
that ``the fiery trial through which we pass will mark us down in honor
or dishonor until the latest generation'' but that so long as the
people ``retain their virtue and vigilance, no administration, by any
extreme of wickedness or folly, can very seriously injure the
government' in the short space of four years.''
And Lincoln was right, for on Election Day 2020, Americans by a
substantial majority, voted to withhold consent to govern from an
incumbent administration and confer it upon another.
That act of self-government and sovereign expression was solemnized
on January 20, 2021, at noon when Joseph R. Biden and Kamala D. Harris
took the oath of office as the 46th President and 59th Vice-President
of the United States.
The Philadelphia Miracle of 1789 endures but only because we
Americans resolve that it does and work to make it so.
The President takes the oath of office pledging to preserve, protect,
and defend the Constitution.
As does every one of my congressional colleagues, I have sacredly
pledged true faith and allegiance in defending the Constitution against
all enemies, foreign and domestic, and to execute the duties of the
office well and faithfully I hold. I do this ever mindful that the
purpose of our form of government is ``to form a more perfect union, to
establish justice, to ensure domestic tranquility, to provide for the
common defense, to promote the general welfare, and to secure the
blessings of liberty for posterity.''
But we all have a responsibility to preserve and strengthen this
constitutional republic and pass it on to the next generation by
engaging in robust, lawful, and peaceful civic activity to hold our
government to account and to peaceably assemble when necessary to
petition for a redress of grievances as shown by the Rev. Dr. Martin
Luther King, Jr. at the March on Washington, following the example of
Mahatma Gandhi; by John Lewis and the Civil Rights foot soldiers at the
Edmund Pettus Bridge in Selma, Alabama; by Elizabeth Cady Staton and
Lucretia Mott at Seneca Falls; by Cesar Chavez leading the fight for
human dignity of farmworkers, and by Black Lives Matter demonstrators
protesting inequalities in the criminal justice system.
For the work of democracy is never complete, our union is always in
the process of being made more perfect.

[[Page H457]]

