Transcripts For CSPAN3 Hearing On Immigrants Serving In U.S. Military 20240713

Our witnesses we proceed to the hearing and i think many of us would like to say a comment about the late john conyers who was a member of this committee for many decades who gave his life to Public Service and who passed away just a few days ago while serving his country both in the armed forces and in the congress. We do more in his passing and it would be not in keeping with our traditions to proceed without at least giving our condolences to his family and to those who sent him to congress. I would like to recognize mr. Nadler for remarks. Thank you madam chairperson. People are mourning the loss of john conyers but nowhere is his loss felt more deeply than here in the Judiciary Committee where he served for more than 50 years as a member of this committee including more than 20 years as either chairman or Ranking Member. John conyers was a true champion for civil rights and a justice for the oppressed and disenfranchised. Prior to service was on the forefront of the Civil Rights Movement and was in alabama for the freedom day bodine drive in congress endorsed and once in office he hired rosa parks and when her civil rights activism caused other employers to shun her. Throughout his career he was a leader of progressive causes even if it was a lonely pursuit. He first introduced ledges asian for the reparations of slavery and jim crow back in 1989. He worked across the aisle and enacted Bipartisan Legislation such as the violence against women act, usa freedom act and the Voting Rights act. As a leader on the Judiciary Committee Congress Conyers and past important legislation such as age crimes legislation and the innocent protection act. His he was a Founding Member of the critic and congressional black benefited from his wisdom and grace. He was my colleague, my friend. Im honored to follow in his footsteps as he as we attempt to carry out his legacy. Under all those we are heavy with his loss that we have lost the benefit of his leadership. The gentleman yields back. I now recognize the Ranking Member for the full committee for his statement. Thank you. I echo the chairmans statements about the long list of accomplishments that the statements that he made but i choose to emphasize what he accomplished from his time as chair and his Ranking Member whenever to him and the thing i remember the most is kindness, sense of humor and his dress and his sharpest dresser always in the room especially on coattails and one of the highlights was a few years ago when we went to detroit and he was host for that. It was a meantime to show his city and where he came from. The last memory i will hold dearest was when you get to washington youre amazed and i can remember leaving this committee and going to the floor for a vote and we went to number, back to the hearing room and it happened to be me and him and i had been here a month or two so i was introducing myself and he said youre from georgia and i said yes, sir. I said you been here a long time so what brought you and i said ill ask this question but what do you to congress and he started chuckling. He said i really wanted to come to a part of the Jury Committee to work on Voting Rights act of 1964. I laughed and i said you realize thats two years before i was born and he said yep, ive been here a while. Stick and we would be remiss. The gentleman yields back and all members will be invited to cement whatever comment they would like to make at this time. It is my pleasure to welcome everyone to this afternoons hearing on the impact of the current immigration policies on Service Members, veterans and their families. Over the last two and half years the meditation has implanted numerous policy changes that have made life more difficult for noncitizen members of the armed forces, veterans and their families enforcement as well as the elimination of prosecutorial discretion when it comes to migration endorsement has resulted in the removal or attempted removal of far too many lawful, permanent veterans who honorably served our country but struggled with the transition back to civilian life, some who were disabled by ptsd. This hearing will allow the subcommittee to explore how these policy changes can be unforgiving and how they have impacted activeduty Service Members with veterans and their families. At this point, i would like to, without objection, ignite my colleague as a champion of this fear important issue for who will preside over this hearing in whom i yield the remainder of my time for his opening statement. Good afternoon. Without objection first i would like to request permission to cement these letters as part of the record. These letters on current immigration policies on the service, veterans and their families. First of all let me thank my colleague representative for her leadership and i appreciate the opportunity to preside over this most important hearing today and as we approach veterans day we have to recognize and honor all our veterans including immigrant veterans that served our country honorably in the armed forces from the revolutionary war to the recent conflicts in afghanistan and iraq. Today there are over half a million foreignborn veterans in the United States. As recently as 2012 there were 24000 immigrants part philippines, mexico, mexico, jamaica are accounted for the greatest number of where they were born they are americans in every sense of the word who was in mexico. The corporal was killed in action in 2003 after iraq he forces pretending to surrender and ambushed him and his fellow. The corporal was post to muesli given american citizenship. He chose to defend his country as a marine and made the ultimate sacrifice. He was a dreamer. The United States a country they love we have an allegation to uphold their promise to provide for these patriots with american citizenship. That since 1996 thousands of noncitizen veterans who took the oath of allegiance and were honorably discharged have been deported. No one put the uniform on and is honorably discharged should be subject to deportation. As every soldier knows, you never leave a soldier behind. Sadly, the u. S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement or ice does not follow policy for solving cases of potentially removable veterans does not always identify and track such veterans. As a result, ice does not know how many veterans it has deported. Recently the admin attrition has adopted policies that have affected the naturalization process for military Service Members and veterans. As a result military naturalizations have decreased by 44 from 7300 fiscal year 2017 to about 4000 fiscal year 2018. In august of 2019 u. S. Citizenship and Immigration Service announced a change definition of the term resident. In fact, children born to certain u. S. Service members stationed abroad will now be required to naturalize under a lengthier and more complicated application process. Together with my colleague representative of texas we left a letter to the u. S. Citizenship and Immigration Service with acting director, asking for reconsideration of this policy. Without objection i would like to cement that letter as part of this record. In total the policy changes negatively affect military recruitment and effectiveness and turn our back on immigrant servicemembers, veterans and their families. This is unacceptable and we need to correct the situation. I look forward to hearing our witnesses. It is my pleasure to introduce the gentleman from colorado for an opening statement. Thank you. Immigrants have recognize their sacrifice congress provided in law for the expedited naturalization of Foreign Nationals which includes september 11, 2001 naturalization is voluntary for naturalization must apply for it, receive a variable adjudication and take the oath of allegiance to become a naturalized u. S. Citizen. As part of the process the apartment of defense must defy Honorable Service alien has met the time in service or garments. In most cases the 180 days. This policy that the servicemember has served honorably as required statute. October 1, the united state citizen and Inpatient Services has nationalized a proximally 130,000 members of the abroad. Today we will discuss the difficult issue of noncitizen vetted veterans who been removed from the United States. Supported to know if no one is above the legal consequent is of their behavior. The cases of that has been a place for several administrations and with sensitivity to those who may have suffered from Mental Health problems due to their service. Im also honored to be an original cosponsor with bringing member collins of hr 4803 the citizenship for military children its a bipartisan bill to make the technical change for the requirements of section 320 the immigration and naturalization act. This will ensure the children of the u. S. Armed forces, members stationed abroad will automatically acquire citizenship for all of the requirements are and will make sure they are not disadvantaged civilly because they u. S. Citizen parent is stationed abroad. Introduced hr 4803 earlier this month and im proud of her work on this bill than the chose when a change i look forward to hearing from the witnesses and youll back the balance of my time. I will now recognize the chairman of the committee for his opening statement. Thank you. Immigrants have served in the u. S. Armed forces in every major conflict since the revolutionary war. According to the Bipartisan Policy Center in 2016 a proximally 511,000 foreignborn veterans in the armed forces residing in the United States. Immigrants make up a substantial portion of the veteran population and every day brave men and women risk their lives. We rely on it to keep their safe and provide stability to fragile regions their sacrifices and make sure their families are supported to give them every opportunity to become u. S. Citizens. Fortunately, as a result of the unproven giving nature of our Immigration Laws numerous policy changes limited by the Trump Administration appears the opposite is happening. Under the Trump Administration the deferment of defense u. S. Citizenship and Immigration Services have implemented numerous policy changes that undermine congress to provide an expedited naturalization process for Service Members and veterans october, 2017 they cannot receive certification of Honorable Service. Document which was essential to expedite the naturalization process and previously certifications can be issued as soon however one must First Complete 180 days of service and one year in the selected reserve. In addition certifications could previously have been issued by any supervising officer and now must be certified by the secretary of the Military Branch for a commissioned officer. These changes are unnecessary and cruel. They serve no purpose which may harder for any visuals serving our country to become citizens. They had a measurable impact. Total military authorization fiscal year 2017, [inaudible] in addition because they dramatically cut the numbers of offices Naturalization Services to those stationed overseas have become much more limited. U. S. Eis used to provide services 23 International Offices in the change took effect last month and was cut from 23 International Offices to four offices. Personnel is on site to conduct naturalization