[Pages S2941-S2947]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                    MOTION TO DISCHARGE--S. RES. 195

  Mr. KAINE. Mr. President, I move to discharge S. Res. 195 from the 
Committee on Foreign Relations, as provided under the previous order.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the motion.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       Motion to discharge from the Committee on Foreign 
     Relations, S. Res. 195, requesting information on El 
     Salvador's human rights practices pursuant to section 502B(c) 
     of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. All time until 1:45 is equally divided.
  The Senator from Kansas.


                             Food for Peace

  Mr. MORAN. Mr. President, the call to feed the world has been 
answered by many Kansans, from farmers and ranchers to Senator Bob Dole 
and President Dwight D. Eisenhower. American farmers are linked to 
global markets and, by extension, to the well-being of people 
everywhere.
  Two of our Nation's most successful programs for delivering American-
grown food to the hungry around the

[[Page S2942]]

world are Food for Peace and the McGovern-Dole Food for Education 
Program, both rooted in my State of Kansas.
  At the recommendation of a Kansas farmer way out in Northwest Kansas, 
Kansas Senator Andrew Schoeppel introduced the Food for Peace Act in 
the Senate to purchase commodity surpluses to feed the hungry around 
the world. It was signed into law by another Kansan, Dwight D. 
Eisenhower, in 1954. Later, Senator Dole became the key champion of its 
reauthorization. Since its creation, Food for Peace has reached more 
than 4 billion people in more than 150 countries using American-grown 
commodities.
  Another food aid program, the McGovern-Dole Program, was established 
in 2002 through the farm bill. It originated from the partnership 
between Senator Bob Dole of Kansas and Senator George McGovern of South 
Dakota. Since the beginning, McGovern-Dole has delivered more than 5.5 
billion school meals to children around the globe.
  The mission of these programs is more urgent now than ever. In 2023, 
more than 735 million people around the world faced chronic hunger. 
That is 1 out of every 10 people on the planet. Food security also 
contributes to our national security. When governments cannot feed 
their own people, chaos and violence often follow. Food assistance 
provided by the United States leads to greater stability in regions of 
the world important to America's strategic interests.
  Hunger can drive children to join militias or nations to descend into 
chaos, opening up an opportunity for adversaries to step in and coerce 
a country for natural resources or military capabilities.
  Hunger fuels desperation, and desperation fuels unrest. In the Sahel 
region of Africa, violent extremism is on the rise. Terrorist groups 
exploit food insecurity to win recruits and enforce loyalty. Programs 
like Food for Peace and McGovern-Dole break that cycle.
  In Lebanon, where economic collapse has shredded the supply chain, 
Food for Peace delivered over 100,000 metric tons of wheat last year. 
In fiscal year 2023, McGovern-Dole provided school meals to more than 
2.5 million children in developing countries like Bangladesh, where 
families fled ethnic cleansing and rely upon rations to survive.
  Through these programs, Kansas wheat, Arkansas rice, and Iowa 
soybeans are feeding the hungry around the world who are facing famine, 
war, and national instability.
  Food for Peace also provides a critical market for our producers. 
This is an issue that matters to Kansas farmers and farmers around the 
country. It allows them to sell nearly $2 billion worth of excess 
commodities every year, so farmers don't have to let the crops go to 
waste and shoulder the losses.
  For years, Food for Peace has been hampered by bureaucratic delays, 
mismanagement, and abuse within USAID. The inefficiency of USAID hasn't 
just wasted taxpayer dollars; it has weakened the reach and 
effectiveness of some of our most vital humanitarian aid programs.
  Thanks to its extensive infrastructure and hands-on experience in 
both domestic and international operations, the USDA is uniquely 
positioned to manage Food for Peace. In February, I introduced a bill 
with my colleague from Kansas Senator Marshall and our colleague from 
North Dakota Senator Hoeven and Representative Tracey Mann--the 
occupier of the seat in the First District of Kansas--in Congress to 
move Food for Peace out of USAID and under the Department of 
Agriculture in an effort to prevent waste and bring the program closer 
to the farmers who depend upon it.
  Right now, USDA runs two highly successful foreign assistance 
programs and already handles all domestic commodity purchases for Food 
for Peace Title II.
  Most importantly, USDA has the trust of American farmers. They know 
the Agency. They understand their work, and it can deliver results. I 
am grateful that USDA Secretary Rollins has expressed a willingness to 
take on this program and for their commitment to preserving and 
strengthening the program's mission.
  By placing Food for Peace under USDA's authority, we make certain the 
program can continue to bring revenue to American agriculture 
producers.
  In fiscal year 2023, Food for Peace purchased $713 million worth of 
U.S.-grown commodities and McGovern Dole purchased another $33 
million--both direct investments into rural communities across Kansas 
and the country.
  I cochair the Hunger Caucus in the Senate. I cochaired the Hunger 
Caucus in the House. I took on that responsibility to try to make a 
difference. I have seen the differences these programs can make around 
the world, and I support their continuance, even if it needs to be in a 
new form.
  I often tell farmers in Kansas: Farming is a noble profession. 
Feeding people is a worthwhile cause, and God gave you a purpose. God 
gave you, a farmer, a purpose for your life.
  It was Kansas farmers who came up with the idea for Food for Peace as 
a moral and commonsense solution to prevent excess American food from 
going to waste and using it to feed the hungry across the globe.
  For 70 years, the United States of America has made the difference 
between life and death for millions of people around the world and has 
made circumstances better for farmers here at home.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from North Carolina.