The ingredients for good policy are competence, capability, and
willingness to put aside partisanship and place national interest
first.
At this moment in our nation's history Republicans are attempting to
impeach Secretary Mayorkas not for any malfeasance or wrongdoing--but
because they disagree with his actions carrying out the Biden
administration's border and immigration policies.
Using policy differences as grounds for impeachment is an abusive
political action that the Founders rejected as antithetical to the U.S.
Constitution.
Republicans have not alleged that the Secretary has committed an
impeacbable offense, so their ``reports'' attempting to legitimize
their unfounded case for impeachment effort contain blatant
misinformation and politically motivated rhetoric, such as criticizing
the termination of harmful but barely utilized Trump-era immigration
and border policies, which were not laws--a fact they either do not
understand or willfully ignore.
Such a political theater has no basis in the history of American
constitutional law, as Article II of the U.S. Constitution sets the
standard for impeachment of ``civil officers'' as ``Treason, Bribery,
or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.''
The Biden administration's departure from the failed, cruel, and
sometimes unlawful border and immigration policies of the previous
administration is certainly not an impeachable offense.
Impeachment under these circumstances is not a constitutional remedy
for political and policy differences.
Impeachment is an extraordinary remedy reserved for the most
egregious political offenses, not policy differences. Indeed, Madison
objected to the term ``maladministration'' being added to the list of
impeachable offenses during the Constitutional Convention because it
would upset the separation of powers.
The first and only impeachment of a Cabinet official occurred in 1876
following extensive evidence of corruption.
Republican Congressman Tom McClintock, the Chairman of the Committee
on the Judiciary's Subcommittee on Immigration Integrity, Security, and
Enforcement, described Rep. Greene's attempt to impeach Secretary
Mayorkas over policy disagreements as a ``perilous path'' for future
governance.
Chairman McClintock went on to argue that the redefinition of
impeachment found in H. Res. 863 ``would utterly destroy the separation
of powers at the heart of our Constitution.
While these are the basis for this Committee not moving forward in
the process, there are compelling reasons why the Committee should be
actively engaged in Immigration Reform.
Impeachment is not a punishment, sought to be inflicted when one
branch of government merely disagrees with or dislikes what a
coordinate branch has done.
It is a serious remedy designed to prevent abuses of power and is
designed to ensure that ours remains a government of, by, and for the
people.
This is about the duty of the President of the United States--you do
not impeach people because you disagree with their approach to their
service to the country or to the provisions on their policy. We do not
impeach people on that basis.
No, this resolution does not provide any meaningful or sincere effort
to protect the American people.
Rather, this resolution sets forth nothing more than a partisan
fishing expedition and should be rebuked as such.
Impeachment is serious, yet here we are engaged in a baseless
political stunt to impeach our current President.
The U.S. Constitution governs the order of our Nation, and it
dictates the work of the Congress.
Article I detail the powers of the House and the exercising of these
powers as they relate to the coordinate, coequa1 branches of
government, codified in Article II, and Article III: three equal
branches of government coexisting and cohesively working to provide
oversight to the respective actions of the Congress, the Executive and
Judiciary.
Specifically, Article I, Section 2, Clause 5 indicates that the
``House of Representatives . . . shall have the sole power of
impeachment.'' Article II states that the ``The President . . . shall
be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason,
Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors''; Article II also
requires that the ``President take care that the laws are faithfully
executed.''
That language is stark and clear--and throughout our history it has
been used in varying periods where the assessment was that the law has
been breached.
Sometimes Congresses are concerned that the weight and view of the
American people should be considered. Sometimes they are moved by the
urgency of the matter.
This has worked, with challenges of course, since 1789, yet the
outright abuse of our constitution to use impeachment as a political
tool is an abomination of our congressional duties.
As constitutional scholars have long laid out the historical
guardrails and mandates upon which must heed, I would like to point to
a few salient remarks from the September 28, 2023, Committee on
Oversight and Accountability hearing entitled ``The Basis for the
Impeachment Inquiry of President Joseph R. Biden'' as reminders for us
all here today.
In the testimony of Michael J. Gerhardt, Burton Craige Distinguished
Professor of Jurisprudence, University of North Carolina at Chapel
Hill, he highlighted the clear warning from Alexander Hamilton in the
Federalist Papers, and what he foresaw in the dangers of trivializing
impeachment through petty partisanship.
As quoted in Alexander Hamilton, No. 65, the Federalist Papers
(1961), he states that impeachment may ``agitate the passions of the
whole community, and to divide it into parties more or less friendly or
inimical to the accused. In many cases it will connect itself with
preexisting factions, and will enlist all their animosities,
partialities, influence, and interest on one side or on the other; and
in such cases there will always be the greatest danger that the
decision will be regulated more by the relative strength of the
parties, than by the demonstrations of innocence or guilt.''
As Professor Gerhardt noted, ``in other words, an impeachment
proceeding, including the initiation of an impeachment inquiry, must
rise above petty partisanship in order to ensure its legitimacy.''
And as aptly stated in the testimony of Johnathon Turley, Shapiro
Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University School
of Law, in highlighting the carefully crafted powers vested in the
House of Representatives pursuant to Art. I, Sec. 2, Cl. 5 is that:
``The Framers debated and crafted this standard and process to avoid
an ``anything goes'' mentality. That was the reason our Framers opposed
the ``maladministration'' standards as too malleable and indeterminate.
While we continue to have passionate and good-faith debates over the
meaning of the high crimes and misdemeanors standard, it is not
intended to give the House carte blanche for any impulsive impeachment
theory.''
Nearly fifty years ago, my predecessor, Barbara Jordan, of Texas'
18th Congressional District, declared, in the first presidential
impeachment inquiry in more than a century, that:
My faith in the Constitution is whole; it is complete, it is total. I
am not going to sit here and be an idle spectator to the diminution,
the subversion, the destruction of the Constitution.'' She noted
``those are impeachable `who behave amiss or betray their public
trust'' (quoting from the North Carolina ratification convention).
In this vein, we should not be here today in efforts to betray and
diminish our Constitution and rule of law.
The unsubstantiated accusations, that the President of the United
States has abused his powers and that his conduct is in dereliction of
his duties as President is flatly outrageous.
When the Framers of our Constitution designed our government, they
bifurcated power between the federal and state governments, and divided
among the branches.
They vested in Congress the capacity to make the laws, and in the
Executive the power to faithfully execute those laws.
Because the House enjoyed a natural superiority, as most
representatives of the passions of the populace, the Framers vested in
the House of Representatives the sole power of impeachment and made the
Senate the judges.
Yet, entirely unlike the incredulous and now confirmed illegality of
President Trump's behavior while in office, President Biden has
certainly not earned the same stain of impeachment from the House of
Representatives and his conduct absolutely does not merit conviction
and removal from office by the Senate.
When the Founders inserted the Impeachment Clause in Article I,
Section 2, Clause 5, they did so to preserve our democracy, protect the
American people, and to prevent the abuses and excesses of the Chief
Executive.
The Constitution has served our nation well for over two hundred
years.
Yes, in order to keep faith with the Framers and with our future, we
must preserve, protect and defend that Constitution and its provisions.
This impeachment resolution, however, is not one that is within the
national interest but a disgrace to our government and its entrusted
duties.
The reason given for the Impeachment is the border crisis, one that
this body has not taken any steps to address, but the Senate has sent
over a border bill to address the border policy issues raised during
the two Impeachment hearings.
The response from the House is to stay the Senate Border bill is dead
on arrival-sight unseen and no counteroffer made.