interviews but one week for every calendar quart. Why would we make it more difficult for the men and women were risking their lives in service of our country to become permanent citizens. Its shortsighted and foolhardy. Many of these veterans have been removed from the United States as a result of the ptsd, brain injury and other physical trauma suffered while on active duty and make the transition back to civilian life. In other words, they served this country, had a medical condition as a result which impaired their judgment, committed some crimes as a result of their medical condition but were therefore deported. We can agree individuals should serve a reasonable sentence but we should if that may have been service related. There must be a better way to address these cases. Our veterans deserve better and we owe it to them to find a way to bring compassion and discretion back to our Immigration Laws. I want to end on a positive note. Last week i introduced a bill along with Ranking Member collins and we served honorably in the armed forces himself as well as several of my esteemed colleagues. This bill will fix the problem the result of the policy change in august which makes it more difficult for children of u. S. Citizens serving our country abroad to be organized as u. S. Citizens. This will reverse this misguided policy. It will make it easier for the children. Im glad we were able to Work Together to pass this important legislation. I look forward to advancing our efforts in the coming weeks. I want to thank the percentage of for holding this important hearing. I think the witnesses for testifying. I yield back the balance of my time. Thank you, chairman nadler. I like to recognize the Ranking Member, mr. Collins for his opening statement. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Im pleased to have the opportunity to discuss these opportunities because i was a colonel and understand the issues running military service. Its Congress Place to determine what should be made to u. S. Law governing those who serve desperate last week that sharon mentioned he and i along with other colleagues from across the political spectrum introduced hr 4803, citizenship for children. [inaudible] this exposed a loophole. Some children were not automatic acquire citizenship because of their parents deployment prohibited them from eating the statute. This would fix this unfortunate loophole. It is important to remember that immigrants wear the uniform and have since the founding of our nation. Historically the average number of Foreign Nationals have been around 5000 a year and that number jumped to 7000 in 2019. Many will go on to be naturalized for their service and from fiscal year 2001members in the military including more than 11000 deployed overbroad. Our Immigration Laws organize the immigrant layout provisions of the expedited naturalization of Foreign Nationals. In Foreign National who serves in hostilities is a level eligible to apply for naturalization for Honorable Service. [inaudible] this aligns with Longstanding Department policies that the department does not issue characterization for any citizen or noncitizen alike. Not all Foreign Nationals have certain military and those who do not remain subject to our Immigration Laws, although we should not sealed Service Members from the necessary lawful consequences for agencies handling oral cases should be particularly careful with those of services. We must be vigilant about any enlistees, foreign or national alike to make sure they do not intend arm. The department of defense under the Obama Administration became aware of the risks created and halted enlistment. But that is vital with linkage or Health Skills vital to the National Interest to enlist in the Armed Services even though they were only here on timber a visa. Wellintentioned, the screening processes were not up to the challenge. This includes questionable preference for the foreign country. Susceptibility to a foreign influence. There is an even one publicly known case in which a chinese spy enlisted to the military through the program. I note the deferment of defense is improving its screening i support the decision to halt the program. [inaudible] at this time in Service Requirement and the other policies we will discuss. I look forward to the witness testimony and thank you for being here. With that, i yield back my time. Thank you, Ranking Member collins. Its my pleasure period he was born in mexico grew up in california and enlisted in the army in 1995 and served for six years during which time he received multiple awards such as the Army Commendation medal, humanitarian service medal, despite his service to the his country he is bent deported twice with disHonorable Discharge from the army in 2001. Last year he became a u. S. Citizen and remains committed to his organization and providing support whether deported veterans. We thank him for his service and for being here today and we share your story, sir. Second witness, the director of immigrant rights for the aclu of california and served as a senior staff attorney at the aclu of southern california. She has worked since 2008 and specializes in immigrant rights in litigation and policy advocacys related to Immigration Enforcement and policy. She received her ba from Bernard College and jd from georgetown university. Margaret stock is a retired Lieutenant Colonel in the military police, u. S. Army reserve imposable immigration attorney with the crossborder log group in the distinguished Macarthur Foundation for her outstanding work in immigration and National Security. She has testified before both chambers of congress, including this very subcommittee to discuss the issues ranging from the effects of Immigration Law on the military. She holds 3 degrees from harva harvard, including her jd, mpa and masters inches she did studies from the u. S. Army war college. We welcome her as well. Welcome back to this committee. The honorable mark metcalf is a former immigration judge on the Immigration Court in miami, florida and a former federal state prosecutor in his home state of kentucky. Mr. Metcalf also held various positions with the u. S. Deferment of justice in 20022008. Hes worked as a petitioner and a colonel in the Army National guard and serves as command judge a test. Test. Test. Mr. Metcalf has previously testified before congress and is an expert on Immigration Law. This includes his testimony before the subcommittee and that 100 11th congress he received his ba and jd from the university of kentucky and we welcome them back through the subcommittee and we look forward to your testimony. We welcome all our distinguished witnesses and thank you for your participation. If you could please rise i will spare you in. Please raise your hand. Do you swear or affirm under penalty of perjury that the testimony you are about to give his true and correct to the best of your knowledge, information and belief to help you god . Thank you. Let the record show the witnesses answered in the affirmative and thank you and please be seated. Please note each of your written statements will be entered into that record and i will ask each of we will begin. Welcome. Chairman, congressman, Ranking Member and other distinct numbers of the committee thank you the opportunity to appear before the subcommittee to testify about these important issues i am a u. S. Veteran who was to mexico in 2004 and honored to join you today to speak on math of my fellow deported veterans about my personal experience and i would like to acknowledge that some formerly deported veterans have joined us in the room today, including miguel perez and the green card veterans that are supporters. Im not proud what led to my deportation but proud of my military service in the positive compliments in my life, including starting this in tijuana. I grew up in compton, california and my family and i moved to the u. S. When i was kevin years old. As a child i remember pledging allegiance to our American Flag every morning. I enlisted in 1995 when i was 17 years old and a lawful permanent resident at the time and wanted to serve my adopted country and saw service as a way to leave the environment and to afford to go to college. I arrived in fort bragg and volunteered for Airborne School serving in the 82nd airborne from 19961999. I reenlisted for another three years left service with an Honorable Discharge in october 2001. After i left the service i had trouble adjusting and made mistakes. I eventually found myself in prison for an incident where a firearm was discharged at a vehicle and i was sentenced to 3. 5 years in the state of california but i was deported because of my criminal record and because i was not a u. S. Citizen. I came back to the u. S. Eagerly started a family and worked as a roofer. Eventually i was deported in 2010 for a traffic incident that i had but they reinstated my deportation. I made the toughest decision in my life and decided to stay in tijuana and return to the u. S. Legally. I wanted to but in in 2013 the commendation of hard work and determination i opened up the veteran support i wanted a place that could help support veterans in situations like mine and navigate the hardship of deportation and the separation from our families in the country we love and serve. Its a lifeline for many deported veterans and around the world. Provides housing helps them find jobs in file for va benefits and connect pro bono attorneys can return to their families under todays laws most deported veterans only come home to america with an American Flag draped around their caskets. There is no honor in bringing deported veterans to be recognized for their service only when they died. I became an citizenship on april 13, 2018 and im blessed to be back home in america and be a father to my daughter. Once again, i want to emphasize im a Firm Believer in people being held accountable. It does not make sense for me to deport our veterans after they have completed their sentence and paid for their actions. For veterans, deportation is a double punishment. As an example, my friend is a former u. S. Marine who was deported in the day he rose Drug Rehab Center in tijuana. His daughter was a lively and inspiring young woman passed away in an accident in 2017 and we held a Funeral Service in tijuana because roberto was unable to go to san diego to bury his daughter. I have a few recordations on how to ensure we protect our veterans from deportation and encourage all service mowers and veterans to naturalize. Im blessed to be u. S. Citizen today and i believe u. S. Citizenship only acknowledges when many deported veterans already believe in their hearts. We believe ourselves to be american and no current law requires us to be report our veterans. We must support our veterans and i thank you for the opportunity to testify. Thank you. I like to call on [inaudible] for her statement. Ranking member about, to stay with members of the Sub Committee for immigrant recruits expedited citizenship in exchange for their military. Since 1996 the United States has betrayed that promise. Weve deported thousands of our veterans and every day we deport more. Just last week i supported [inaudible] a twotime iraq and Afghanistan War veteran, combat veteran who suffered a traumatic brain injury and who struggles with severe ptsd and substance