                          National Police Week

  Mr. TILLIS. Mr. President, I rise during Police Week to honor the 
brave men and women in North Carolina and across the Nation who serve 
in law enforcement. Thousands of officers and their families come to 
our Nation's Capital every year to pay tribute to those who paid the 
ultimate sacrifice to protect our communities.
  Each name added to the memorial wall represents a story of courage, 
selflessness, and sacrifice. Unfortunately, North Carolinians know all 
too well about that kind of sacrifice. Today, I want to honor three 
heroes who we lost in North Carolina since last year's Police Week in 
May 2024.
  Last September, North Carolina was hit by Hurricane Helene, one of 
the worst natural disasters in the State's history. The historic 
flooding and devastation caused by Helene required an all-out effort by 
first responders, who were working around the clock.
  One of those first responders was Court Officer James Lau. Officer 
Lau's vehicle was swept away by unexpected floodwaters from a river, in 
the immediate aftermath of Hurricane Helene. Officer Lau was a Vietnam 
veteran, and his law enforcement career spanned nearly four decades 
across 3 States. In fact, Officer Lau was 75 years old. He was already 
fully retired, but he continued to serve his community as a security 
officer at the Macon County Courthouse. He is survived by his wife, 
five children, and four grandchildren.
  We also remember Major Michelle Lynn Quintero of the Madison County 
Sheriff's Office, who was only 48 years old. She was tragically killed 
by the same storm and fast-moving floodwaters caused by a dam that had 
overflowed and took down all the power, radio communication, and phone 
service. Major Quintero was swept downhill and was hit by a tree 
careening in the fast-moving water.
  She served more than 17 years with the Madison County Sheriff's 
Office. Major Quintero is survived by her husband, who also works in 
law enforcement, and she is survived by her two children, both of whom 
work for the Madison County Sheriff's Office.
  Late December of last year, on the day before Christmas Eve, 
Greensboro Police Officer Michael Horan was shot and killed while 
responding to a call about a man with a firearm in a grocery store. The 
murderer fled the scene and led law enforcement on a multicounty chase. 
The brave men from multiple law enforcement agencies apprehended the 
suspect on Interstate 40.
  Officer Horan was a reservist in the U.S. Coast Guard, where he 
earned multiple awards, including the Coast Guard Enlisted Person of 
the Year award in 2015 and 2019. He was posthumously promoted to the 
rank of chief warrant officer, earlier this year.
  Officer Horan served with the Greensboro Police Department for 7 
years. He was only 44 years old and is survived by his wife and 
children.
  While we can't stop natural disasters or accidents, lawmakers can 
play a role

[[Page S2943]]

in helping to reduce the intentional targeting of law enforcement. That 
is why I continue to push for the passage of the Protect and Serve Act. 
This is legislation that I introduced that makes it a Federal crime to 
intentionally harm or attempt to harm a law enforcement officer. It 
also gives prosecutors new tools to penalize criminals who target law 
enforcement.
  Officers go to work every day prepared to make the ultimate sacrifice 
for their communities, and they need our support now more than ever.
  I had a colleague of mine in the Judiciary Committee today make a 
great point. That uniform now includes a bulletproof vest. They know 
what they have signed up for. They wear that as a matter of procedure 
because every single day they go out there, they assume they may be 
shot at.
  I am asking my colleagues to consider the importance of this 
legislation and encourage them to take a stand on behalf of law 
enforcement officers who are no longer with us. There is a reason the 
Protect and Serve Act is supported by law enforcement groups across the 
Nation: the Fraternal Order of Police, the National Association of 
Police Organizations, the Police Officers' Defense Coalition, the North 
Carolina Fraternal Order of Police, the National Sheriffs' Association, 
and the Major County Sheriffs association.
  Ladies and gentlemen, I don't know why it is hard for any Member of 
the U.S. Senate to get behind this bill. It simply says that we are 
going to raise the stakes for anybody who would knowingly do harm to a 
police officer.
  To every officer serving today: Thank you for your courage. You have 
earned my unending gratitude.
  By supporting this bill, Members of the U.S. Senate can demonstrate 
their enduring gratitude to law enforcement.
  By not supporting it--I don't know what that says, but I know it is 
something that in North Carolina and among law enforcement agencies, it 
is not good.
  To the families of the fallen: Your loss is shared by a grateful 
nation. We will never forget your loved ones' service, nor their 
sacrifice. God bless them. God bless law enforcement. And may God bless 
the United States of America.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Florida.


