Smarter Borders, Safer Nation: Expanding the Use of Non-Intrusive Inspection Technology

Chairman Michael Guest (R-MS)SPEAKER_02

Subcommittee on Border Security and Enforcement's hearing on U.S. Customs and Border Protection's use of non-intrusive technology, or NII, at our borders. The committee will come to order. Without objection, the chair may declare the committee in recess at any point. Without objection, the gentleman from Rhode Island, Mr. Magaziner, will be permitted to sit on the dais and ask questions today. The purpose of this hearing is to examine U.S. Customs and Border Protection's Non-Intrusive Inspection Systems program, including its crucial role in detecting and preventing the entry of contraband into the country. Additionally, we'll discuss the challenges and roadblocks in the deployment of NII equipment, as evidenced in the fall 2025 Government Accountability Office report, that concluded the program must be strengthened to achieve congressional-mandated scan rates. I now recognize myself for an opening statement. CBP's non-intrusive inspection equipment uses technology to locate concealed items such as drugs, weapons, or people in vehicles and cargo. As cartels and other smuggling organizations develop more sophisticated means of concealing drugs and contraband, the government must adapt to stay ahead of these evolving threats, and the expansion of the NII program will play a critical role in that effort. CBP mans the front lines in our efforts to keep threats out of our country, and NII has been an integral tool for CBP's mission. NII enables CBP to detect and interdict contraband while minimizing the impact to the flow of lawful trade and travel at our borders. Pursuant to the Securing America's Ports Act of 2021, CBP was tasked to develop a plan to reach a 100% high-throughput NII scan rate at land ports of entry by 2027. As of fiscal year 2024, CBP fell short of that goal, using NII to examine approximately only 8% of passenger vehicles and 27% of commercial vehicles. These low scan rates can be attributed partially to poor planning and mismanagement from acquisition to installation and the deployment of the NII equipment. Reports from both the Department of Homeland Security Office of Inspector General and the Government Accountability Office have raised concerns with, one, program management, and, two, future outlook. NII program leaders have assured oversight bodies that they have made changes to their structure, staffing, management, and standards to ensure scan rates reflect the amount of taxpayer dollars that the program has received. Ultimately, regardless of the prior shortcomings in the NII program, the capabilities NII affords to our frontline officers keeping our ports secure are invaluable. We must continue to invest responsibly in this technology, as we see that this technology has a proven track record in facilitating CBP's ability to protect and prevent smuggling into our country. Additionally, having just entered a year with record-low illegal border crossings, CBP has the opportunity to invest resources in developing and the deployment of security measures along our border. Those measures include NII, which will further strengthen our national security. To aid in this effort, Congress provided a historic investment in the budget reconciliation bill to enhance and improve NII at our borders. With the appropriations of these additional funds, Congress must provide additional oversight to ensure this investment in the NII program is wisely and efficiently allocated. I am cautiously optimistic that prudent decisions from NII leadership within CBP, oversight from Congress, and technological advances in industry will allow CBP to achieve 100% scanning rates. I would like to thank our witnesses for their participation and for briefing Ranking Member Correa and myself prior to this hearing. I look forward to working with my colleagues to enhance and prioritize CBP's non-intrusive inspection program. I now recognize the ranking member, my friend, the gentleman from California, Mr. Correa, for his opening statement.