abuse. They came to the u. S. As a three euro child and knows no other home. He cares for his life in el salvador paid these deportations are unconscionable and immoral and the result of three forces working together for the first, punishing an unforgiving 1996 deportation. The failure of the u. S. Government to naturalize nonService Members while they are serving. Third, hyper aggressive Immigration Enforcement over the past decade. Deported veterans are nearly all former lawful permanent residents and those interviewed for our 20 the United States is the only country they know as home. Change made excessively punitive with criminal convictions such as writing a bad check or possession for failed marijuana and even convictions for those who may serve no time in jail at all with prior deportation bars them for life. Ninetysix laws dramatically expanded the definition of the category known as aggravated felonies. Today the term is a whole host of nonviolent misdemeanors but are neither aggregated nor felonies. The law may deportation men today are by eliminating all forms of judicial suppression meaning a single colonel conviction, one mistake, could equal a lifetime of the banishment with no exception. It means the judge will not be permitted to consider whether deportation because it Domestic Violence occurred more than ten years ago and they will not be able to served honorably to earn the rank of sergeant. He lived in the United States for 52 years since he was four years old and as a successful engineering career, two grown sons and a granddaughter and extended family who are all u. S. Citizens. The judge will not consider the deportation was forcing him to live the remainder of his life estranged from everything he knows because the law says one mistake and you are out. Citizen and noncitizen veterans equally struggle with reentry following discharge and substance abuse, Mental Health issues and anger can lead to contact with the colonel Justice System and as a society with that inflict our veterans. The policy looks the other way. [inaudible] is here today and sitting behind me with his daughter deported for the crime of spitting on a Police Officer which was defined as an aggravated felony. He served one year in connecticut prison and at the conclusion of a sentence ice was at the prison door and they arrested him and detained him for 3. 5 years, 3. 5 years without the rights to be released on bail. He fought his deportation and then deported him. Do not matter he served eight honorable years in two young daughters their father. One mistake. Because of the change in law and allowed to get his green card back. Most aborted veterans have no such options for return. U. S. Will not be deporting the veterans how the government kept his promise to them and made them citizens while they were in the military. Over the years numerous obstacles have stood in the way of Service Members naturalizing. None of those obstacles, none are greater than the obstacles Service Members are facing today with the deferment of defense and Immigration Service polici policies, miguel behind me and body the hope of deported veterans around the world their hopes lay at the feet of congress and they did not turn their back on our country. We must not turn our back on them. Thank you. Missus stock, welcome. Congressman, chairwoman, Ranking Member, distinguished members of the subcommittee name is Margaret Stock and a monitor to testify today. The last three years have witnessed in an effort to stop immigrants from joining the immigrants from joining the military captioning performed by vitac and preventing them from continuing to serve. The new policies do not make our country safer. They harm military recruiting, they hurt military readiness and they prevent the United States armed forces from utilizing talented immigrants. The new policies hide behind rati,onals. The improvements to the process for expediting cases have been eradicated. The media reported that there has been a 65 drop in the numbers of Service Members applying for naturalization after dod issued a new policy memo preventing them from applying a. Story explained that immigrants servicing in the military were more likely to be denied citizenship than civilians. Military members cannot file for citizenship unless they receive a form stating they are serving honorably. Getting the form signed required a trip to the nearest military office. Recently, the department of defense has changed the rules whereby this form can be certified. Dod now requires an officer in the grade of 0 to certify the form. They have grave difficulty finding an officer who is willing to sign their forms. They were required to process military naturalization applications within six months. However the law contained a sunset date. Today, however, they take the position that theres no deadline for processing these cases and they are now often taking years to process. In mid 2009, uscs started a Successful Program where recruits filed for naturalization when they reported to training and in accordance with longstanding practice, these applications were processed so that the soldiers graduated from training and became u. S. Citizens at the same time. The Current Administration terminated this program in early 2018. Last thursday, i was at the uscis office in new york city, only a few short block fls the World Trade Center in one direction and in the other, the monument to Chinese Americans who fought in the u. S. Military. The promises made in that film are false. Theres no more expedited military naturalization. Today it takes much longer to naturalize than his or her civilian counterpart. And a military members application is much more likely to be denied. Military members have had to resort to the courts just to get the agencies to follow the law. Last week, an active duty soldier with no criminal record had to sue dhs because the agency refused to make a decision in her case. She was interviewed more than three years ago. Officials told her that they had decided not to naturalize her until she was discharged, citing new policies. She was discharged last month without her citizenship. As i said earlier, its now much easier for a civil green card holder to naturalize than for green holders to natural through their military service. Immigration lawyers are now advising green card holders not to join the military because it will make their process more difficult. Dod has also made it much more difficult for noncitizens to join the military in the first place. They are less than 4 of the military. Military recruiters report to me that there are meeting recruiting less qualified native born americans. Theyve also recently changed certain policies or has plans to change certain policies in ways that harm the family members of military personnel. Changes are being made without transparency or accountability and without asking Key Stakeholders first. Many of Foreign National workers have tried to get the visas promised to them by congress but remain in danger while they wait for background checks. When the United States breaks their promise to these individuals and previously passed rigorous background checks, American Foreign policy and the lives of American Military members are put at risk. Our National Security depends on keeping the promises that america makes to the immigrants who are coming here and keeping the promises we make when someone stands before the American Flag and takes an oath of al to the United States. They show know interest in reversing their policy changes. Congress must act. In my written testimony, i make ten suggestions for things that congress can do to force the bureaucrats to keep the promises that the u. S. Government has made to Americas Fighting men and women. I thank you for the opportunity to testify and im ready to take your questions. Thank you very much for your comments. Mr. Metcalf, welcome. Thank you. Its an honor to be here. Members of the committee, its an honor to be here. I thank all of you and i thank the panelists for their statements. Im a Lieutenant Colonel in my 28th year of service. My unit, the 149th, closed american operations in iraq and did the handover of all military installations in iraq. In at least one case, a naturalized citizen served as a combat arms company commander, all had earned their citizenship. Background checks were the rule and this brings me to the points i believe critical to good policy. First of all, we may have differences of opinions today, but all of us are americans. The policies conceived to advance the experience of immigrants is wide, large and generous. I favor a 180 day active duty Service Requirement. This allows background checks to be completed that can better individual individuals whose histories require further investigation before they continue to more rigorous and sensitive training. This requirement is not onerous. In light of the great Responsibilities Service in the military offers. It permits suitability assessment, financial, criminal and loyalty issues are raised. I agree with policies that make it as certain as possible that military service and the consequence american citizenship conceived are conferred on th e those. The program was created to enhance force readiness. Medical and Language Skills were augmented through its application and through it, some 10,400 Foreign Nationals were listed. It was halted by the Obama Administration in fall 2016. Generally, u. S. Born recruits have verifiable public and private records, recruits outside the u. S. Do not, making the need to scrutinize their histories all the more important and moves onto citizenship, i favor approaches to scrutiny already put in place by dod. Recent army experiences with the program justifies this rigger and flexibility and i want to point out, in my more illustrated statement to the incidents involving fraudulent applications in one case a Chinese National posing as a recruit only to be found as a chinese espionage asset. I want to move onto the removal of veterans. First of all, if i had been an immigration judge, i would have canceled his removal from the United States. As a judge in miami, i awarded 75 granted 75 to 80 of all cancellation applications. His was a perfect case, in my opinion, for the grant of cancellation. And, by the way, my grant of 75 to 80 cancellations was not unusual. The numbers from the Immigration Courts, if you start parsing them, will show that our Immigration Judges are generous. And thats something we could talk about at further hearings. But i want to point out that mr. Bf arajas is a perfect example. The cancellation process takes into consideration the kind of deep dive into the facts that the elements now being used by i. C. E. Should have been using all along. I note veterans overall criminal history, his rehabilitation or her rehabilitation, family and financial ties to the understanding, employment history, health and Community Service in addition to the duty status, active or reserve, war zone duty, years in service and decorations awarded, all of these are proper considerations to remove one veteran who should not be removed is one too many to consider each case on a case by case basis looking at all the facts applicable is the right approach and will always be the right approach. I thank you for your time today. Im happy to answer any