             Unanimous Consent Requests--Executive Calendar

  Mr. SCOTT of Florida. Mr. President, the nominees I will discuss 
today were approved by the Armed Services Committee with bipartisan 
support. Republicans and Democrats agreed they are qualified and ready 
to serve. President Trump was elected in a landslide, and the American 
people expect and deserve our support in getting his agenda 
accomplished.
  President Trump and his administration are working incredibly hard to 
bring back the U.S. policy of peace through strength and to ensure our 
military is a respected and lethal fighting force. This is not an easy 
task after President Biden's weakness allowed our enemies free rein 
while our military leadership was distracted with being woke.
  President Trump needs his full team in place to deliver on his agenda 
to restore our Nation's military to focus on the warfighter.
  To that end, I ask that we move to consider the following nominees: 
First, I will ask we consider Dale Marks to be an Assistant Secretary 
of Defense.
  Mr. Marks is a former fighter pilot and combat-wounded veteran. After 
his distinguished military career, he continued service in a civilian 
capacity, where he rose through the ranks of Senior Executive Service. 
He is currently serving as Executive Director of the 96th Test Wing, 
Air Force Materiel Command at Eglin Air Force Base in Florida.
  The position he is nominated for is essential to ensure our military 
installations remain strong, our energy policies support mission 
success, and our environmental strategies enhance, not hinder, 
operational readiness and support peace through strength.
  I urge the Democrats to drop their misplaced stall tactics and allow 
for his immediate confirmation.
  I ask unanimous consent the Senate proceed to executive session to 
consider the following nomination: Executive Calendar No. 109, Dale 
Marks, to be an Assistant Secretary of Defense; that the Senate vote on 
the nomination without intervening action or debate; that the motion to 
reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table; and that the 
President be immediately notified of the Senate's action and the Senate 
resume legislative session.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  The Senator from Connecticut.
  Mr. BLUMENTHAL. Reserving the right to object, I appreciate my 
colleague from Florida asking for a competent team of professionals at 
the Department of Defense. We all want the Department of Defense to be 
managed efficiently and effectively. It is vital to our national 
security.
  What we have right now is chaos, literally, confusion, turmoil, and 
turbulence, in part, because we have a Department of Defense that is 
unaccountable.
  Last Congress, I led a bicameral letter to then-Secretary Austin 
demanding answers after a GAO report found significant failures in 
barracks' facilities across the country. Billions of dollars have been 
poured into installations for housing and infrastructure improvements. 
Again, those investments are being undercut by the mass layoffs we see 
right now at the Department of Defense.
  We expect Mr. Marks to manage the entirety of these installations and 
environmental programs at DOD, but the administration, in effect, is 
undercutting at every turn.
  This Secretary of Defense has created that chaos. He has shredded the 
Department's report on climate change, despite its outlining the 
serious implications it will have on the military in coming decades. I 
wonder whether the Secretary has actually visited Guam or Alaska and 
seen the effects of climate change in either place. I wonder whether he 
understands the equipment, the electronics, the ammunition that are 
required and that themselves require special storage and resilient 
infrastructure if we expect them to perform in combat effectively.
  As climate change creates a more challenging environment for our 
warfighters, the DOD should be leading the charge in research and 
adaptability.
  I feel especially strongly that the DOD, in firing its scientists and 
throwing research in the trash, is betraying the values and principles 
that the Secretary ought to be fighting to uphold.
  Mr. Marks would be responsible for all of it. Yet the Secretary 
hasn't the slightest idea of what he is doing in these areas. We 
questioned him for more than 4 hours during his hearing at the Armed 
Services Committee; that is, the Secretary. We all knew that he was the 
least qualified Secretary of Defense in our history. And 4 months 
later, sadly, unfortunately, we can say, confidently, we were right.
  What he is doing is slashing personnel, the experts, the scientists. 
He is the reason I stand here and say that we cannot accept Mr. Marks' 
shortcutting the proper process that provides for debate on all these 
issues, and therefore I object.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
  The Senator from Florida.
  Mr. SCOTT of Florida. Mr. President, I am not sure I understand my 
colleague's objections. These are well-qualified nominees. They enjoy 
bipartisan support. There are several more nominees waiting. It is 
obvious, my colleagues across the aisle will do everything they can to 
undermine President Trump's agenda and delay these nominees.
  Next, I would like to consider Keith Bass to be Assistant Secretary 
of Defense. Mr. Bass is a retired U.S. Navy commander. He is also a 
member of the American College of Healthcare Executives, the National 
Rehabilitation Association, the American Counseling Association, and 
the National Association of Alcoholism and Drug Abuse Counselors.
  Prior to nomination, Mr. Bass served as the Medical Center Director 
for the West Texas VA Health Care System. The role Mr. Bass has been 
nominated to oversee is a Military Health System that has 9.6 million 
beneficiaries entitled to care. The military health system is currently 
undergoing many reforms to improve efficiency, increase readiness, and 
deliver better care. I urge my colleagues to allow for his immediate 
confirmation.

