At today's House Homeland Security Committee hearing, Rep. Dan Goldman (D-NY) clashed with DHS Sec. Kristi Noem over Kilmar Abrego Garcia.
Category
🗞
NewsTranscript
00:00I now recognize Mr. Goldman for five minutes questioning. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would
00:04like to go back to Mr. Kilmar-Obrego-Garcia's case, Madam Secretary. But my first question for
00:11you is a pretty simple one. It's basic civics. Which branch of government does the Constitution
00:18give the authority to interpret what the law is, the judiciary or the executive branch?
00:25Sir, going forward, the interpretation of the law, you make the laws in this body, the
00:32judicial branch makes sure that they have integrity and they're applied properly to individuals.
00:37Okay, so I'm just going to take that as the judiciary branch. Now, let's focus for a second
00:44on what the judiciary branch has said about this case. We know the Supreme Court has said
00:49nine to nothing that notwithstanding your statements under oath here today that Mr. Kilmar-Obrego-Garcia
00:58was afforded due process. He was, in fact, not afforded due process because then if he were,
01:05you would have seen the withholding order that did not permit him to be deported to El Salvador.
01:11Now, you allege, and I guess the Attorney General alleges, that he's a member of MS-13.
01:16That may very well be, that very well may be the case. And if he is, now that that is a foreign
01:27terrorist organization, certainly the immigration laws would allow him and, in fact, require him to
01:34be deported. I certainly would support that. But the problem that we have here is what you allege,
01:41what Ms. Green alleges, what the Attorney General alleges, is not the judiciary. You don't get to
01:48decide whether or not he is an MS-13 member. And you don't have to take my word for it because
01:57Judge Wilkinson, a Fourth Circuit judge, very conservative, addressed this argument. He said,
02:04the government asserts that Abrego Garcia is a terrorist and a member of MS-13. Perhaps, but perhaps
02:11not. Regardless, he is still entitled to due process. If the government is confident in its
02:17position, it should be assured that position will prevail in proceedings to terminate the withholding
02:25of removal order. Will you commit right now to give Mr. Abrego Garcia that process where you can
02:33prove your allegation that he is a member of MS-13? Congressman, that judge that you just quoted
02:40did not say he was not a member of MS-13. Who did say that he was a member of MS-13 was law enforcement
02:47officers that encountered this individual? Yeah, he knows that. This is a Fourth Circuit judge. He knows
02:52all of what the evidence is. And he's saying if that evidence is. So you're not going to commit
02:56to follow this order. You won't commit to follow this court order. Madam Secretary, I reclaim my
03:03time. Stop filibustering. Stop filibustering. He was surrounded by gang members of MS-13. Will you give
03:08Mr. Abrego Garcia the due process that the Supreme Court and Judge Wilkinson has required you to give
03:16him? Abrego Garcia is an El Salvador resident who is in his home country. If he were to come back to
03:22this country, he would be immediately removed again. How do you know? He has received and been
03:25treated appropriately. How can you say he's been treated appropriately if the Supreme Court has
03:32ruled 9-0? 9-0 that he hasn't been treated appropriately. Why is your opinion better and
03:42have more authority than the Supreme Court? Investigators, two judges, an immigration court that all said he was
03:48MS-13 and was removed from this country. But you understand that is you saying that. That is you
03:54saying that. No, no, no, no. That is you making that determination. The court has considered all that.
04:03The judge has considered all that, Madam Secretary. And if you would be quiet because I'm reclaiming my
04:08time, you are not following this court order. But let's focus on the court order because this opinion
04:14also says that to facilitate, which the Supreme Court is requiring, is an active verb. It requires
04:22that steps be taken. What steps have you taken to return Mr. Abrego Garcia to allow him to get due
04:32process? Abrego Garcia is in his home country. What steps have you taken? If your continued advocacy
04:39for him? I'm not advocating for him. I'm advocating for a court order, Madam Secretary. The court order
04:46says that you must take steps to follow the court order. You are here under oath. What steps have you
04:54taken to return Mr. Abrego Garcia pursuant to this court order? It's got to be extremely discouraging
05:01to be one of your constituents. To see you fight for a terrorist like this and not fight for them
05:06is extremely alarming to me. I'm fighting for due process. And that's under the constitution.
05:13The gentleman's time has expired. The gentleman's time has expired. I now recognize.