questions you and the members of the panel may have. Thank you mr. Metcalf. Now i would like to proceed for questions and ill begin by recognizing myself. First of all, mr. Metcalf, youre right, this is not a democrat or republican issue. This is an issue about justice for all of our veterans who have served our country, who have put their life on the line for our country. And if i may ask the deported veterans, just please raise your hand, please, who are here today. I want to thank you for your service to our country and my question is the basic one which is why when these soldiers earned service, why do you not become citizens . Are those resources not given to you . Were you promised automatic citizenship when you enlisted . Thank you for that important question. Theres two things that happen, i think the government needs to be held accountable when they promise citizenship and there needs to be some kind of program when you say the government promised citizenship the recruiters. The recruiters they promise you citizenship and basically one of the things that doesnt happen is nobody sits down with you and actually makes sure that you know what kind of forms need to be filled out and its an individual responsibility. But definitely the u. S. Government needs to make sure theres a program in place that they set aside time or have somebody that can show you what needs to be done. Thank you. Ms. Stock, you mentioned the Program Terminated when you graduate from training in terms of putting you on a fast track to become a citizen, you said that program has been canceled or suspended. Its a program that existed during the program has been canceled. It existed during world war i, world war ii, the korean war, vietnam war. The background checks, by the way, that are done on military members are done before they enter the service let me ask you, is there a difference right now if youre a marine, air force, army in terms of level of citizenships that may folks that may become citizens after theyre discharged . All of the services have basic training naturalization until january 2018 when it was canceled. Now we have chaos. And we have be more specific. Every day i get call from a green card holder in the military who says nobody will help me file for citizenship. I cant get anybody to sign my n426. Nobody is willing to assist me. You mentioned its harder for a green card holder in the military than a green card holder outside the military to become a citizen, how is that . Civilians dont need to go through convoluted, multiyear background checks by the department of defense before they become citizens. They dont need to get an n426 certified i ask you that because i bet in my district, i bet i have the most latino district in my country, these kids i know from my high schools that are residence dont ask how hard is it going to be for me to become a citizen . They just enlist. Marine recruiters are in the high schools and these kids say im going to sign up and i dont think the thought of becoming a citizen is there. Theyre there to serve the country. And this concerns me because we need to move ahead and go revert back to that program that was just canceled to make sure that these soldiers that are serving with honor have the right to become a citizen and that right is a meaningful one. The program was highly successful. Where do we go from here . Do we present legislation . Something that maybe my colleagues can also support us to move in that direction . The law allows programs like this to exist and they were common as i said, world war i, world war ii, the korean war, this was the Standard Practice of the United States government. It was only reversed by the department of defense that undermined the express intent of congress more than a hundred years ago. We have here lawlessness by the department of defense. Theyre undermining a statute with internal executive memos. Judicial discretion, you mentioned that, did you mention that, that the 1996 act take away some judicial discretion. I know mr. Metcalf had a different perspective on that. Yes, and that is one of the most troubling aspects of the changes that were made to the Immigration Law that it removed all forms of judicial discretion for any person who has an aggravated felony and expanded the definition of aggravated felony. You have more people who are subject to deportation, even more misdemeanors im out of time. In orange county, we were one of the first pioneers on this. I look forward to working with you on this issue. And now i would like to recognize mr. Biggs for five minutes of questions. I think we all understand that many of our veterans have struggled with reintegration due to ptsd issues and thats why ive introduced legislation, i advocate today for my colleagues across the aisle to make access to therapy for available, that is and more easily. It is coldhearted to with hold support for this important therapy for veterans. So when i see mr. Barajasvarels say he was struggling to integrate, i dont think thats unusual. You also said theres no free pass and that deportation is a double punishment. Let me explain why thats not so. Theres no free pass because you did serve the time for shooting at a vehicle. That was the charge you were convicted, you served your time. You were later deported because you were a noncitizen. Theres nobody else that would get an exception to that who is here because of any other rational. They would still be deportable as you were. And you were deported and reentered illegally and im happy that youve received a pardon. But to say its a double punishment is illogical. The first punishment for committing the crime is the actual criminal sentence itself. The deportation is applicable to any person whos in the country that is not a citizen who is engaged in criminal conduct. That is not a second penalty, thats the penalty that comes for failing to obtain citizenship and i read your statement and listened to you testify. You might have had a misunderstanding of what you needed to do to obtain citizenship. Thats a fair comment. But i want to point out some data that i think is mindboggling that this was brought up. This individual who was deported, he was convicted, among other things, injury to a spouse, assault with a Deadly Weapon and false imprisonment. Well, you know what, he didnt naturalize when he was in the military, thus he is subject to deportability. Thats the way the law works. That type of criminal conduct do constitute aggravated felonies. Weve also heard about the higher denial rate for u. S. Military applications, that rate is 17 . Overall its 11 . You need to understand, youre talking apples and oranges here. From april to june there were they had received 75 military applications compared to 209,000 applications. Theres some interesting things when you manipulate statistics in the way that i heard here today. They reviewed the cases of veterans that were ultimately deported. 18 of those veterans, were convicted for sexually abusing a minor. 21 were convicted of a violent felony such as homicide, or assault, thats 24 of the total. Having been convict. And those cases that im talking about, over half of them were removals during the Obama Administration and not under the Trump Administration as so many of you want to focus on. Mr. Chairman, i ask consent to enter into the record the following documents. Department of Justice Press release entitled Chinese National for acting as an illegal alien who enlisted in the u. S. Army and was believed to be working at the direction of a high level. Also the department of defense memo specifying that the certification may not take place until security checks have been complet completed. And, three, the process for naturalization and the help line number. And i see my time is expired. I would like to call on mr. Nadler for five minutes of questions. Thank you for coming here and sharing your story. It appears stories like youres are all too common. A report identified 250 veterans placed in removal proceedings from fiscal years 2013 to 2018. Many of these veterans have been removed as a result of transgressions and other physical traumas suffered while on active duty. Can you say the question again . How could the government, especially dod, the department of defense, better inform military Service Members and veterans about their eligibility for naturalization . We need to have some kind of program in place, again, that where they can explain the forms that need to be done or thats my suggestion for that. Okay. Now ms. Stock, in your testimony today, you laid out how the Trump Administration has made life more difficult for green card holders who join the military and apply for naturalization. Were military Service Members and or Immigration Attorneys working on nationalizations informed about these changes ahead of time or were able to provide any input . No, they were not. Was there any outreach . No. No cost benefit analysis to support this. None. The services are pushed back at the requirements because they say theyre unreasonable and making it hard to recruit people. Theyve pushed back the requirements that the against department of defense. Theyve sent emails to dod. This doesnt come from the services, it came from dod, upper level. It came from department of defense which did not do any cost benefit analysis. There was no hearing, no cost benefit analysis on the impact it was going to have on the force or military recruiting. Was there a process in place for lprs serving in the military to have their n426, which is essential to the naturalization process signed by the proper authorities as required by the october 13th, 2017, dod policy changes, they put out the memo but didnt do anything to educate people. There was kind of haphazard memos put out that didnt reach to the lowest levels. If you talk to recruiters today, theyll tell you that solidiers can be naturalized at basic training people are say its easy but you have to wait until you get to your first unit and when you get there, you cant find anybody who will certify it. Whats the average time it takes for Service Members to receive a response to request once they complete the n264. Its taking months. If they email it to me, i can send it to somebody who will get one signed in a couple of weeks if youre in the army. And if you dont, it takes months . It can take months. The forms are getting lost. People never hear back after they submit them. What signal do you think that these policy changes sent to lprs who are serving in the military . Unfortunately they send a signal that their service is not valued. That they are not welcome in the military and they also send a signal that they should not join the military because theyre going to face a very long haul to get their citizenship if they try to do it after joining the military. And what dod spoupport servis are available . There used to be very Strong Services because the basic training naturalization sites had teams who were dedicated to handling those cases. Those have been dismantled. Its rather ad hoc. Theres a military hotline that you can call but you often get wrong information. The bureaucrat requirements are increased and the resources are decreased. Thats correct. Whats the average length of time it takes to process an application . It used to only take a few months, when they had basic