[[Page S2944]]

  I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to executive session 
to consider the following nomination: Executive Calendar No. 70, Keith 
Bass, to be an Assistant Secretary of Defense; that the Senate vote on 
the nomination without intervening action or debate; that the motion to 
reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table; and that the 
President be immediately notified of the Senate's action and the Senate 
resume legislative session.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  The Senator from Connecticut.
  Mr. BLUMENTHAL. Reserving the right to object, I, once again, agree 
with my colleague from Florida that we worked together in a bipartisan 
way for years now, and I appreciate his leadership on the C Power 
Subcommittee where we share a number of interests.
  I fear that the chaos at the Department of Defense, due to the 
slashing of positions, the confusion caused by ideological 
interventions that are harmful, reckless, and unnecessary, that those 
kinds of downsizing and defects in leadership will hurt the military 
families and, particularly, their access to healthcare.
  TRICARE provides for the well-being of our servicemembers, their 
families, and loved ones.
  Mr. Bass has a long service record, but this administration is 
undercutting his potential work, and we deserve to debate it on the 
floor of the Senate without unanimous consent, without shortcutting 
public accountability.
  The administration now in charge of the Department of Defense should 
be held accountable for exactly the healthcare interests that Mr. Bass 
will have responsibility for advancing. Therefore, I object.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
  The Senator from Florida.
  Mr. SCOTT of Florida. Mr. President, the President deserves his 
national security nominees today. Let me see if we will consider this 
one: Brandon Williams to be Under Secretary for Nuclear Security, 
Military Health System.
  Mr. Williams is a nuclear submarine officer. During his service, he 
made six strategic deterrence patrols, was a nuclear weapons safety 
officer, nuclear weapons security officer, and nuclear weapons 
radiological control officer. He is pretty competent.
  This role is responsible for the maintenance of a safe, secure, and 
reliable nuclear stockpile.
  Confirmation is critical to President Trump's ``peace through 
strength and strategic deterrence'' agenda. Hopefully, my colleague 
will see the wisdom in allowing this confirmation--this individual who 
is clearly qualified to be confirmed today.
  I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to executive session 
to consider the following nomination: Executive Calendar No. 107, 
Brandon Williams, to be Under Secretary for Nuclear Security; that the 
Senate vote on the nomination without intervening action or debate; 
that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the 
table; and that the President be immediately notified of the Senate's 
action and the Senate resume legislative session.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  The Senator from Connecticut.
  Mr. BLUMENTHAL. Mr. President, on this one, I think the stakes are 
particularly high. At the Department of Energy, the DOGE-Musk cuts led 
to hundreds of employees being fired. They were responsible for 
overseeing our nuclear weapons stockpile. That set of moves caused a 
massive counterintelligence disaster and a logistical train wreck. 
After realizing these employees were indispensable, the Agency begged 
for them to come back.
  Billions of dollars have been poured into this program, and what we 
have seen now is the whirlwind, the confusion, and chaos caused by this 
mismanagement. We need full accountability. We need more facts, which 
we have been denied.
  Our Armed Services Committee, along with other committees, should be 
looking into what the consequences were of those DOGE slashing-and-
trashing steps that put our Nation in jeopardy. We are not going to 
have it if we proceed to this nomination with unanimous consent, 
shortcutting public debate. Therefore, I object.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
  The Senator from Florida.
  Mr. SCOTT of Florida. Mr. President, one final ask. I hope my 
colleagues can agree that we have at least one critical nominee today 
approved.
  Let's consider Bradley Hansell to be Under Secretary of Defense for 
Intelligence and Security.
  Mr. Hansell is a former Green Beret, Senior Director on the National 
Security Council staff, and has previously received bipartisan 
support. He will be responsible to exercise the Secretary of Defense's 
authority, direction, and control over the DIA, NGA, NSA, NRO, and the 
Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency. His confirmation is 
critical to the President's ``peace through strength'' agenda.