Ranking Member Lou Correa (D-CA)SPEAKER_00

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, my good friend, Ms. Sabatino. Ms. Benedict, thank you for being here today. As a member of this committee, I've had the opportunity to visit all the ports of entry, south border of the U.S. up into Mexico. And in those visits, I've had the opportunity to begin to understand the job, the tasks that you have, the challenges. So, I have sat there, stood there with your agents in blue uniforms and asked them about their challenges on an everyday basis. One thing stood out clear to me, which is, when you have a car, when you have a vehicle coming across the border, the challenge is you don't know who is in that car. You don't know if it's a friendly. You don't know what that individual may have in mind, which poses a lot of challenges for the individuals in blue uniform. I think it's important that we appreciate that it's not only your blue uniforms at the border, but rather it's the result of working with other agencies to make sure that you have the intel to know who's coming to the border at that moment. And that's the challenge that we have today, Ms. Sabatino. I want to talk to you about non-intrusive inspection technology. I think I can speak for both the chairman and myself, but Democrats and Republicans support this technology implemented at our border. But I think we have to we have to address a bigger-picture issue, which is DHS, CBP, and ICE are being deployed to the interior of our country and not doing the job that they're supposed to do, which is protect our country from things that are coming across the border and from foreign foreign terrorists, foreign elements that may pose a threat to our nation. We recently had Renee Nicole Good shot and killed by an ICE agent in Minnesota. I've had many stories from my district about American citizens, some being blinded because of the behavior of some of these agents. Today, Ms. Sabatino, the administration is focused on mass deportations, in my opinion, at the expense of our national security. So much focus on deportations. And I've spoken to many folks that work with you, other departments within the United States government, that tell me right now the focus is deportations and not what DHS was supposed to focus on. And as you know, DHS was created after 9/11. The goal was to protect Americans from future terrorist attacks. Thousands of Americans died 9/11. I remember that day. I couldn't believe it was happening in front of my eyes. DHS was created to stop one of those attacks from happening. Back home, I check with my local law enforcement. One of the individuals I check with is my local sheriff, Don Barnes, who runs a local Orange County fusion center. And he's told me many, many, many times that his concern is the focus on deportations has left a lot of empty doors, a lot of open doors in our national security that could be exploited by those that want to do our nation harm. Not only are we leaving doors open, so to speak, in our national security picture, but a lot of those agents are now terrorizing our communities. Immigration agents going after not only immigrants, but American citizens now. Last night, I got another phone call from the district, another challenge. This administration has essentially redirected thousands of agents from Homeland Security from the mission of protecting our country to deportations. Not only Homeland, but FBI, DEA, CBP all are now converging on deportations. And as you know, the President of the United States promised that we were going he would be going after the worst of the worst. That's not the case today. He's going after immigrants, hardworking immigrants, nannies, construction workers, anybody they can get their hands on, people that have essentially are providing valuable services and work to this great country. The administration is no longer arresting criminals. They are sadly arresting U.S. citizens. I see this on a daily basis. I have young people in my district asking me, Should we carry a passport? I think the fact that they even have to ask me that question is a sad testament to the situation in our country. And some of those that actually carry the passport, makes no difference. They've been apprehended, taken in to double-, triple-check their citizenship status. I It pains me to see what's going on in my district. Every night I get phone calls, not only undocumented, but American citizens now being arrested, held, charges alleged, charges dropped, but nonetheless, American citizens being held for a number of days in custody. Ms. Sabatino, I support what you do at the border. I've worked with you for a number of years. I think you have a tremendous, tremendously hard job keeping drugs from coming into the country, making sure that trade and commerce, good stuff, continues to flow. We support non-intrusive technology. But when I think of all the resources that should be focused on helping you do your job, and instead they're focused on American citizens, on undocumented immigrants that don't even have a traffic ticket to their name, this is bothersome. As people back home who voted for President Trump tell me, This is not what we thought we were going to get. We voted for an individual that was supposed to deport criminals, not our neighbors that have lived among us for so many years. I'm hoping that, as we move forward, this committee, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, as well as we, do an investigation of what's really going on. Ms. Sabatino, you've been in uniform for 30 years-plus. I trust that you have essentially put into place good practices at the border, how to manage the border, how to treat American citizens. But I'm sad to report that today in the United States, American citizens are being terrorized. I look forward to hearing your testimony today, ma'am. And Ms. Benedict, I look forward to hearing from you as well. But as we focus on a certain technology, we got to pull back and look at the big picture. As General Kelly, former Homeland Security Secretary, used to say, border security does not end or begin at the border. It's a holistic approach to protecting this great country. Thank you very much, and Mr. Chairman, with that, I yield.

Chairman Michael Guest (R-MS)SPEAKER_02

Thank you. I now recognize the ranking member of the full committee, from the great state of Mississippi, Congressman Thompson, to give an opening statement.