training naturalization in place. Now in many cases, its taking upwards of a year or two. And they plan on closing most of the International Field offices and consolidation overseas military naturalization, consolidating them into four hubs. I think there are 26 field offices. How will these changes impact Service Members and their families who are seeking citizenship . Those closures will make it harder for individuals to get United States citizenship. One more question. How can we stop the deportations of military veterans . Restore basic training naturalization. We will not have any deported vets if everyone gets naturalized before leaving the military. The law says if you dont serve honorably for periods aggregating five years, you can lose your citizenship that you gained through military service. There is no reason for these misguided policies because the legal means already is in the law to take care of anybody whos a bad actor and misbehaves after they get their citizenship. No reason other than ill will. Thank you. I yield back. I will recognize mr. Buck for five minutes of questions. Thank you. Ms. Stock, do you have a security clearance currently . Currently, no, im retired. Do you have any access to classified information that was involved in making the decisions about which veterans would receive citizenship. I only reviewed unclassified summaries. Would you be surprised to know that there were thousands of folks who for classified reasons were not allowed to receive citizenship because they had ties to foreign countries. Thats not correct. You dont believe that . No. The citizenship applications are actually not classified. So its classified information as to why they did not receive citizenship. Its not classified. They give you a written decision telling you why youre being denied citizenship. You believe if someone has ties to china, to Chinese Intelligence Services, that there will be a Public Statement identifying that person as having ties to Chinese Intelligence Services . When you go through the naturalization process you have to complete a form. If youre denied naturalization, youre given a written statement why youre denied naturalization. And that written statement may not include the reasons for the classified reasons for you not to be given that privilege of becoming a u. S. Citizen . They will tell you directly why youre being denied . Youre saying here today that a top secret relationship a topsecret information that has been developed during the Obama Administration, by the way, that identifies an individual as having a relationship with a Chinese Intelligence Service that that is going to be identified in a Public Document . Thats what youre saying. Thats not what im saying. What im saying is when you apply for citizenship, theres a form that asks you questions including things like, whether youve done this that or the other thing and you have to answer those questions under oath and if you lie under oath they will deny you naturalization because you lied to us said said x and x wasnt true. They have access to it they dont normally, no. The department of defense doesnt naturalize people. I understand. One agency of the government will work with another agency of the government to determine whether someone has a relationship that would be threatening to this government. Interesting dod doesnt pass that information along. This came out in a Court Proceeding recently. Okay. So but the naturalization proceeding is not classified. Its your understanding that no one has been denied a no veteran has been denied citizenship based on a relationship with a foreign Intelligence Service . Well, i think the case that was raised earlier, he was never naturalized. Thats not my question. My question is, your understanding is that there has never been an individual denied citizenship, a veteran denied citizenship, as a result of a relationship with a foreign Intelligence Service . I cant answer that because the country has been fighting bars since 1775 and i dont know every case of somebody being denied citizenship for more than 200 years. But the concerns about National Security that have been raised regarding the program are overblown and that was proven in a court case in seattle where the department of defense came into court and presented the facts to the judge and the judge dismissed these concerns and said they were not valid. Lets get to a simple question. Would you be in favor of naturalizing a an individual or for an individual to become a naturalized citizen if that individual had a relationship with a foreign Intelligence Service . Im not sure what you they worked for and received money from a foreign Intelligence Service to provide information about the United States of america . If the individual was a spy and they failed to reveal that information in their naturalization application and they got naturalized by accident, they could be denaturalized as soon as the government found out that information and they could be prosecuted and deported. Im certainly in favor of that. My question is, would you be in favor of naturalizing that person . Im not in favor of naturalizing anybody who doesnt meet the requirements to become an american citizen. I yield back. Thank you. Ms. Jayapal recognized. Thank you. And i thank the witnesses for being here. The u. S. Military has long relied on immigrants to protect our country. Within the United States we have 2. 4 million veterans with immigrant ties but we rely on assistance from Foreign Nationals aboard. In january of 2006, congress created a special immigrant visa to provide a path to safety in the United States for iraqi and afghans who worked for the u. S. And are facing danger. This is simple common sense when people put their lives on the line to defend our country, the only right thing to do is to make sure that they and their families are protected. Ive working with a number of republican offices to advocate for a gentleman that i will call mohammed, a translator who worked with the u. S. In your experience as Lieutenant Colonel, would youhczx agree th the assistance of native translators in countries what level of danger are those are those translators putting themselves in when they when they agree to do that job . Theyre putting themselves in extreme dangers. Many of them have been killed because they sided with the United States. Unsurprisingly, people face persecution and retaliation. In fact he and his family have faced persistent persecution. Just one week ago, he was arrested by military police and theres a possibility that he will be disappeared. And yet state has denied his application on a discretionary basis. His case is part of a larger trend. Theres a 60 drop in sivs issued to afghanis. In your opinion, what is causing these delays and drops in admission . A lot of it is fear on the part of the bureaucrats who were supposed to be conducting background checks on these individuals. Theyre afraid to approve anyone and its also a lack of resources and a lack of attention by the leadership who doesnt seem to want to focus on folks who put their lives on the line for america. How do we improve those programs to ensure access to safety for them. Unfortunately the bureaucracy is ignoring the deadline. Congress needs to provide strong oversight to ensure that the statutes are followed. What does the process look like for our veterans. Isnt there quite a bit of heavy vetting. Theyre already heavily vetted and they have huge files filled with testimonials about their Loyal Service to the United States, sometimes over a period of many, many years. Its unclear what exactly is going on in the subsequent vetting that seems to take years and years. From what i can tell, most of it is a final being put on a shelf and nothing happening. Beyond the humanitarian concerns to protect those who have risked their lives for us, another thing that concerns me is the message that were sending to future allies. So how does this farreilure to protect these people impact our natural security interests today . Its quite bad. The people who are potentially out there that might be willing to help us in the nurtufuture a going to say, i dont want to take a chance. Im not going to help you next time. Mr. Chairman, the treatment of people who have put their lives on the line defending our country is unacceptable, whether its immigrants living here who have signed up to protect our country, or people aboard who have done so despite significant affects to their family and families lives. Its our duty to stand by these communities and do them justice. I agree with you and i would like to call on ms. Garcia from texas. Thank you for convening this hearing on this very important topic. I know that this is something that many of us in texas are concerned about. Over a 20 of people who have been awarded the medal of honor were not born in the United States. My state of texas is home to both the second highest number of noncitizens and the second number of veterans in the nation. Texas is home to a high number of noncitizen veterans making this topic important to many of us, particularly many of my constituents. According to a 2017 report from the National Immigration forum, about 40,000 immigrants serve in the armed forces and about 5,000 noncitizens enlist each year. We must not forget the people behind these numbers. A man who came to the United States as a young boy with his family in 1978 and settled in texas. He graduated from high school and joined the navy he says out of pride for his country. Following that he served with the national guard. While serving in the navy, he and the ship crew what many would do, when they would dock, they would go out drinking, perhaps using it as a way to cope with their anxiety with the war. Later he was convicted with a dwi, he was deported back to mexico. He responds simply with this isnt my life. Immigrants are the most patriotic americans have they have experienced different places and are able to appreciate the contrast of how wonderful it is to live in the United States. It has been noted, noncitizens have in fact joined the Armed Services since the revolutionary war and sense then have joined ranked and followed along side their counterparts during every major conflict, from the war of 1812 to the current inflicts in the middle east. I thank our witness here today who speaks for the veterans who have been deported and all of those who joined him today. And i begin my question with you, sir, mr. Barajas, you said that you dont get the details about the process. Do you get any Legal Assistance . Unfortunately, when i was in the military, there was actually, there was. I believe jag you could go through, but there was nobody who directed me towards the path and then a failure on my part, but i think we need to make sure either our squad leaders or somebody at some point makes sure that that happens. Do you know if they get Legal Assistance now . Im not sure what the what it is right now, if theres jag or some kind of a department that the military has. Ive been out for almost 20 years. My colleague, also a texan, introduced a repatriate our patriots act, a bill that would allow special veterans to pass through citizenship. They include those individuals who were honorably discharged, have not been convicted of a voluntary manslaughter, murder, rape, sexual abuse of a minor, do you support passage of this bill . Yes. Do you ms. Pasquarella . I have not reviewed the bill, so i cant give you an affirmative yes or no, but it sounds like something was said about my colleagues about how this wasnt double punishment. The land of the free, its a report from the texas civil rights project and it says, noncitizens have joined armed forces and it says that it really is a double punishment because you do go through the criminal Justice System and youre kweconvicted and that conviction is used to deport you and youre deported. Its double punishment. And he said, i forget what my colleague said, he said there was no logic to that. Do you agree or disagree that that is double punishment . Thank you. Absolutely agree. It is 100 double punishment. People serve their time in criminal custody, they pay the price for that crime and they should go home the same way that citizen veterans go home. Instead they face lifetime banishment. Its as if theyre serving a life sentence, they cant be with their families. Thank you, i yield back, mr. Chairman. Thank you very much and i would like to call on mr. Neguse from the state of colorado. Thank you, mr. Chair, and thank you for hosting this important hearing. Also i want to start by thanking our veterans in the room for your bravery and service to our country. As has been said, under this administration, immigrants have been under constant attack. Most immigrants are lawful, permanent residents. About 511,000 foreign born veterans are residing in the u. S. And represent 3 of the total veteran population of 18. 