  I, once again, urge my colleague to allow for the nominee's immediate 
confirmation.
  I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to executive session 
to consider the following nomination: Executive Calendar No. 108, 
Bradley Hansell, to be Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence and 
Security; that the Senate vote on the nomination without intervening 
action or debate; that the motion to reconsider be considered made and 
laid upon the table; that the President be immediately notified of the 
Senate's action; and that the Senate resume legislative session.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  The Senator from Connecticut.
  Mr. BLUMENTHAL. Mr. President, I wish I could agree to the unanimous 
consent on this nominee.
  As my colleague from Florida obviously understands, the issues here 
are bigger than any one of these nominees. The issues are more 
consequential than the career or advancement of any single member of 
the Department of Defense team. This Secretary seems more concerned 
with his own public image than the safety of our servicemembers because 
he has violated basic security protocols.
  We are talking here about an official who will be responsible for 
securing our national intelligence. When this Secretary, in effect, has 
jeopardized them through actions that are currently under 
investigation, how is the person responsible for the Office of 
Intelligence and Security at the Department of Defense supposed to do 
their job when they face the most serious counterintelligence threat in 
recent memory from within the Department of Defense? Elon Musk's 
firings put thousands of highly qualified people out of a job. Many of 
them possessed security clearances and knowledge of their Departments' 
most sensitive programs. Their service is vital to our national 
security. Thousands were fired without cause. Our adversaries couldn't 
be happier, and they may be profiting from those mistakes right now.
  These cuts come at a time when we are prioritizing--we in the U.S. 
Senate--funding to expand our nuclear triad and to counter China's 
growing nuclear capabilities. These workforce reductions undermine our 
goals across the board in the Department of Defense. We need to provide 
personnel for program oversight, supply chain management, cyber 
security, and other critical functions. So I think we need 
accountability, and we need the facts. They haven't been forthcoming.
  I object.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The objection is heard.
  The Senator from Florida.
  Mr. SCOTT of Florida. At some point, this has got to change. We have 
Presidential elections every 4 years. Our President got elected. 
President Trump got elected, whether people like it or not. He deserves 
an opportunity to put his team together and act as the President and 
put his agenda in place.
  This idea that both parties sit here and delay nominees and the 
ability to put teams together doesn't make any sense for the future of 
this country. This is not a time that there is no risk in the world, 
and so, at some point, we are going to all have to come together to 
start accelerating this. We have so many nominees. Whether it is a 
Republican or a Democrat President, we have got to allow these nominees 
to get through and get confirmed in a much more expedited manner. 
Otherwise,

[[Page S2945]]

none of our Presidents are ever going to get in a position that they 
can ever put a team together during their 4-year term.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Connecticut.
  Mr. BLUMENTHAL. What I hear from the other side is, essentially, 
``Give the President whatever he wants in the name of his having the 
prerogative.'' He should name his own team, but we have a 
responsibility. It is a constitutional obligation. ``Advice and 
consent'' is more than just saying: Give him his own team. If we had 
been responsible in this body--if my Republican colleagues had stood up 
and spoken out as they should have done--we would have a different 
Secretary of Defense right now. It would have been unnecessary for the 
Vice President to come here and break a tie. We would have a more 
competent Secretary of Defense. That is the mindset that got us where 
we are today, and that is the reason I have lodged these objections.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Florida.
  Mr. SCOTT of Florida. Let's remember what we just did today. This is 
not the confirmation of the Secretary of Defense. These are the 
confirmations of very competent people. No one can question the 
competence of these four people. No one can. All right? These are 
competent people who have served our country and who do a great job. So 
what we are doing is we are saying: Because some people don't like our 
Secretary of Defense, we are not going to allow the President to put a 
team together of very competent people.
  So what we are doing is, now we just have acting people whom none of 
us get to vote on and none of us get to question until they come to 
committee. None of this makes any sense. It is not helping us put 
together a team and holding people accountable.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Virginia.


                              S. Res. 195

  Mr. KAINE. Mr. President, I rise to discuss S. Res. 195, which is a 
vote on a motion to discharge that will be the next pending vote in the 
Senate.
  It is actually a pretty simple bill about very basic concepts: Do you 
believe in the Constitution or not? Do you believe in the rule of law 
or not? Do you believe in due process or not? Do you believe that final 
orders of the U.S. Supreme Court should be respected or not? Those are 
the questions at issue on S. Res. 195.

  Our President, President Trump, has entered into an agreement still 
shrouded in some secrecy with the President of El Salvador, President 
Bukele, to deport American residents into El Salvador and imprison them 
in prisons in a country that has been charged by the United States and 
others with gross human rights violations.
  The Congress that is in charge of appropriating taxpayer dollars 
should want to know the circumstances of this imprisonment and whether 
U.S. law is being followed. The $6 million payment to the El Salvadoran 
prison likely violates human rights law in accord with many experts who 
looked at the details as they emerged, and that is where we begin. 
These are dollars that Congress has appropriated, but the precise 
mechanism for the transfer of these moneys and the President's 
authority to both spend the money and carry out the deportations is 
questionable.
  The U.S. Supreme Court, in the case of one of these individuals who 
it admits was deported by mistake--and there are many others similarly 
situated--is defying an order of the Supreme Court. The U.S. Supreme 
Court ruled in a nine-to-nothing ruling that the administration should 
facilitate the return of Mr. Kilmar Abrego Garcia. Thus far, nearly a 
month later, that has not occurred.
  This is about fighting lawlessness. The 14th Amendment to the 
Constitution, to which we all pledge fealty, is pretty straightforward:

       No person shall be deprived of life, liberty or property 
     without due process of law.

