BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I listened to the Republican leader from South Dakota Senator Thune in his remarks today, and I would like to say a few words that may be in disagreement with him on some of the things that he said.
Let me preface my remarks by saying the Republican Senate leader is my friend. I think he would count me as a friend as well. We have served together for many years. There are many things we agree on; many things we disagree on.
But that is what the floor of the Senate is all about: Men and women elected to the Senate come to the floor and discuss the issues that they or the people who gather in the Gallery or at home follow this debate.
And there are differences of opinion. It is not unusual. But what I have seen in the 30 years--this is my 30th year in the U.S. Senate representing the State of Illinois--is that despite these disagreements, there comes a moment where the doors are closed, cameras are gone, and Members of both political parties sit down and say: OK, can we solve this problem? Is there a way to solve it?
And let me tell you what this problem is, and for some of you, it will not be a surprise because you have witnessed parts of it. There was an effort made by this President when he was elected to start a massive deportation effort. That is how they characterized it. It was massive.
Millions of people living in America would be forced to leave. And the Agency, the Department of Homeland Security would be in charge of that effort. We heard the President explain over and over and over again at his rallies what his goal was.
He used the words, you will recognize them: We are going to expel the ``worst of the worst.'' Terrorists, murderers, rapists, criminally insane, sex and drug traffickers, they are gone. They never should have been allowed in this country, and now, they are going to be gone.
Well, let me hold up my hand and say: That is a worthy goal. I believe, having been involved in the debate on immigration for decades now, there are some basics that I believe, and most Senators of both parties agree. Let me see if they ring true to you as well.
We should never knowingly allow a dangerous person to come into this country--never knowingly allow a dangerous person to come into this country. And if they are in this country seeking legal status and citizenship and are dangerous or commit a crime, they are gone. I think most Americans would say: Well, that just makes sense. We don't want dangerous people here. And if they come here and want to be part of America for any period of time, they have to demonstrate that they will be positive, contributing to this society and our economy.
What happened to the previous administration with the border, I am not going to debate one way or the other. We are in the present dealing with the second year of this President's term, and we are dealing with the situation as of today. The question is, What are we going to do about it?
Because it turns out that President Trump's promise to go after the ``worst of the worst'' was a promise that was not kept. I know it personally from the city of Chicago because the ICE forces showed up in Chicago.
I went over to their facilities. I asked as a Senator to see some of the people who were being held. They refused me that opportunity. It was the first time ever. They said: This is too dangerous a situation. We can't let you see the people we have arrested.
Well, it turns out that the legal reports of the people who were arrested and the people detained and the people sent away did not just include a handful of people who were dangerous but many more who were not dangerous. They have not broken any laws, and yet they were deported.
Some of them were American citizens, arrested by the ICE Agency. And now remember what happened in the streets of Minneapolis. We all saw that video over and over again. Two innocent Americans protesting, as they have a right to do under the Constitution, were killed on the streets of Minneapolis by ICE agents.
When they were asked later on by the Agency who were these people, they said they were domestic terrorists. They called them domestic terrorists. And when they took a look at their background, it turned out it wasn't true. One of them was actually a nurse in a veterans hospital in Minneapolis.
And so we said to ourselves: What is going on here? Thousands of ICE agents descending on populations in cities like Minneapolis and Chicago, deporting people from those cities, and they don't fit the definition of dangerous people, dangerous criminals. We have to do something about it to clean this up.
And why would we have ICE agents wearing masks? Why are they hiding their faces? I will just tell you: If your home State is South Dakota like the Republican leader or Illinois like myself, our policemen don't wear masks; our State troopers don't wear masks; our deputy sheriffs don't wear masks. What is going on here? I know what is going on, and you do too.
It strikes fear in the hearts of a lot of people to see those folks heavily armed with combat type uniforms wearing masks. It is to create fear; it is not for effective law enforcement.
What we have tried to argue on this side--the Democratic side of the aisle--is we ought to use the same standards for the ICE agents that we use for police in our own States. That makes sense to me. I have talked to a lot of law enforcement about this, and they say: Our people don't wear masks, and they don't need to.
Now, if they are undercover agents, different thing, keep them safe, do what you need. But that is a rare circumstance, a limited number of people that it applies to.
So we have gone back and forth for weeks now as to what to do to reform the ICE agents and those who are working for this effort for masks and deportation. I thought we were at least moving in the right direction, but we had limited success.
And so we said on 11 different occasions to our friends on the other side of the aisle: Republicans, join us in doing this. Let's fund everything else in the Federal Government, everything else in the Department of Homeland Security, and leave this one area, ICE agents and such, which we are debating, separate.
We offered that amendment 11 times, and 11 times they voted no. Now, they can explain why they voted no. I happen to think they believed it was politically right for them to stick with the President at that point.
But we have gone beyond that point now. Just 2 weeks ago, Senator Thune from South Dakota the Republican leader came to the floor and asked for unanimous consent to pass a funding bill, which excluded ICE from being included into it, and it passed here.
It was sent over to the House of Representatives where there is a Republican majority; they rejected it. They said: We want everything funded or nothing. So they funded everything, which brought us to a standstill again.
Needless to say, this needs to be resolved and soon. The good news is that the Agencies at the Department of Homeland Security like the Coast Guard, CISA, and FEMA, and a lot of other Agencies which you may be familiar with are going to be funded, but we still have to work out the ICE agents part. That is an important element in this, and it should be done and done right to make sure that our constitutional rights are protected.
If any law enforcement agent in any State that you happen to live in decided that it was time to search your home and to crash down your front door to get into your home, they would need a judicial warrant for that purpose. Arguments are being made by some that ICE agents should be excepted from that; I think that is wrong. If you don't have a court that says you have legal authority to tear down my front door and come into my home and arrest me, then you shouldn't do it. You need a judicial warrant, except in the most extreme circumstances, and that doesn't apply to what ICE is doing. So that issue still is out there.
That is the background that Senator Thune was alluding to. He sees it differently than I do, but that is not new in the Senate. There are always differences of opinion. The question is, Will we come together now and try to work out those differences? We have 3 weeks, this week and two more, that we will be in session. This is an opportunity to get it done. No excuses. Both parties, Democrats and Republicans, let's get it done, starting this week.
I am ready to stand and volunteer for that effort if I can help, but it should be done, and done soon.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT