Of staff. Were really very thrilled hes been able to carve time out of his busy schedule. And spend time with us today to talk about counterterrorism in an era of competing priorities. Russell will deliver opening remarks from the podium and well sit down for a little fireside chat. Ill take the moderators prerogative and ask the first few questions then ill open it up to all you here in attendance in person to ask some questions, and we welcome all of you who are watching via live stream or via cspan. Thank you for joining us today. Russell, the podium is yours. So, thanks very much, matt. Its a great pleasure to be here amongst a number of old friends to talk about counterterrorism in an era of competing resources. I happened to testify earlier this week with the leadership at the fbi and dhs and was talking to a friend of mine yesterday from dhs and said a colleague of hers had seen the testimony and that characterized my performance as that of a thoughtful nerd, so i am hoping to a
Subcommittee on Border Security will come to order. Subcommittee is meeting to receive testimony in examining the human rights and legal implications of dhss remain in mexico policy. Without objection the chair is authorized to declare the subcommittee in recess at any point. Good morning. Today we will examine implications of a migrant protection protocol more commonly known as the remain in Mexico Program. We will hear the perspective of practitioners who witnessed the program on the ground. Since the program went into effect on january 18, 2019, the remain in mexico policy has forced 10,000 asylumseekers to wait in mexico while their claims are processed. This summary does not begin to touch on the devastating and deceptive impact on countless lives. Prior to this programs implication, asylumseekers will stay in the United States as it moves through the court. Policy based on the humane and common sense premise that should be given temporary safe havens, deciding whether or not they
Subcommittee on Border Security will come to order. Subcommittee is meeting to receive testimony in examining the human rights and legal implications of dhss remain in mexico policy. Without objection the chair is authorized to declare the subcommittee in recess at any point. Good morning. Today we will examine implications of a migrant protection protocol more commonly known as the remain in Mexico Program. We will hear the perspective of practitioners who witnessed the program on the ground. Since the program went into effect on january 18, 2019, the remain in mexico policy has forced 10,000 asylumseekers to wait in mexico while their claims are processed. This summary does not begin to touch on the devastating and deceptive impact on countless lives. Prior to this programs implication, asylumseekers will stay in the United States as it moves through the court. Policy based on the humane and common sense premise that should be given temporary safe havens, deciding whether or not they
So it is important to keep that comparison in mind. Something more extensive on the National Security side than on the criminal side. I want to make that clear theres nothing special. You took a lot of my time. A brief question but a good question. Let me raise one last issue. The solicitor general, donald borrelia, assured the Supreme Court any criminal defendant who was being prosecuted losing evidence directly or indirectly through surveillance authorized by section 702 of the fisa amendment would receive notification of that fact. That kind of notice is essential, and the lawfulness of surveillance. And after mister borrelia made that representation. Is not informing, the defendants when surveillance was used to build a case against them. They have changed since then. Hope it is an easy one for you. The department of justice always in forms, the defendants in the case against them build on evidence gained through 702 surveillance. The standard in the statute is evident, obtained or
Reauthorizing the freedom act of 2015. Two panels, basically for parts of the act. Im of the panels to tell us the good, the bad, the ugly, why we need these four tools, why we need to reauthorize the program in your view, what happens if we dont, would you accept any changes . What with those changes be . Im very interested in hearing from the National Security perspective how the usa freedom act of 2015 is still relevant in 2019 and beyond, and the tools available to Law Enforcement and Intelligence Community provided by this act, how they are relevant to the fight we are still in, baghdadi is dead, but the cause lives or the effort to penetrate our countrys ongoing every day. Terrorist groups of different names are trying to come here to do us harm and to americans abroad. The war is far from over. No air force to shoot down, no navy to sink, no capital to conquer. This is an ideology that must be combated and those that embrace this ideology embrace death. The only way you protect