Full Committee Ranking Member Bennie Thompson (D-MS)SPEAKER_08

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and let me welcome our panel of witnesses here this morning. I look forward to your testimony. I'm particularly pleased to see CBP here to answer questions. With the violent immigration enforcement activities occurring in communities, I expect members will have plenty of questions for you, Ms. Sabatino, today. I understand you oversee some of the officers participating in these activities. In fact, we have a photo of your officers participating in a raid in Massachusetts. The noticed topic today is about non-intrusive inspection equipment. I want to be clear. I have long pushed for the full deployment of these scanners at our ports of entry to prevent dangerous drugs and other illicit goods from entering the country. There are real concerns with the acquisition and rollout of that equipment, and I'll continue to engage with CBP on that. We need to make sure taxpayers' dollars are invested effectively. However, right now, the American people are demanding answers about what is happening in our cities. They want to know what immigration agents are being instructed to do. We've all seen the horrific videos from Minnesota, Chicago, Los Angeles, New Orleans, and other areas. The Trump administration is occupying and terrorizing American communities in the name of immigration enforcement. That is what needs to be our focus today. I do not understand how my Republican colleagues can sit here and pretend it isn't happening. It's been one year since President Trump was sworn into office. It's clear that he, along with his corrupt crew, don't care about public safety or national security. President Trump and his administration have not made us safer or stronger as a nation. In fact, he's done the opposite. Just look at Minneapolis. I can't believe anyone could claim those violent actions are making the city safe. Most citizens there will probably tell you they've never felt more unsafe. Masked federal agents are roaming the streets asking people of color for their papers to prove their citizenship, including young children in Minneapolis who were walking home alone just yesterday. And if they don't have them or don't respond quickly, they're violently arrested and whisked away to unknown locations. That same thing is happening to those who dare to film them, even though that is a protected activity. This is an assault on everyone's civil rights and civil liberties. And I still can't quite believe that my Republican colleagues who were appalled about wearing a mask during COVID are just fine being told that their constituents must carry their passports on them at all times, because if an immigration officer can detain a citizen in Minneapolis who doesn't have their passport on them, they can just as easily detain any one of us in this room or any one of the people we are here representing. This is not okay. None of us should think of it as acceptable. Citizens and noncitizens alike are being harmed by this administration. We saw an ICE agent shoot and kill a mother of three in broad daylight. And immigration agents, including CBP, have shot at least 11 other people since the start of this Trump administration. In addition to the shootings, we've seen aggressive and violent tactics by ICE and CBP depicted in over-the-top action movies. A military-style raid in Chicago targeted residents in an apartment building in the middle of the night. Beyond the flashbang grenades and agents rappelling from helicopters, witnesses saw children in their underwear zip-tied together in vans. Other residents, including U.S. citizens and military veterans, were also zip-tied for hours. This is not what our country stands for. The American people are taking notice. They see the Trump administration and DHS is more focused on an anti-immigrant agenda than improving the lives of our citizens. And I heard the ranking member, Mr. Correa, in his passionate comments. You know, as a person of color, I had to go through some things in Mississippi as a young Black boy, and I thought those kinds of activities were past. But what I see occurring with people of color—Black, brown, whatever—is not who we are as a country. I want law enforcement to follow the law. I now find out that you can just break into somebody's house now without a warrant. We are a better country than this. I was brought up to respect law enforcement, and I want law enforcement to do their job, but respect civil rights and civil liberties of anyone in this country. So, I think we're at a juncture in this country that is concerning to a lot of us, and I hope, as we pursue some remedy for this endeavor, we can all get back on the same page. And with that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.

Chairman Michael Guest (R-MS)SPEAKER_02

Thank you, Ranking Member Thompson. Other members of the committee are reminded that opening statements may be submitted for the record. I'm pleased to have a distinguished panel of witnesses before us today on this important topic. Pursuant to Committee Rule 8(c), I would ask that our witnesses please rise and raise their right hand. Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you will give before the Committee on Homeland Security of the United States House of Representatives will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? Thank you. Let the record reflect that the witnesses have answered in the affirmative, and please be seated. I would now like to take a moment to formally introduce our witnesses. First, Ms. Diane Sabatino serves as the Acting Executive Assistant Commissioner within the field office operations at the U.S. Customs and Border Protection. We also have with us Ms. Hilary Benedict, who serves as the Director of the Science, Technology Assessments, and Analytics director within the Government Accountability Office. I'd like to thank each of our witnesses for being here today. And Ms. Sabatino, I recognize you for 5 minutes to make an opening statement.