8 million. They fill vital roles in the military when there are not enough u. S. Citizen recruits. Foreign nationals serve as translators and their applications are being deplayed which can make them at risk of being targeted for assisting the u. S. The changes in numerous policies are atrocious and hurting veterans and their families. They have made it harder for Service Members to nationalize and receive protection for deportation. Instead, in my view, we should be focusing on ensuring that veterans receive the medical care they concerned as well as help them with their immigration cases. The u. S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement have policies that require them to take additional steps in handling cases. A report found that agencies were unaware of policies in place for veterans in removal proceedings. It is beyond disheartening to hear that your veterans are not being given the appropriate level of review and it is unamerican to deport immigrants fighting for your safety and freedom. We should not leave them to feel abandoned and feel hopeless. Mr. Hector barajas, i want to thank you for your service to our country. You chose to enlist at age 17. You served for five years and earned an Honorable Discharge. You lacked the protection of citizenship and you were deported after serving time for criminal charge after discharge. Can you walk us through how this may have been different if you would have received guidance from the u. S. Military on how to apply for citizenship either during or after your service to this country . I firmly believe that my squad leader would have sat me down people say that we shouldnt hold your hands to that were not there to hold your hands, but were there to show you how to march, make sure that your power of attorney is done so, why not make sure we sit down with our soldiers and make sure thats taken care of before they go off to afghanistan or vietnam that theyre already u. S. Citizens. Its very important to take care of our soldiers. Thank you. Lieutenant colonel, thank you for your service as well. Thank you for being here today. In your testimony, i believe, certainly in your written testimony which i reviewed, you mentioned that the department of defense issued two significant policy changes on october 13th, 2017 that made it harder for military services Service Members to naturalize. From your experience, what is the average time that it takes for a Service Member to receive a response to a request for certification of Honorable Service once they complete their uscis form and n26. It varies dramatically, but right now, sometimes they dont get a response at all, but its taken many months. It used to happen in a matter of minutes. You could walk into your local office, hand them the form and say certify that im serving honorableably. You would get an officer signing your form almost immediately, but now its taking months and months. A matter of minutes to now a matter of months to never receiving an answer. A lot of people tell me they never get an answer. What message does that send to lprs who are thinking of joining the military . It sends a terrible message. And a lot of them are contacting me and saying theyre not going to join the military. They can file electronically if theyre civilians. They have to send a paper packet into chicago through the mail which gets lost. Military people are told their packet has been lost. I was in sacramento a few weeks ago with a green card holder who had finished all of his training. He walked into the building for his interview and the officer said, im sorry, your lawyer flew her to be with you today, but we cant find your packet in the building and well let you know when we find it. We have not heard from them ever since. Thank you, Lieutenant Colonel. The stories you share are stories we need no hear and i hope the administration is listening. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you. And i would like to call on on the gentle lady from florida. Florida is home to one of the largest veteran populations in the country. We have the Third Largest population of veterans in florida in the country around 1. 5 million who live there. My district is also home to some veterans that have been waiting for the naturalization process and one of the things that i just want to make very clear is for those members who have served our country several of you here today, we owe you our deepest respect and our gratitude, but i also hear from Service Members and veterans about the stress that serving our country puts on their families and children. Service members sacrifice a great deal and so do their loved ones. We should not be making the lives of Service Members, veterans and their families any harder. Our men and women in uniform put their lives on the line and have earned the privilege to live and work in our country and i am a9 naturalif t. Citizen mysexc6 gr know how u. S. Citizen but if we are asking our servicemembers to put their lives on the line, to fight for our freedom we need to make sure that the naturalization process is much easier for them. On whose demonstration weve seen that the number has declined to 44 percent almost half and it is just on an acceptable. We should not be making it more difficult probable members of our military to naturalize. My first quick question is can you explain to us why those net numbers have dropped significantly in the past two years. The drop for a couple of reason deity is made it hard for green her card join the military. Second couple of reasons. One is dod has made it harder for green card holders to join. The military. Mad second, and if you dont join, h you cant apply for order naturalization. Apply they have made it harder for them to get the forms signed t o that they need in order to apply, and you cant apply without this form, and if you cant get it signed, youre notr thigible to apply, and then they have made it more difficult to get citizenship, theyre applying different standards to military people that are w inappropriate. Today, an example is a woman whos she sitting in the audience today, n agc, she was wrongly denied naturalization by u. S. Igration citizenship and Immigration Services. She the they denied her application turi while she was serving on active mity in the military. She replied for naturalization. She was discharged from the military and approved for ment. Naturalization after the aclu took her case and filed a lawsuit against the government. We have a case of somebody serving honorably on active duty who gets wrongly denied citizenship, leaves active duty and is approved for citizenship. This makes no sense. Im assuming she wasnt a chinese spy. Well, i think shes from whn south korea. Oh, okay. Was there a reason given to her when she was serving that her citizenship was denied . They said she was lacked good moral character. She was serving honorable, thise is a catch all term that they use when they have come into the charact, and we dont think you should be a citizen, they accuse you of lacking good moral character. It seems like a lot of changes in procedure are cruel without an explanation to that. So whats the purpose of changing this policy, do you think . As i said earlier, its driven by xenophobia. And can you prove that to us right now . I can prove it. Clear evidence of that, because i dont think my exit colleagues sometimes understand that that exists in this country. He it does exist, and i can ittt prove it by directing the k at distinguished members of the he subcommittee to start taking a r look at some of the socalled blsh background checks that dod is they a doing on the military. They are laughable and bizarre, and say things like you have a relative who served in the south korea military, therefore this is derogatory information and requires your discharge from the military, making you ineligible for american citizenship, they say things like your parents are from a foreign country. Thats derogatory information. Now of course dod, when the individuals got recruited knew r they were immigrants. Arents w by definition all of their hey w parents are foreign. Yettheir parents were citizens, they wouldnt be immigrants andn yet they are being told this is derogatory information requirinm their discharge from the rge fro military. Thank you. One last question, i want to ask you if you could speak a little bit about what just happened with the uscis decision to no s longer consider children of military Service Members and other Government Employees as po residing in the u. S. For purposes of acquiring u. S. Citizenship, so kids born. Outside of the United States, but their parents are u. S. Citizens are now being denied u. S. Citizenship. Erned can you talk briefly about that. Im very concerned about this new rule. Yes, it was not something of i the agency warned anybody float ahead of time, although im told internally within dod they floated it. A if they had floated it ahead of time they would have learned that lots and lots of children t clai going to be affected by this. Because the agency doesnt apped understand Immigration Law, theh didnt realize, they claim onlye 25 children are affected. Thats not true. What happened is they said the basically theyre going to punish people who choose to be e bigtioned overseas or sent overseas. If they live in the u. S. , the kids would get automatic citizenship, and the parent has to file convoluted and expensive applications to get t them recognized. Ave ran and this of children who are Service Members of american citizens. I have run out of time, thank you very much. Thats correct. I would like to call ms. Escobar from the good state of u texas. q thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you for having this very e important hearing