Prosecutorial Deception: The $21 Billion DHS Betrayal

Michael's picture

By Michael W. Cutler

Mike is a Senior Fellow with CAPS and retired INS Senior Special Agent. During his 30-year career with the INS he rotated through all of the squads within the Investigations Branch. He was assigned to the Unified Intelligence Division of the DEA and for 10 years was assigned, as an INS Senior Special Agent, to the Organized Crime, Drug Enforcement Task Force. He has testified at numerous hearings conducted by committees and subcommittees of the House and Senate and provided testimony to the 9/11 Commission.

He hosts "The Michael Cutler Hour" on USA Talk Radio Fridays at 7 p.m. (EST) and is frequently interviewed by broadcast media on various aspects of immigration issues, especially the nexus to national security.

The writer's views are his own.

June 26, 2015

On June 17, 2015, the House Subcommittee on National Security and the Subcommittee on Health Care, Benefits and Administrative Rules, conducted a joint oversight hearing concerning “A Review of the President’s Executive Actions on Immigration.”

IG Jon Roth of DHS
IG John Roth of DHS.

DHS Inspector General (IG) John Roth testified at this hearing along with the directors of ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) and USCIS (United States Citizenship and Immigration Services). Those agencies, as well as CBP (Customs and Border Protection), all operate under the aegis of DHS (The Department of Homeland Security).

Roth’s prepared testimony disclosed his concerns about how the administration has “addressed” the immigration crisis in the United States – by implementing executive orders to inhibit immigration enforcement personnel from doing their jobs. He noted that for each of the past two fiscal years, ICE, CBP and USCIS, collectively, received approximately $21 billion. The obvious question is: “What we are getting for that huge expenditure of money?”

Roth’s testimony revealed what we are not getting for that huge sum of hard-earned taxpayers’ money: Effective immigration law enforcement and accountability.

Here is an excerpt from the IG’s testimony about the impact of the administration’s executive orders on a number of critical issues that have potentially undermined national security and public safety and have failed to free up jobs held by illegal aliens that should be held by lawful immigrants and Americans (I used boldface type to emphasize key statements):

DHS also does not collect other prosecutorial discretion-related data that might help immigration efforts. For example, DHS would benefit from capturing information regarding aliens who are granted prosecutorial discretion and later commit a crime or pose a threat to national security and public safety.

In addition to assisting in the overall policy-making process, capturing the right information would allow the Department to ensure the proper and evenhanded application of the policies that do exist. As it stands now, there is no mechanism by which to assess the reasonableness of an individual officer’s similarly situated aliens, or to compare the use of prosecutorial discretion by various field offices. This data, if collected, could also be used to evaluate the performance of individual officers or field offices.

Uneven or inconsistent policy enforcement can have a negative effect on DHS’ immigration enforcement mission. For example, in February 2013 we published an audit report examining ICE’s worksite enforcement strategy, and found that headquarters did not adequately oversee the field offices to ensure that they were consistent in issuing warnings and fines, and some field offices issued significantly more warnings than fines. The directorate also negotiated fines with employers, in some cases substantially reducing the amounts. Homeland Security Investigations’ inconsistent implementation of the administrative inspection process, plus the reduction of fines, may have hindered its mission to prevent or deter employers from violating immigration laws.

On June 24, 2015, FrontPage Magazine published my article, “Obama’s Actions on Immigration Lack Accountability – An Inspector General’s warning about Obama’s amnesty insanity,” that provides more details about the administration’s policies and lack of accountability.

The obvious reason that the administration has refused to accumulate and provide the vital information, as noted in the IG’s testimony, parallels the reason that individuals who are being questioned under oath refuse to answer questions and invoke their Fifth Amendment rights – they know their answers would likely incriminate them.

CAPS blog posts may be republished or reposted only in their entirety. Please credit CAPS as www.capsweb.org. CAPS assumes no responsibility for where blog posts might be republished or reposted. Views expressed in CAPS blog posts do not necessarily reflect the official position of CAPS.

Top