Ms. Diane J. SabatinoSPEAKER_06

Chairman Guest, Ranking Member Correa, Ranking Member Thompson, and members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today to discuss how U.S. Customs and Border Protection uses non-intrusive inspection technology, or NII, to secure our nation's ports of entry while enforcing lawful trade and travel. I'm honored to represent the more than 35,000 men and women of CBP's Office of Field Operations stationed at 328 ports of entry across the nation, with more than 800 men and women serving in 48 countries overseas. Our frontline personnel work tirelessly to protect the homeland, and on a typical day, they process more than 1 million travelers and enable $10 billion in imported goods. At the same time, they prevent the entry of inadmissible individuals, seize illicit drugs, intercept contraband, illuminate and deliver consequences to bad actors in the supply chain, prevent biological threats from harming our communities and natural resources, all while ensuring the efficient flow of lawful trade and travel. The Office of Field Operations plays a critical role in national security. Our nation's ports of entry are not only gateways for lawful commerce and travel, they are also prime targets for transnational criminal organizations and other bad actors seeking to exploit the immense volume of cross-border activity. In fiscal year '25, for example, 75% of illicit drugs seized by Customs and Border Protection at the southwest border were intercepted at ports of entry. NII is one of many tools that we use to secure our borders. It's complementary to intelligence, canine teams, and targeting systems, among many others, in support of our most valuable resource, which is our frontline personnel. All of these tools relieve administrative burdens from our personnel, enabling them to do what they do best, which is to determine intent and increase situational awareness. In fiscal year 2025 alone, CBP officers used NII systems to scan more than 17 million sea containers, railcars, and vehicles. These inspections led to the interdiction of 110,000 pounds of narcotics, the seizure of $2.2 million in unreported U.S. currency, and the apprehension of 66 undeclared passengers. And while NII technology is a proven and powerful tool, deploying these systems is not without challenges. Constraints related to port infrastructure, real estate availability, and the need to avoid interference with other detection systems can be limiting as to where and how the systems are placed. To address these challenges, we're continually reevaluating port facilities, exploring opportunities for alternative placement of the systems, and prioritizing deployments in areas with the greatest operational impact. From the beginning of our NII deployments, we have deliberately gathered lessons learned and incorporated them into a long-term, comprehensive resource strategy. This strategy strengthens acquisition planning, improves contract support, and ensures systems are deployed where they will deliver the greatest benefit to border security and trade enforcement. With the support of Congress, we've made significant progress in deploying our and and enhancing our NII capabilities. As of December 2nd, we had deployed 405 large-scale NII systems at air, sea, and land ports of entry, including 67 new systems added over the past two fiscal years. We're also enhancing our NII operations through the integration of artificial intelligence, which helps automate the analysis of the scanned images, reduces the time needed for manual image review, and allows us to focus our resources on the greatest risks. Looking ahead, we remain committed to expanding our NII capabilities, and with funding provided by Congress, we plan to deploy 38 additional systems by the end of this fiscal year. These drive-through systems will allow us to scan 40% of privately owned vehicles and up to 70% of commercial vehicles at the southwest border land ports of entry, significantly enhancing our ability to detect and interdict threats. And as I mentioned earlier, NII is one of the critical components of CBP's broader multi-layered border security strategy. With investments authorized through the Big Beautiful Bill Act, we will enhance scanning capabilities and recapitalize many of the existing mobile and fixed technologies in the field today. Our Excuse me. Our continued approach prioritizes the indispensable expertise of our frontline personnel, including officers, skilled trade specialists, and agriculture specialists, and integrates all of the specialized tools and capabilities available to us. Through the combined use of advanced technology, canine teams, skilled personnel, as well as strong partnerships with federal, state, and international stakeholders, CBP maintains a comprehensive and agile security posture. This integrated approach not only enhances our ability to address evolving and emerging security threats, but also supports the efficient movement of lawful trade and travel across our borders. Thank you for your continued support of CBP's mission, and I look forward to your questions.

Chairman Michael Guest (R-MS)SPEAKER_02

Thank you, Ms. Sabatino. I now recognize Ms. Benedict for 5 minutes to summarize her opening statement.