[[Page H458]]

As a result of lack of Congressional action, the Biden Administration
is using the tools it has available to secure the border and build a
safe, orderly, and humane immigration system.
Secretary Mayorkas as head of DHS began a whole-of-government
approach in Fall 2021 to prepare for the end of Title 42.
In May 2022, Secretary Mayorkas issued the six-pillar plan that
outlined preparations to prepare for surges in migration and the
lifting of Title 42.
The plan showed measurable success.
The power of immigration reform to reduce unlawful entry is proven
through the Biden Administration method of promoting the largest
expansion of legal pathways for safe, orderly, and humane migration in
decades, and put in new rules to encourage people to use those lawful
pathways instead of making the dangerous journey to try to enter
unlawfully.
The success of the lifting of Title 42 was not sustainable without
resources and changes being made to immigration laws.
Instead, Republican governors have become the poster children for
increased irregular migration because of their work to send people from
the Southern Border to New York, Chicago, San Francisco, and Los
Angeles, which sent a message that unlawful border crossings were
welcomed.
The final ingredient is legislative action by Congress to address
increasing the capacity of immigration courts to prioritize the orderly
and fair processing of asylum claims of certain recent arrivals, while
ensuring those not seeking protection or who don't qualify are promptly
returned to their country of origin.
The Administration is continuing to aggressively increase legal
pathways, enforce our immigration laws, target smugglers who prey and
profit on vulnerable migrants and seek to traffic drugs into our
country, and work collaboratively with cities and states that are
impacted.
Republicans who have used immigration as a wedge issue attempted to
derail the President's efforts.
It is time to focus on the places and communities receiving new
residents and families to make sure the transition a win--win for new
immigrants and communities.
Providing Resources to Larger Urban Areas and Rural Areas.
Democrats have proposed legislation, such as the Dream Act and the
American Dream and Promise Act, that would provide a pathway to
citizenship for young undocumented immigrants brought to the U.S. as
children, also known as Dreamers.
Democrats are focused on providing resources to communities receiving
migrants, implementing policies to ensure an orderly, humane border,
and keeping the government funded.
Democrats also recognize that while there are near-term costs to
receiving migrants, immigrants contribute significantly to the U.S.
economy, fuel our growth, and provide a net benefit to our country's
finances by paying billions in taxes annually.
Democrats also support comprehensive immigration reform that would
create a pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants and improve
border security measures while respecting the rights and dignity of all
individuals.
In July 2021, the House passed a bill that would create a pathway to
citizenship for undocumented farmworkers and their families, called the
Farm Workforce Modernization Act.
This would protect workers from exploitation and abuse and would
provide stability for the agricultural industry.
Democrats have advocated for a comprehensive immigration reform
package that would address the root causes of migration, improve border
security, and create legal pathways for people to enter the U.S.
lawfully.
The Biden-Harris Administration, under the direction of Secretary
Mayorkas, are showing Congress, the nation and the world what is indeed
possible when immigration is not treated like an offense to the nation
instead of the fuel that drives our economy and injects vitality into
our communities.
Because of joint Congressional and White House support since early
2021, DHS and CBP increased their border holding capacity by over a
third through the construction of new facilities.
CBP has increased the efficiency of migrant processing and reduced
the time noncitizens spend in temporary holding by 30 percent.
Over the years, I worked with my fellow Democrats and Republican
Members of this Committee to make sure that these unaccompanied
children stay safe and have a legal documentation in the United States,
while the Republican Party sadly has steadfastly opposed all the
legislations that benefits these children.
I ask the Rules Committee to reject this Impeachment and begin plans
to consider the bill sent from the Senate for a resolution to the
Border crisis.
Mr. GREEN of Tennessee. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Pfluger).
Mr. PFLUGER. Madam Speaker, this is a sad day. It is a sad day that
we have to be here, but the Framers of our Constitution forecasted that
this could occur.
While we are going to hear that this is a policy difference, that
this is maladministration. This is the systemic refusal to follow the
law and to enforce the law. It is an egregious breach of public trust.
Moreover, there are no other avenues here. There must be a
consequence, and there must be accountability. That is why we are
moving to impeach Alejandro Mayorkas for endangering our country.
Anyone with common sense can see that what is being allowed to happen
at our border is not only a catastrophe, but it is a national security
crisis.