  That was the clause that the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously 
interpreted to mandate the return of Mr. Abrego Garcia.
  The President was asked recently whether he had an obligation to 
uphold the Constitution, which he swore an oath to in the witness of 
all of us on Inauguration Day. He was asked if he had to uphold the 
Constitution. Just within the last week, he said he did not know. We 
know the answer to that question, but the President does not. The 
particular country to which these American residents have been 
deported, El Salvador--this now goes back a year--has a track record of 
imprisoning individuals--innocent individuals. The last thing any of us 
should want is an innocent individual in prison, especially if that 
innocent individual is an American.
  But this is the punch line: The President has indicated that this is 
not just for those who are here with questions about their legal 
status. President Trump has said ``homegrowns'' are next. Trump doubles 
down on sending American criminals to foreign prisons. We have a prison 
system in the United States--local jails, State prisons, Federal 
prisons. The notion of sending American citizens to foreign prisons 
without scrutiny is truly shocking, and that is the reason that I filed 
the resolution.
  What is this resolution?
  It is a privileged motion--available to any Senator--directing the 
administration to produce a human rights report about a nation--in this 
case, El Salvador. S. Res. 195 directs the Secretary of State to 
produce a report to this body that would be available not only to us 
but to the American public about the human rights record in El 
Salvador, and a couple of the clauses of the resolution, I think, are 
specific about this particular case.
  The report should contain information about the treatment of citizens 
or residents of other countries, including the United States--non-
Salvadorans--who are being detained or imprisoned in El Salvador, 
including any opportunity provided to such citizens or residents to 
demonstrate that they are being wrongfully detained or imprisoned.
  We should all want to know whether Americans detained in El Salvador 
have an opportunity to demonstrate that they are wrongfully imprisoned. 
The report will require that.
  The report would require an assessment from the Secretary of State of 
the conditions in El Salvador's Centro de Confinamiento del Terrorismo, 
including an assessment of allegations of torture and other gross 
violations of human rights.
  Remember again that the Trump administration has acknowledged that at 
least one of the individuals who was deported was deported mistakenly. 
He has been in prison for some time. If he is not there now, he was for 
some time in CECOT. We should want to know whether Americans in prison 
there are subject to torture or to other gross violations of human 
rights.
  The report should include a description of any actions that the U.S. 
Government has taken to ensure that the Government of the Republic of 
El Salvador releases U.S. citizens being detained or imprisoned in El 
Salvador in compliance with U.S. court orders regarding their return.
  Finally, the report would require information--a description of 
actions--the U.S. Government is taking to provide due process in 
compliance with U.S. law for relevant persons detained or imprisoned in 
El Salvador.
  Why would anyone in this body, in understanding this record--the 
forceable deportation of American residents, some admittedly deported 
by mistake and whom the Supreme Court has ordered returned into El 
Salvadoran prisons--why would anyone in this body not want to get a 
human rights report about the conditions of that confinement, 
particularly given the fact that President Trump has indicated that he 
may intend next to send U.S. citizens into those same prisons?
  This information will be very relevant to important decisions that we 
take in our relationship with El Salvador and also in our decisions we 
take with respect to the Appropriations Act. So I urge my colleagues to 
vote for S. Res. 195.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Maryland.
  Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. President, I want to start by thanking my friend 
and colleague Senator Kaine for his longtime leadership and support of 
human rights and the rule of law. It is an honor to team up with him in 
introducing this resolution.
  As he indicated, this is designed to expose the truth about a scheme 
that is threatening the constitutional rights of everybody who lives in 
the United

[[Page S2946]]