Ms. Hilary BenedictSPEAKER_05

Thank you, Chairman Guest, Ranking Member Correa, Ranking Member Thompson, and members of the subcommittee. Thank you for this opportunity to talk about CBP's non-intrusive inspection systems. My statement is based on GAO's report on the topic issued in September 2025. CBP has received more than $2 billion to deploy non-intrusive inspection systems at land ports of entry. These systems generally use X-rays to scan vehicles. Officers review the images from these scans to identify anomalies that indicate the presence of contraband. In 2021, the Securing America's Ports Act directed CBP to develop a plan to scan 100% of commercial and passenger vehicles and rail containers by 2027 using these systems. CBP has made progress in deploying systems in pre-primary inspection areas. For example, CBP determined it needed a total of 434 systems and procured 153 systems for these areas. 52 were operational at the time of our review. CBP's deployment of these systems has increased its rate of scanning passenger and commercial vehicles at the southwest border. Specifically, scanning rates for passenger vehicles have increased from 2% in 2020 to 8% in 2024 for passenger vehicles. For commercial vehicles, scanning increased from 16% to 27% during this time. However, three issues have prevented CBP from meeting the requirement to scan 100% of commercial and passenger vehicles and rail containers by 2027. The first issue is planning. CBP's scanning plan does not include all land ports of entry. Specifically, the plan does not include nine southwest border crossings. These nine crossings together account for 40% of passenger vehicle crossings at the southwest border and include three of the biggest border crossings: San Ysidro, Otay Mesa, and Nogales. CBP officials said these sites are not included in the current plans because they are still determining how to overcome space issues at these sites. In our September 2025 report, we recommended that CBP determine how to include systems at all border crossings in its deployment plans. CBP agreed with our recommendation and plans to implement it by the end of fiscal year 2028. The second issue that has prevented CBP from meeting the scanning requirement is cost. CBP developed cost estimates for deploying systems, but costs have exceeded those estimates. These cost increases are due to a variety of factors, such as not accounting for all deployment costs in the original estimates and unique construction challenges at each site. CBP officials said they have received the funding they needed to deploy the systems they have procured to date. However, CBP will need additional funding to meet the 100% scanning requirement because CBP needs to procure additional systems to achieve its current plans, and the estimate does not include systems at the nine border crossings that are not included in CBP's plans. The third issue that has prevented CBP from meeting the scanning requirement is the schedule. Deployment of non-intrusive inspection systems has taken longer than expected. At the time of our review, CBP planned to complete deployment of the systems it had procured for passenger and commercial vehicles by the end of 2026, and for rail containers by the end of 2029. However, it will take longer to achieve the 100% scanning requirement because the schedule does not include the systems CBP has not yet procured or the systems needed for the nine biggest crossings that are not included in CBP's plan. CBP officials told us that various factors have caused schedule delays. For example, major upgrades were needed at some sites, vendors have been slow to resolve deployment issues, and site conditions, such as interference with scanning systems, have required additional time to resolve. During our review, CBP officials told us they were aware of these issues and were working to resolve them. It will be important for CBP to continue to address these issues as it deploys and operates additional systems. Moving forward, GAO will monitor CBP's implementation of the recommendations we made in our September 2025 report. We believe that addressing our recommendations would strengthen CBP's management of its non-intrusive inspection systems and its interdiction efforts to help achieve its mission. This concludes my statement. I'm happy to answer any questions.

Chairman Michael Guest (R-MS)SPEAKER_02

Thank you. I would now recognize myself, for 5 minutes to ask questions. Questions will be asked by order of seniority. As I mentioned earlier to each of our witnesses, we will have to break shortly as votes have been called. But I do believe that we have an opportunity. Would you like to go ahead and break now, Mr. Ranking Member?

Ranking Member Lou Correa (D-CA)SPEAKER_00

Let's keep it going.