{time} 1530

Madam Speaker, 9 million illegal aliens have entered our country
since President Biden has been in office, including 300 people that
have matched the terror watch list.
It took less than 20 people to orchestrate the attacks on 9/11, which
sent me into 20 years of service to this country to protect us
overseas. Yet, we are letting the Trojan horse into our country that
threatens us. We have a Secretary who refuses to enforce the laws on
the books.
It is Congress' duty to ensure that the Department of Homeland
Security is led by individuals committed to upholding the rule of law
and protecting our borders, and the failure to secure the border has
been so severe that we have to provide accountability.
Not only is this a systemic refusal to follow the law, but it is also
the systemic deconstruction of the rule of law that eventually will eat
away at this country.
I am so concerned, and our country should be concerned.
Madam Speaker, I urge everyone in this House to do something that
actually gets accountability, to impeach Alejandro Mayorkas, and to get
our country secure again.
Mr. GREEN of Tennessee. Madam Speaker, may I inquire how much time is
remaining on each side.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Tennessee has 37\1/4\
minutes. The gentleman from Mississippi has 39\3/4\ minutes.
Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Madam Speaker, daily removals are nearly
double what they were compared to pre-pandemic averages. The vast
majority of individuals encountered at the southwest border throughout
this administration have been removed, returned, or expelled.
Secretary Mayorkas is enforcing the law.
Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California (Mr.
Ruiz).
Mr. RUIZ. Madam Speaker, I rise to call out the hypocrisy and extreme
political stunts Republicans are displaying with this baseless and
unconstitutional impeachment against the Secretary of Homeland
Security, Alejandro Mayorkas.
Instead of seeking bipartisan solutions, they voted to cut border
security funding. Let me repeat that: cut border security funding. They
are now bringing an impeachment that lacks basis in law just to pull
another one of their political stunts.
Secretary Mayorkas has dedicated his career to public service and our
country. During his time in the Department, he led the development and
implementation of DACA and led the Department's successful response to
Ebola and Zika outbreaks.
He has worked tirelessly on combating human trafficking and developed
an emergency relief program for orphaned youth following the tragic
January 10 earthquake in Haiti.
Secretary Mayorkas has done the work he was tasked to do by the
President and more.
Stop wasting time on yet another extreme political farce. Start
working with Democrats for a bipartisan, real solution.
Mr. GREEN of Tennessee. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wittman).
Mr. WITTMAN. Madam Speaker, I rise today to urge support of H. Res.
863, the Articles of Impeachment against Homeland Security Secretary
Alejandro Mayorkas.

[[Page H459]]

It is clear that Secretary Mayorkas has willfully and systematically
refused to comply with U.S. immigration law. An average of 5,000
illegal immigrants are being released into the United States each day,
which is a flagrant abuse of immigration laws passed by Congress
governing the parole, detention, and removal of illegal immigrants.
For 3 years, Secretary Mayorkas has refused to enforce the laws
passed by Congress. He has abused his authority as a Cabinet Secretary.
He has misled Congress and the American people about the crisis and the
role his actions and decisions have played in sparking and facilitating
it.
As a result, we see record amounts of daily fentanyl flowing into our
communities, rising crime across our country, and a massive strain on
our localities, schools, and community services.
Since Secretary Mayorkas' tenure, over 300 individuals on the
terrorist watch list trying to illegally enter the United States at the
southern border between ports of entry have been apprehended by Border
Patrol agents.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mrs. Miller-Meeks). The time of the
gentleman has expired.
Mr. GREEN of Tennessee. Madam Speaker, I yield an additional 15
seconds to the gentleman from Virginia.
Mr. WITTMAN. Madam Speaker, cartels in Mexico are empowered to expand
lucrative trafficking and smuggling operations across our porous
southwest border.
The actions of Secretary Mayorkas have led to a complete humanitarian
and national security catastrophe.
Congress must hold the executive branch accountable when they fail to
uphold the oath of office.
Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in voting in favor of
H. Res. 863.
Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Madam Speaker, Republicans ignore the
fact that no administration has ever had the resources to detain all
border crossers. President Trump released over 500,000 people without
ever detaining any of them.
Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr.
Nadler), the ranking member on the Judiciary Committee.
Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to the sham
impeachment of Secretary Mayorkas.
This resolution is filled with false and misleading statements that
amount to nothing more than policy disagreements. Even if it were based
in truth, however, policy disagreements are not a legitimate basis for
impeachment.
Impeaching a Cabinet Secretary is serious. Unfortunately, House
Republicans are not. This sham impeachment ran roughshod over due
process and completely bypassed the Judiciary Committee, the committee
of jurisdiction for impeachment.