States of America. As we speak, President Trump is paying American 
taxpayer dollars to the Government of El Salvador, which has been a 
notorious violator of human rights. He is paying them American taxpayer 
dollars to lock up American residents without due process of law. The 
Constitution is clear in the 5th Amendment and, by application to the 
States, the 14th Amendment, but the 5th Amendment to the Constitution 
guarantees due process.
  As Senator Kaine indicated, when President Trump was recently asked 
whether he had to comply with the Constitution of the United States, 
despite the fact that he put his hand on the Bible and took the oath of 
office right down the hall here not that long ago, the President's 
response was:
  I don't know.
  That should concern every single Member of the U.S. Senate, 
regardless of party.
  The principle of not depriving somebody of their liberty without the 
due process of law is a fundamental core American value. That is why it 
is in the Constitution of the United States. This is not a liberal 
issue. It is not a conservative issue. It is not an issue that belongs 
to any one party. This is a fundamental American issue in the 
Constitution of the United States.
  I know that Donald Trump wants to continue to change the subject when 
it comes to this matter, but the subject could not be more clear, and 
that is to protect the constitutional rights of people who reside in 
the United States.
  One person who was caught up in this unconstitutional scheme was 
Kilmar Abrego Garcia, who is a constituent of mine in Maryland, as are 
his wife Jennifer and their children.
  Federal agents illegally abducted Kilmar Abrego Garcia while he was 
driving with his 5-year-old son, who has autism. They took him to 
Baltimore, then Texas, and then they shackled him and handcuffed him 
and put him on a plane. He didn't know where he was going. The next 
thing he knows, he ends up in El Salvador at this notorious prison 
called CECOT, which is the gulag of Latin America.
  The Trump administration admitted in a Federal court that they had 
wrongfully detained Mr. Abrego Garcia. They admitted it. They said it 
was an ``administrative error'' that landed him in CECOT. But what did 
they do? Instead of fixing that egregious error, they fired the lawyer 
who told the truth to the court. That is what they did.
  Since then, they have been ignoring the orders of the district court, 
the Fourth Circuit, and the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court, in a 9-
to-0 decision--we don't see many of those--ordered the Trump 
administration to facilitate the return of Mr. Abrego Garcia in 
accordance with his right to due process. If President Trump can ignore 
the courts, that is a very short road to tyranny.
  I have made very clear from the start that I am not vouching for the 
man, Mr. Abrego Garcia; I am vouching for his rights because if you 
deny his rights, you put in jeopardy the rights of everybody who 
resides in the United States of America.
  So that is why I did travel to El Salvador, both to meet with Kilmar 
Abrego Garcia to find out whether he was dead or alive and report back 
to his family but also to ask the Government of El Salvador to stop 
being complicit in this scheme with President Trump to deny residents 
of the United States their constitutional rights.
  When I met with the Vice President of El Salvador, my worst fears 
were reinforced.
  I asked the Vice President of El Salvador: Why are you holding Mr. 
Abrego Garcia? Do you have any criminal complaint against him?
  No. No, not at all.
  Why?
  Because the U.S. Government, the Trump administration, is paying us 
to do so. That is why.
  I ultimately got to see Mr. Abrego Garcia--at first, I was 
stonewalled by the Government of El Salvador--and he has been totally 
unable to contact anybody in the outside world before I met with him 
and since. He is not only in a total news blackout, but nobody can call 
him--not his lawyers, not his wife, not his mother, not his brother. 
That is a violation of international law, and that is one of the 
hallmarks of this El Salvadoran gulag, is people go into CECOT or these 
other prisons and you never hear from them again.
  The State Department's 2023 human rights report on El Salvador--the 
most recent one we have--reported ``credible reports'' of ``cruel, 
inhuman, or degrading torture'' in El Salvadoran prisons, including 
beatings with batons and rifles, overcrowding, underfeeding, and life-
threatening medical neglect; reports that guards fire stun guns on wet 
floors to deliver electric shock to the entire cell at once. That is 
where we are sending people like Abrego Garcia without any due process 
of law, and that is why it is so important that we adopt this 
resolution, which Senator Kaine has so well described.
  I would urge my Republican colleagues to stand back and think of the 
moment we are in because not only did the President of the United 
States say he wasn't sure if he had to comply with the Constitution of 
the United States, which should set off alarm bells all over the 
country, regardless of party, but Steve Miller, one of his top policy 
advisers, publicly talked about suspending habeas corpus, suspending 
the Constitution of the United States. That is a very dangerous idea, 
and all of us--all of us, regardless of party--should stand up to 
protect the Constitution, protect due process, and make it clear that 
the President of the United States cannot ignore a nine-to-nothing 
Supreme Court order, which he is doing as we speak, because if he can 
do it with one person or do it to two people, he can do it to anybody 
in the United States of America, and that is un-American.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from California.
  Mr. PADILLA. Mr. President, I first want to begin by thanking my 
colleagues Senator Kaine and Senator Van Hollen--I believe Senator 
Schumer will be joining us--for this important issue. I want to thank 
them for their efforts to provide some needed moral clarity at this 
critical time.
  Earlier this year--I hope you have seen the news reports--all across 
the country, there were stories of families waking up to learn that 
their loved ones had disappeared--a husband with no criminal record 
detained after a routine immigration appointment, complying with the 
conditions of his status at the moment; another instance was a makeup 
artist, who had fled Venezuela after being targeted for sexual 
orientation and political views, one day gone simply for having crown 
tattoos in honor of his parents; a mother who learned the whereabouts 
of her son only when she saw his face on propaganda videos released by 
El Salvador.
  Over 200 migrants were sent to El Salvador's notorious, high-security 
prison known as CECOT. By the way, that includes eight women whom the 
Trump administration mistakenly flew to the all-male prison, only to 
have to fly them back. But hundreds of men have been sent to prison 
with no trial even, no sentence, no end date, no communication with the 
outside world.
  Let me be the first to say and I think I speak on behalf of my 
colleagues when I say that if you have committed a crime in the United 
States of America, then, yes, you deserve to be prosecuted. But, as we 
all know--and I hope we continue to respect--we have a justice system 
to do just that, a justice system that has a process for those charged 
with a crime to be found guilty or innocent, because, yes, you actually 
have to be found guilty in a court to be guilty. Now, that shouldn't be 
controversial.
  Anyone who claims to be for ``law and order'' has to be for both law 
and order. You can't just overlook the ``law'' part of the slogan. But 
Republicans continue to leave out that fact and the fact that the 
overwhelming majority of those deported had no criminal records.
  A report from ``60 Minutes'' just last month showed that 75 percent 
of those deported to CECOT had no criminal record. These were people 
who in many cases had pending asylum cases or some other sort of 
immigration protection. But simply because they may have tattoos, the 
Trump administration has decided to use them for a poorly executed and 
expensive publicity stunt.
  As I think Senator Van Hollen began to explain to us, if Republicans