Chairman Michael Guest (R-MS)SPEAKER_02

All right, we're going to get through maybe the first questions by myself and the ranking member, and then we will break for us to vote and return quickly. So I will begin. Ms. Sabatino, I know we had a chance to meet and visit, and you do a great job of setting forth in your written testimony the importance of what we're here for today. You talk about 55 tons of narcotics being seized, that 75% of all narcotics that are seized are seized at ports of entry, and so you make a very compelling case for the importance of this technology. I'll tell you that as a former prosecutor, I've seen firsthand the impact that this type of technology has on us being able to stop the flow of illegal drugs. I know that this makes our border more secure and our agents more effective. We've heard statistics put out by GAO talking about where we are on scan rates. We know that in 2021, the Securing America's Ports Act said that by next year, by 2027, that we wanted to have 100% scan rates of all passenger, commercial, and rail. We started off in 2020 with 2% passenger, 16% commercial. By 2024, that rate had increased to 8% passenger, 27% commercial. And Ms. Sabatino, I think you say the goal for FY26 is 40% passenger, 70% commercial. And then we heard, just in the opening statement of Ms. Benedict, that there are nine Southwest border crossings that have not been included in the planning phase. And so clearly it does not appear to me that we are going to be able to meet that 2027 deadline. We're getting closer, and we're getting better, and we're moving in the right direction, but we're not getting there quick enough, we're not getting there fast enough, and Americans are dying because fentanyl and methamphetamine and cocaine and other drugs continue to flow into our country because we are not doing an adequate job of screening that. And so I understand, Ms. Sabatino, when we've met, that there are at certain border crossings, there are infrastructure issues that we're having to deal with, there are interference issues where we've got different types of scanners looking for different things and sometimes those scanners interfere with one another. But I also know that there's different types of non-intrusive inspection technology. There's the fixed permanent sites, which do have to have infrastructure. There's mobile scanning technology, there's handheld scanning technology. And so I want to make sure that we are including, when we talk about this inspection technology, that we're not just focused on the fixed technology, which is great and which we want to have in every port, but we know that some of the ports weren't designed for this type of equipment. And I do believe that the mobile and handheld will at least provide us some sort of scanning capabilities as we are working toward that 100% scan rate that Congress instructed DHS to get to. And so my question to both of you, and I've got about a minute and a half, is how do we get there, and how quickly can we get there? And what do you need from Congress other than money? And we have funded this technology, I think we will continue to fund this technology. This is a bipartisan issue. We can argue about other things in the DHS arena, but I don't think there's anybody that's going to question either of you here today that are going to say that we don't need to continue to make this investment. So what do you need from us to make sure that we can get to the 100% scan rate as quickly as possible? Ms. Sabatino, I'll start with you. And if there's any time left, Ms. Benedict, I'll let you have the remainder of that time.

Ms. Diane J. SabatinoSPEAKER_06

Thank you for the question, Congressman. I certainly would say that continued accountability and holding us accountable for meeting those goals is critical for us to get there with the deployments. I think continuing to support our work with the vendors to identify additional or enhanced or emerging technology. We're very optimistic about some tests that are going on now working with the Department of Homeland Security Science and Technology Office to address the radiation portal monitor interference at a place like San Ysidro. That would significantly increase the scan rates, being the largest border crossing for vehicles on the southwest border. I think certainly continuing to engage with us with our needs with respect to addressing the civil works and funding, and very much appreciate the funding that was available to us in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act.

Chairman Michael Guest (R-MS)SPEAKER_02

Ms. Benedict, I know I'm almost over time, but I want to give you a real brief opportunity to answer as well, and then I will turn the, the questioning over to Mr. Correa.

Ms. Hilary BenedictSPEAKER_05

Absolutely. I think a good first step will be CBP including those nine border crossings that are not currently in the plans, in their plans, and how they plan to address the non-intrusive inspection systems at those sites. Ms. Sabatino and I have talked, and it sounds like that's in progress, and we look forward to seeing their progress on that as we follow up on our recommendations. And I look forward to working with you and your committee staff on the updates to our recommendations.

Chairman Michael Guest (R-MS)SPEAKER_02

Again, thank y'all both for being here. Thank you for what you do. We want you to be successful. At this time, uh, I recognize the ranking member for his 5 minutes of questioning.

