Government agencies have bypassed US immigration law with arbitrary policies which encourage the invasion from Mexico to such an extent that America may as well “abolish immigration laws altogether,” the president of the National Border Patrol Council (NBPC), Brandon Judd, has said.
Speaking today before the immigration subcommittee of the House Judiciary Committee in Washington DC, Judd—whose council represents 75 percent of all US customs and border agents—said that the only way to describe the situation on the border with Mexico was to call it “chaos.”
The biggest trouble area at the moment, he said was in Texas, where criminal cartels are once again “proving adept at understanding and working around our policies.”
He pointed out a major fact that that the controlled media had ignored—or simply not questioned—about the “unprecedented” number of “unaccompanied minors” who invaded the US in 2013 and 2014 through the Rio Grande Valley.
“Instead of presenting themselves legally at Ports of Entry and asking for asylum, the unaccompanied minors were forced by the cartels to enter illegally at dangerous points along the border,” Judd said.
“In most cases, these minors were not trying to escape or evade apprehension; they were simply crossing the border illegally and giving themselves up.
“The cartels understood that the unaccompanied minors would force the Border Patrol to deploy Agents to these crossing areas in order to take the minors into custody.
“I want to stress this point because it has been completely overlooked by the press. The unaccompanied minors could have walked right up to the Port of Entry and asked for asylum.
“Why did the cartels drive them to the middle of the desert and then have them cross over the Rio Grande only to surrender to the first Border Patrol Agent they came across?
“The reason is that it completely tied up our manpower and allowed the cartels to smuggle whatever they wanted across our border,” he said.
This was, however, Judd went to say, only one way in which the immigration laws were being sidestepped.
Another, just as important way, was the exploitation of internal policies devised by the DHS and CPB, which were made up quite independently of the official law—and which makes a mockery of those laws.
In particular, Judd said, the order to implement a “catch and release” policy had utterly destroyed the border patrol’s effectiveness.
“As this surge became too much to handle, the Border Patrol and the Enforcement and Removal Office began releasing nearly everyone we arrested. I believe this release allowed the cartels to increase their smuggling profits,” he continued.
“With catch and release, the cartels could credibly say to potential customers that they would be able to remain in the United States without fear of deportation as long as they asked for asylum upon being apprehended.
“Although the problem began with unaccompanied minors, as word quickly spread of everyone being released, we started to see more crossings of complete family units, leading to a bigger problem than what we had in 2014.”
Judd pointed out that this “policy” had included an incredibly naïve clause in terms of which “notices to appear” (or NTA) documents had been given to the released invaders in the expectation that they would actually voluntarily come to court at a later date for a hearing.
“All individuals that were released during this period of time were given an official document that ordered them to appear before an immigration judge at some future date,” he said, “These orders are called Notices to Appear (NTA). The only problem, however, is that these official orders are usually ignored; so much so that Border Patrol Agents have dubbed them Notices to Disappear.”
“The willful failure to show up for court appearances by persons that were arrested and released by the Border Patrol has become an extreme embarrassment for the Department of Homeland Security,” he continued.
“It has been so embarrassing that DHS and the US Attorney’s office has come up with a new policy,” he said. In a nutshell, this “new” policy makes mandatory the release of any illegal as long as they do not have a previous felony arrest conviction—and as long as they claim to have been continuously in the United States since January of 2014.
“The operative word in this policy is ‘claim,’” Judd added. “The policy does not require the person to prove they have been here. Instead, it simply requires them to claim to have been here since January of 2014.”
Furthermore, he said, not “only do we release these individuals that by law are subject to removal proceedings, we do it without any means of tracking their whereabouts.
“In essence, we pull these persons out of the shadows and into the light just to release them right back to those same shadows from whence they came.”
He went on to give just one example from his personal sector in Montana. Several months ago they had arrested an illegal alien with a felony domestic violence arrest from another state.
He was however released because he had not yet been convicted, as per the “new” policy.
“Under the law, he should have been set up for removal proceedings, but under the policy, he was let go,” Judd said, highlighting the different procedures and how the “policies” had supplemented US immigration law.
“And he was let go even though he first proved that he cared so little about our laws that he entered the United States illegally, and once here, he proved further disdain by getting arrested for a serious violent act against another.
“What did we teach him and everyone else he undoubtedly told about his experience? We taught him our laws mean very little, but policies mean everything.
“Immigration laws today appear to be mere suggestions. There are little or no consequences for breaking the laws and that fact is well known in other countries.
“If government agencies like DHS or CBP are allowed to bypass Congress by legislating through policy, we might as well abolish our immigration laws altogether,” Judd concluded.