[[Page S2947]]

allow Donald Trump to make himself judge, jury, and executioner, then 
we are all in trouble. This is the behavior of a foreign dictator, not 
the President of the United States. A dictator wishes to do away with 
due process and disappearing loved ones to foreign countries without a 
trace.
  This administration is violating Federal law by sending people to 
places like CECOT and, soon, maybe Libya, where they may very well face 
torture or some other horrific treatment.
  For anybody who thinks this may not concern them because they are an 
American citizen, think again. You may not actually be given an 
opportunity to prove your citizenship before you are sent away. Donald 
Trump has said publicly that he wants to imprison American citizens in 
El Salvador next--not my words; his--so there is no telling where all 
of this is going to lead.
  We have seen Federal courts time and again rebuff the Trump 
administration's lawlessness and order them to take steps to return 
wrongfully deported immigrants. We have also seen the Trump 
administration continue to resist and ignore court orders.
  So, colleagues, the resolution before us today would force the Trump 
administration to start opening up the books, to tell us what 
meaningful actions they are taking to comply, to be accountable to the 
American people, and, yes, demand that the administration publish a 
report on the human rights violations being committed by the country 
Trump is so willingly embracing. But it also does another thing. It 
puts us all on the record because history will judge not only those who 
willingly embraced the erosion of civil rights that is happening, but 
it will also judge those who chose to sit back and watch it happen over 
and over again.
  Every Member of this body has to decide whether they will stand up 
and demand answers from the administration or sit silently while Trump 
imprisons innocent men.
  This is more than just about immigrants or immigration. This is about 
due process. This is about civil rights. This is about the foundation 
of our liberties.
  I urge my colleagues to join us in holding this administration 
accountable.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Moreno). The Senator from Virginia.
  Mr. KAINE. Mr. President, I will conclude prior to the vote just by 
saying this is a very basic resolution.
  Everyone in this body, knowing that Americans have been deported 
without due process to a prison in a foreign country that has a 
grievous record of human rights abuses, should at least want to get 
information about the circumstances of that confinement, about whether 
that prison is according American residents any semblance of due 
process and whether the United States is undertaking efforts to ensure 
that that country and that prison are following final orders of the 
U.S. Supreme Court.
  If you support the rule of law, if you support due process, if you 
support the Constitution, if you support human rights, if you support 
final orders of the U.S. Supreme Court, you will support S. Res. 195.
  I now ask for the vote.


                          Vote on S. Res. 195

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on adoption of the resolution.
  Mr. KAINE. I ask for the yeas and nays.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  There appears to be a sufficient second.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant bill clerk called the roll.
  Mr. BARRASSO. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the 
Senator from South Carolina (Mr. Graham), the Senator from Pennsylvania 
(Mr. McCormick), and the Senator from Kansas (Mr. Moran).
  Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Arizona (Mr. Kelly) and 
the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Sanders) are necessarily absent.
  The result was announced--yeas 45, nays 50, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 259 Leg.]

                                YEAS--45

     Alsobrooks
     Baldwin
     Bennet
     Blumenthal
     Blunt Rochester
     Booker
     Cantwell
     Coons
     Cortez Masto
     Duckworth
     Durbin
     Fetterman
     Gallego
     Gillibrand
     Hassan
     Heinrich
     Hickenlooper
     Hirono
     Kaine
     Kim
     King
     Klobuchar
     Lujan
     Markey
     Merkley
     Murphy
     Murray
     Ossoff
     Padilla
     Peters
     Reed
     Rosen
     Schatz
     Schiff
     Schumer
     Shaheen
     Slotkin
     Smith
     Van Hollen
     Warner
     Warnock
     Warren
     Welch
     Whitehouse
     Wyden

                                NAYS--50

     Banks
     Barrasso
     Blackburn
     Boozman
     Britt
     Budd
     Capito
     Cassidy
     Collins
     Cornyn
     Cotton
     Cramer
     Crapo
     Cruz
     Curtis
     Daines
     Ernst
     Fischer
     Grassley
     Hagerty
     Hawley
     Hoeven
     Husted
     Hyde-Smith
     Johnson
     Justice
     Kennedy
     Lankford
     Lee
     Lummis
     Marshall
     McConnell
     Moody
     Moreno
     Mullin
     Murkowski
     Paul
     Ricketts
     Risch
     Rounds
     Schmitt
     Scott (FL)
     Scott (SC)
     Sheehy
     Sullivan
     Thune
     Tillis
     Tuberville
     Wicker
     Young

                             NOT VOTING--5

     Graham
     Kelly
     McCormick
     Moran
     Sanders
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. On this vote, the yeas are 45, the nays are 
50. The motion is not agreed to.
  The motion was rejected.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader.

                          ____________________