Ranking Member Lou Correa (D-CA)SPEAKER_00

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And let me follow up with witnesses on the chairman's line of thought questioning. The thought that San Ysidro, one of the nine ports, that's not even being looked at in the plan. Biggest probably border crossing in the world, massive. We've got fentanyl coming into this country, lives being lost. You can't get this technology out there. Miss, Ms. Benedict, you talked about cost. Big Beautiful Bill has $170 billion, massive investment in this part of our government. Want to work with you to make sure that these non-intrusive technology, these marvels of technology, are put into place as quickly as possible. Ms. Sabatino, I'm concerned because the technology is still not implemented. Yet, it's my understanding that currently you've essentially reassigned or been asked to reassign some of your personnel from the border for ICE deportation enforcement in the interior of the United States. Is that correct?

Ms. Diane J. SabatinoSPEAKER_06

We have assigned personnel to surge operations. That's not new or unique for us.

Ranking Member Lou Correa (D-CA)SPEAKER_00

Yet we continue to have this issue at the border. Okay. It's not unique to you, but I believe every agency at the federal level is reassigning the personnel for deportations away from their stated purpose. Is this correct?

Ms. Diane J. SabatinoSPEAKER_06

I can say I'm familiar with the personnel that we have deployed. I don't know that I could speak for the other federal agencies.

Ranking Member Lou Correa (D-CA)SPEAKER_00

Fair enough. If I can, your officers that you've essentially deployed to immigration enforcement, is this job different from stopping or apprehending people at ports of entry?

Ms. Diane J. SabatinoSPEAKER_06

Again, when it comes to surging law enforcement support to our federal, state, or local partners, that is something that we plan for, for periods of

Ranking Member Lou Correa (D-CA)SPEAKER_00

It was reported that Border Patrol recently sent out a legal refresher on the use of force. Have you sent out something similar to your officers Officers ?

Ms. Diane J. SabatinoSPEAKER_06

We do quarterly training with respect to use of force. We have done refresher training in First Amendment and Fourth Amendment rights. And again, that is not unique to any single deployment. That is—

Ranking Member Lou Correa (D-CA)SPEAKER_00

I might have I have 2 minutes, but just hours after Jonathan Ross, ICE officer, shot Renee Nicole Good, Secretary of Homeland Security Ms. Noem stood at a podium and said the officer did exactly what he was taught to do. So let me ask you, if I can and if you have the answers, do you instruct officers to approach a vehicle from the front to prevent them from fleeing?

Ms. Diane J. SabatinoSPEAKER_06

Um, while I am familiar with the incident itself, I'm not familiar with exactly what happened and didn't really assess videos of that.

Ranking Member Lou Correa (D-CA)SPEAKER_00

But in general, would you instruct your officers to approach a vehicle from the front to prevent it from fleeing?

Ms. Diane J. SabatinoSPEAKER_06

The direction that officers are trained in is to approach in as safe a manner as possible.

Ranking Member Lou Correa (D-CA)SPEAKER_00

Do you authorize officers to use— to shoot at fleeing vehicles? If they're not immediately in harm's way?

Ms. Diane J. SabatinoSPEAKER_06

And in our use of force training, it is related to the threat that the individual themselves face or to the public.

Ranking Member Lou Correa (D-CA)SPEAKER_00

Ms. Sabatino, within the refresher, it states that passive resistance alone is not conduct under 18 U.S.C. Section 111 to constitute federal crime as long as there's no assault, resisting arrest, or impeding federal officers from doing their job. The Border Patrol in their refresher course stated that it is not a violation of Section 18.111. Noncompliance, refusal to cooperate with an officer's commands, disobeying commands without fighting back, and taking photographs or videotapes of an officer operating in public, again, does not constitute a crime. Have you sent out a similar refresher instructions to your officers?

Ms. Diane J. SabatinoSPEAKER_06

Again, with respect to the use of force, it is something we do recurring training on.

Ranking Member Lou Correa (D-CA)SPEAKER_00

But would you agree then that Taking a photo, videotaping a person standing on the sidelines as situations are developing is not a violation of the law.

Ms. Diane J. SabatinoSPEAKER_06

Again, our officers are trained to identify threats and take in the totality of circum— circumstances, you know, when it comes to threats to themselves or the public.