This is not a serious effort, nor is it a serious resolution.
Republicans allege that Secretary Mayorkas should be impeached simply
because he failed to meet the impossible standards set out in our laws,
standards that no administration, not even President Trump's, has ever
come close to meeting.
For example, they allege that Secretary Mayorkas failed to detain
everyone that the law requires to be held in mandatory detention. To do
so would require Congress to appropriate over $35 billion a year, a
number 10 times higher than President Trump ever requested for
detention. That is why the Trump administration released over 500,000
people at the U.S.-Mexico border and released 1.1 million people from
immigration detention into the United States.
Did we hear calls from the Republicans to impeach Secretaries Kelly,
Duke, or Nielsen? Of course not.
The resolution also takes aim at the Secretary's use of his parole
authority, but Republicans never complained when President Trump used
his parole authority for tens of thousands of Cubans and military
families.
So, what is different now? Could it be that it is an election year
and Republicans have no record of accomplishments to run on?
With no ideas, no agenda, and no ability to govern, they are
cheapening the serious and awesome power of impeachment to score a few
cheap political points. That is shameful.
Our immigration system has been broken for decades. Impeaching a
Cabinet Secretary because you do not like their policies will not
repair it. Only bipartisan reform can do that.
Madam Speaker, I encourage my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this
resolution.
Mr. GREEN of Tennessee. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the
gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Van Duyne).
Ms. VAN DUYNE. Madam Speaker, I rise to support the impeachment of
Secretary Mayorkas. His actions support lawbreaking and lawlessness and
have inflicted a horrific toll on our country. The kind of damage he
has done to our cities and families is something you would expect from
a hostile foreign adversary looking to destabilize and destroy America.
Our cities are overrun, forcing vital services to be cut off or
reduced, shutting down our schools to house illegal migrants, and
turning community centers into refugee camps, all while ignoring the
needs of our own citizens.
There are more than 110,000 dead Americans from fentanyl that is
being smuggled by Mexican cartels. We see criminal illegal immigrants
committing murder, rape, and beating our police in broad daylight.
This is far more than a policy difference. This is the death and
destruction of our country and our people. I will not stand by and just
politely ask the Biden administration to please stop the chaos and
devastation.
In a functioning government, people need to be held accountable when
they have deliberately inflicted harm on our Nation, and that is
exactly what we are doing today.
Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Madam Speaker, if my Republican
colleagues were worried about the impacts of migration on our local
communities, they should support DHS' Shelter and Services Program.
This is the only Federal program that can provide direct assistance to
cities and organizations responding to arriving migrants. Instead, they
are trying to gut this program and impeach Secretary Mayorkas, which
would accomplish nothing.
Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California (Mr.
Swalwell).
Mr. SWALWELL. Madam Speaker, this is not about Secretary Mayorkas.
This is straight-up sabotage.
MAGA Republicans have never accepted President Biden as the
President, from the day they led an insurrection into this Chamber to
this day, where they are trying to sabotage solutions at the border.
Any shortcomings with Mayorkas are the Republicans' fault. The
Republicans won't give him the authority that he needs to carry out
more security at the border.
All we have heard for years is noun, verb, border. You get your
border deal, led by the second most conservative in the Senate, and you
are walking away from it. You are walking away from it because Trump
says you can't have it.
This place with you all in charge is looking less and less like the
House Chamber and more and more like Trump's echo chamber.
What we need right now are solutions, not chaos. With you all in
charge, you are a party of followers. With President Biden's
leadership, Democrats continue to show that we are a party of leaders.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded to direct their remarks
to the Chair.

____________________