today. The i mr. Thanks to our witnesses, nde really appreciate the time that you have spent helping educate this subcommittee on these he itsues. I want to thank the veterans and their families who are in the e audience, who flew all the way o to washington, d. C. , to make o u sure it wasnt just yourre voic that were heard but the voices you bring with you of all veterans who have hadad e to endure really the trauma that you all haveve endured after having serd our country and protected our nation. Thank you for your service, andy please share my gratitude and es the gratitude that so many of ue have with your fellow service f members who have had to endure l the same kind of trauma. Please tell them were grateful for their service. Is i represent el paso, texas, which is a great, safe, secure community on the u. S. Mexico border which is a home to fort bliss, one of the most important military installations in the country. Ercess so many of these issues for me,o el paso is an intersection of those issues of immigration and really the attacks on migrants we have seen under this t and administration but also trying to uplift and support veterans and military personnel. Has and it is, really, its been nt very difficult to watch how ours country has turned our backs not just on allies but turned our backs on Service Members who is have fought honorably for our country. And yes, this is a double punishment. And there is absolutely no doubt. You know, i just, i want to remind some of my colleagues that we seem to have come a long way in recognizing how veterans after they have served honorably face these really incredible t challenges, reentering into sp communities, especially after being in theater, and serving in war. And so we go the extra step. We have created Veterans Service programs. We have created specialty courts for veterans convicted or being tried for dwi or for drug fense. Related offenses so that we canh be there for veterans who have been there for us. S a but its a different story whenn the veteran is an immigrant. It appears. You ms. Stock, you mentioned something that i want to touch d little bit on. You mentioned the dod background checks and you said some really interesting things about the isallenges with those dod background checks. Is there an appeals process for personnel who want to peel some of the things you outlined when ms. Powell was questioning you. There wasnt until some of tl the immigrants filed a lawsuit, and now theres a lawsuit pending for the district of columbia. The army has decided to institute some sort of process,e due process because the hey immigrants were being kicked out of the military without being told why they were being kickedk out and the army has agreed it will provide some due process, t and again, if you look at these background checks, theyre not,o they dont have anything to do s with citizenship eligibility. The military is applying the top secret adjudicative guidelines,. Saying anything foreign is derogatory, so its a mismatch and mistake to apply those gible adjudicative guidelines to t determine whether an immigrant f is eligible to serve in the military. It causes massive failure rates of the background checks because all the immigrants have foreign parents. They have Foreign Bank Accounts because they immigrated from a foreign country and they had a foreign bank account. Knowle they have foreign relatives whoa served in the south korean military, one of our allies, for example, and thats something lt that caused a failure. Dod internally has acknowledgedw they have a problem. They cant get out of it because theres a bureaucratic struggle. Going on between the folks at the consolidated adjudicative facility who cling to the guidelines. Theres supposed ton due process, and there are i immigrants being discharged, not being told why. Theyre not given a chance to st refute wrong information in the record. Its a travesty and something i Hope Congress will look into. It is ripe for gao checks. They are costing the government thousands upon thousands of. Jacks. They are spending thousands of. Dollars to figure out that immigrants have foreign parents. Thank you, i yield back. Thew i would like to call on ms. Jackson lee from texas. Might thank you very much, mr. Chairman. N the thank you to the witnesses thath are here. Much if i might have those who have c served in the United States military raise their hands. Thank you so very much for your service, my applause to you. Are there men and women in here that have served in combat. Thank you so very much. I recall being here for 9 11 and im not trying to give ancient stories, but i remember as the call came for individuals for or the passion and commitment to ones country, mr. Chairman, there were numbers and numbers of legal permanent residents who heeded the cry both for the war in afghanistan and the war in iraq. O interestingly enough, i have no recollection of any i. C. E. Involvement on anything. I do remember a series of legislative initiatives to provide for opportunities for soldiers in theater to be and naturalized. Naturalization ceremonies were m going on. Isnt it interesting . The country was in need, men ani women who were either immigrants themselves or immigrant parents, took the oath, put on the uniform unselfishly, and offered their lives. There are legal permanent residents who are in the nations military cemeteries or in cemeteries today from the v iraq and afghan war, so i am baffled about where we are today, and i think this is a ed very important hearing, but i also believe that this should be brought to the attention of the Armed Services committee because up theres joint legislation it would have to be in combination with the Armed Services s committee so the department of defense can wake up. So let me just, and forgive me if these questions have been asked and answered, but there is a standard that i. C. E. Is ancial supposed to utilize when they are addressing veterans. O my a they need to consider the criminal history, evidence of rehabilitation, family and financial ties, United States employment history, health and Community Service. T and its come to my attention with our report that some of the folk in i. C. E. Dont even know theyre supposed to do that or , have the list of criteria to even address. If i could ask both hector varalla and jenny pasquerella, d first, hector, if you can tell me what kind of complexity that puts your members or who you interact with when theyre not given any Fair Assessment by the local i. C. E. Officer because theyre not seeing washington. Theyre seeing i. C. E. Where they are. Could you answer that, please . Sure. Thing it creates a problem where one a of the things, the way it could be fixed, you know, when i went to l. A. County jail, they askedk me whether i was a veteran or not and they go through certainu procedures, and definitely in en immigration, they dont even asr you if youre a veteran or not. They dont know what procedures to take, and so they definitely need to make sure we hold the at government accountable to that. R so we need to put in a , separate construct for veterans. We should require both Immigration Services, our i. C. E. Component, you have to ask the t question, and you have to prioritize veteran immigrants in your assessment of so ins naturalization processes ratherh than i have lost your packet. Te its so insignificant that i ht have lost your packet. Jenny, can you help us with the work that you do and the frustration, i guess, that you g face. Thank you, congressman, yes. We have to address it on two ad fronts. First on the front end when a person is inquiring i. C. E. , hat. There should be a minimum whether or not they are serving in the military or a veteran. Thats the first thing they are not doing second, they should h actually implement the policiesh they have, and ideally improve the policies to actually do that assessment. Once they know the person is a o veteran to do that assessment to determine by weighing all the et equities, their service, Everything Else about their at l life, whether removal is a fact sensible policy decision. Then on the back end, we have tr ensure that even if i. C. E. Is putting someone into proceedingd that our law accounts for the wact that somebody may have served our country and deservess to remain in the United States, law i want to correct something that was said earlier by mr. Met calf because its very important. Lation o the law in 1996 eliminated all judicial discretion, including s cancellation of removal. Cancellation of removal was not available for hector when he was being deported from this ge t country. The law in 96 eliminated any ability for a judge to considerw military service or equities in. A persons life. We have to address it with i. C. E. Through sensible policy d but we also have to reform the law. Ms. Jackson lee. , mr. Metcalf, do you want to respond to that. You i do. I really do. He ms. Jackson lee, i want to tell you, i was a judge in miami, i cant tell you that every case that would have come before me m under the rubric thats been testified to would have survived a challenge on cancellation from the government. Acknow that i granted 75 to 80 of the applications that came before me, and let me also add, i was typical of judges across the country, and when you add ve and if you may, maam, or i mayo when you add the veterans u. S. , overall criminal history, his or her rehabilitation, family and financial ties to the u. S. , his employment history, his health,n his Community Service in addition to duty status, war zone duty, years in service, ant decorated, decorations awarded,e that is calling on the judge to do a much deeper dive. It calls also on the Agency Looking into that person to do a deeper dive. Now, i suggest to you that when judges have that kind of blush e in front of them on an kno administrative take, theyre ind going to consider that and be informed by that in their judgments. Not it certainly informed mine on people who were not in front of me as veterans. But as people who had had a host of problems which prompted the u. S. To seek their removal so i want to balance the opinion by that information. Thank you. You going to yield to this gentle lady. I would like to yield. Think you raised your hand. I think the disconnect is tho statute bars judges from grants relief to green card holders convicted of a so called aggravated felony, and if i may, i can give you an example. Someth i know an individual serving on active duty in the navy, a career navy person who long agoo got convicted of something called obstruction of justice in virginia. At the time a very minor offense, he was told that it nd would not have any impact on hir military career, and he went on to serve a full year in the vest United States navy. Is when he applied for citizenship, he was told that this is an aggravated felony under y Immigration Law, and he is not f eligible for citizenship. They told him he would not be deported until he leaves the mr navy so hes trying to put off res retirement. If you were in front of the honorable mark metcalf he would not be eligible for removal because the government considers him. I would take that deeper dive mr. Chairman. Thank you very much. The process requires us to look to the options of the individual whos being victimized so i yield back, i thank you. Thank you. If i can call ms. Scanlan from y pennsylvania. Sue thank you very much. And thank you for your testimon, all of you on this important issue. The impact of current t immigration policies on Service Members and their families, i think its really important that we look at the impact of the, and the cost to our national or. Security. And our National Honor of the ir Current Administrations at policies and the impact theyre having on our armed forces and those who work with us. T tha the fact that we are breaking o our word to men and women who sp have put their lives on the line for this country is profoundly disturbing to me. Ote i also want to note the irony that of the two portraits that hang on the floor of the house t of representatives, one is george washington, and another t is a Foreign National who fought for us and that would be the marquee de lafayette, so ameri certainly we have a very long history in this country of t relying upon persons of goodwil, who may not be american citizens. But with respect to the impact on our National Security. Arm i have some familiarity of the issue of the siv applicants, the iraqi and afghani fascials who have worked with our armed rockg forces. Rorm vol before i came here almost a yeaa go i worked with a coalition of students and volunteers who would represent iraqi and afghani translators and driverss who worked with our armed forcer and in particular i recall one gentleman who had worked with our armed forces as a translator for five years and when he recognized a taliban member on r one of our bases and reported him, thereby saving the lives of many of our forces he then had to go into hiding, and he remained in hiding with his g p family for four years while hisl application was processed. He did finally get here but it was a long process, and ive certainly heard of additional folks who have had more difficulty, and have been unabll to get their applications processed. So just the, you know, impact on National Security is huge and i cant recall if you had figures on what the processing rates ars at this point, if you could respond to that. Its in my written testimony. Okay. I would refer to that. And those processing rates t have gone down. Ropped they have dropped significantly, and the travel bo ban has also affected the ability of special immigrant visa applicants. Were also seeing an up tick iny people that have been approved initially, and now suddenly fors mysterious reasons unknown to anyone, approvals have been t revoked. Theres an appeal process that g doesnt work. Atain. They send their request for om information or the allegations and they never hear anything again. Thegainst in fact, i got an email today right before the hearing from somebody who had sent in a id ih response to completely erroneous allegations made against him ta after he was granted a visa, ant then they revoked it. A he sent in the rebuttal, proving conclusively that the allegations were inkrek to incorrect, and he hasnt heard anything. Our case was similar, we had to take it to the court of appeals. With respect, i was also concerned about the testimony concerning folks who join our ae military with the expectation that they would become citizens and the fact that our military is now having trouble recruitine citizens to fill those slots, le can anyone on the panel speak te that . Es of special operations has conveyed they are having trouble finding people who speak the ra languages of the countries in which they are operating. And that this has reached a eop. Critical point. They cant find people. The other group of people that were helpful are the folks that know about cyber war. That unit just a fact that we have a lot of legal immigrants in the United States who have great h m cyber skills but they cant put them to work for the united be states unless theyre american a citizens because you have to beo an american citizen to get a hen security clearance and if they d cant get into the military and cant get their citizenship, they cant fill the ranks of alber command, short skilled right now. So in a country thats always relied on the skills and talents imgrantmigrants, were turning folks awayou. For one of the highest, and most important duties. Of c thats correct. Which lothank you. I yield back. Icie thank you very much, ms. S he scanlan, let me, first of all, brnclude todays hearing but first i wanted to make a couplet of comments, which is a lot of the policies were talking about here, its not a democrat or republican issue. Hink b a lot of the policies are fighting today precede the i am Current Administration and go oe back to democratic s a administrations and im hoping my colleagues on the other side of the aisle will join us in e d coming up with good common sense legislation. You witnesses here today, you thentified some very solid Public Policy decisions, proposals and we need to move forward and hope we can because this is about america. Its about keeping our e commitment to our veterans, andr making sure that no soldier is left behind. Mov so im hoping we can move forward, and let me thank all of the witnesses here today. Our veterans that are here today. Never t we can never thank you enough ig for your service to our country. And im going to conclude this hearing by once again, thanks the panelists, our witnesses, iy and without objection all members will have five legislative days to submit additional written questions and for the witnesses or additional coterials for the record, and look forward to continuing to uj work with you, and with that objection, this committee is now concluded. Thank you, sir. Were making it easy for you to follow the impeachment inquiry on cspan. Org. Search all of cspans coverage for video on demand of all the congressional briefings and hearings as well as the administrations response during the impeachment inquiry process. Log on to our impeachment inquiry web page at cspan. Org impeachment. Your fast and easy way to watch cspans unfiltered coverage any time. The house will be in order. For 40 years, cspan has been providing america unfiltered coverage of congress, the white house, the supreme court, and Public Policy events from washington, d. C. , and arnt toune country so you can make up your own mind. Created by cable in 1979, cspan is brought to you by your local cable or satellite provider. Cspan, your unfiltered view of government. The tv gallery on capitol hill, where shortly House Speaker nancy pelosi is set to give her Weekly News Conference. This comes as the house prepares today to vote to proceed with an impeachment inquiry against president trump. Speaker pelosi right now on the floor of the house making last speech. We do expect her to arrive here for her Weekly News Conference in just a few moments. Well have live coverage of it when it gets under way here on cspan3. Once again, waiting for House Speaker nancy pelosi to arrive here for her Weekly News Conference. Well have it live when it begins here on cspan3. In the meantime, remarks from Federal Reserve chair Jerome Powell yesterday. He announced a drop in Interest Rates, the third this year. Good afternoon and welcome. My colleagues at the Federal Reserve and i are dedicated to serving the american people. We do this by steadfastly pursuing the goals that congress has given us, maximum employment, and stable prices. Were committed to making the best decisions we can based on facts and objective analysis. Today we decided to lower the Interest Rates for the third time this year. We took this step to help keep the u. S. Economy strong in the face of Global Developments and to provide some insurance against ongoing risks. As i will explain shortly, the policy adjustments weve made since last year are providing and will continue to provide meaningful support to the economy. We believe that Monetary Policy is in a good place. The u. S. Economy is in its 11th year of expansion and the baseline outlook remains favorable. The overall economy is growing at a moderate rate, Household Spending continues to be strong supported by a healthy job market, rising incomes, and solid consumer confidence. In contrast, Business Investment and exports remain weak, and manufacturing output has declined over the past year. Sluggish growth abroad and trade developments have been weighing on those sectors. Looking ahead, we continue to expect the economy to expand at a moderate rate, reflecting solid Household Spending and support of financial conditions. The job market remains strong. The Unemployment Rate has been near half century lows for a year and a half. The pace of job gains has eased this year but has remained solid. We had expected some slowing after last years strong pace. Participation in the labor force by people in their prime working years has been increasing, and wages have been rising, particularly for lowerpaying jobs. People who live and work in low and middleincome communities tell us that many who have struggled to find work are now getting opportunities to add new and better chapters to their lives. This underscores for us the importance of sustaining the expansion so that the strong job market reaches more of those left behind. Inflation continues to run below our symmetric 2 objective. Over the 12 months through august, total pce inflation was 1. 4 and core inflation was 1. 8 . Inflation pressures remain muted and indicators of longer term Inflation Expectations are at the lower end of their historic ranges. Were mindful that continued below target inflation could lead to an unwelcome downward slide in longterm Inflation Expectations. However, against the backdrop of a Strong Economy and support of Monetary Policy, we expect inflation will rise to 2 . Overall, we continue to see sustained expansion of economic activity, a strong labor market, and inflation near our symmetric 2 objective as most likely. While this has been our outlook for quite some time, our views about the past of Interest Rates that will best achieve these outcomes have changed significantly over the past year. As i mentioned, weakness in Global Growth and trade developments have weighed on the economy and posed ongoing risks. These factors, in conjunction with muted inflation pressures, have led us to lower our assessment of the appropriate level of the federal funds rate over the past year. In both july and september, we reduced the target rate for the federal funds rate by one quarter percentage point and did so again today, bringing the range to 1. 5 to 1. 75 . The policy adjustments weve made to date will continue to provide significant support for the economy. Since Monetary Policy operates with a lag, the full effects of these adjustments on economic growth, the job market, and inflation will be realized over time. We see the current stance of Monetary Policy as likely to remain appropriate as long as incoming information about the economy remains broadly consistent with our outlook of moderate economic growth, a strong labor market, and inflation near our symmetric 2 objective. We believe Monetary Policy is in a good place to achieve these outcomes. Looking ahead, well be monitoring the effects of our policy actions, along with other information bearing on the outlook as we assess the appropriate path theres probably nobody here because the gallery uncharacteristically, uncustomarily is full. But i just said id be here, so im here