Ranking Member Lou Correa (D-CA)SPEAKER_00

Thank you, Ms. Sabatino. I'm out of time, but I will ask you these questions again in writing, and I hope we can get clearer answers. Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Chairman Michael Guest (R-MS)SPEAKER_02

The gentleman yields back at this time. Pursuant to committee rules, the chair will call a recess. We will reconvene as soon as votes occur. So the committee stands in recess at this time. The hearing is reconvened. At this time, I call on the gentleman from Arizona, Mr. Crane, for 5 minutes for his questioning.

Rep. Elijah Crane (R-AZ)SPEAKER_03

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you to the panelists for showing up today to give us your thoughts on non-intrusive inspection technology at the border. For those Americans that might be watching this hearing, would it would it make sense to compare this type of technology to the machine at the airport that scans our bags to look inside and using X-ray technology, Ms. Sabatino?

Ms. Diane J. SabatinoSPEAKER_06

Yes, it identifies anomalies in the images.

Rep. Elijah Crane (R-AZ)SPEAKER_03

We recently went down to the border as a part of this, uh, this committee, and I got to see some of the technology in action. It's It's pretty amazing that this technology is being deployed. Obviously, it's not going nearly as quick as we want it to. I believe you said you had over 400 units deployed around the country. Is that correct?

Ms. Diane J. SabatinoSPEAKER_06

405 units deployed, both mobile and fixed.

Rep. Elijah Crane (R-AZ)SPEAKER_03

And Ms. Benedict from GAO said that a part of your plan, there were nine major ports of entry that this technology is not in your plans to deploy this technology to. Is that correct?

Ms. Diane J. SabatinoSPEAKER_06

The technology that's been procured. But we are actively working on plans to identify technology with vendors for beating kind of the physical constraints and the RPM interference in locations where we don't currently have technology deployed.

Rep. Elijah Crane (R-AZ)SPEAKER_03

One thing that I found a little disturbing when looking through the committee prep for this hearing today was that the DHS IG put out a report saying that a lot of the equipment, I think $96 million worth of equipment, was sitting in storage containers. Can you unpack that for us, Ms. Sabatino, and what the issue there is?

Ms. Diane J. SabatinoSPEAKER_06

Well, as of today, we currently have 89 systems that are operational of the technology that was procured. We have 24 systems under construction and 44 in active planning. With respect to the systems that are in storage, 11 of them are high-energy rail systems. We currently have NII technology at the sites. Currently, these would be replacing with new technology. For the 29 other pieces of technology, they're MEPs and LEPs. Two sites specifically make up 15 of those that are in storage. They've been in storage about a year. In March and May of this year, it's nine, I believe, to Calexico and six to San Luis. Following the construction, they'll be deployed, which will shrink the number that's currently in storage.

Rep. Elijah Crane (R-AZ)SPEAKER_03

So it's not that those units that were delivered aren't working, you're just working at implementing the deployment of them, is that correct?

Ms. Diane J. SabatinoSPEAKER_06

Yes.

Rep. Elijah Crane (R-AZ)SPEAKER_03

And for these sites that don't have the capacity at this time to accommodate these units, are you guys using portable and handheld technology at those entry points?

Ms. Diane J. SabatinoSPEAKER_06

We do have some type of NII system available at all our land ports of entry, and that ranges from mobile technology to handheld technology.

Rep. Elijah Crane (R-AZ)SPEAKER_03

How many vendors are you working with to accomplish the goal of 100% of all vehicles coming through ports of entry being scanned?

Ms. Diane J. SabatinoSPEAKER_06

We deal with different vendors all the time. I'd say there's between 4 and 5 that we're regularly in communication with for the specific types of technology that we're looking at.

Rep. Elijah Crane (R-AZ)SPEAKER_03

Have you found any of the vendors to be superior in the product they deliver?

Ms. Diane J. SabatinoSPEAKER_06

I think all have benefits, the types of technology, and it really is unique to the type of deployment that we're doing and the distinctions between mobile or fixed or the handheld.

Rep. Elijah Crane (R-AZ)SPEAKER_03

Which systems are more susceptible to have malfunction and breakdown?

Ms. Diane J. SabatinoSPEAKER_06

A number of reasons for outages, but the primary one is the age of the equipment and the availability of parts. And that's where the funding for the recapitalization from the One Big Beautiful Bill Act is going to be prioritized.

Rep. Elijah Crane (R-AZ)SPEAKER_03

We've obviously talked today in this hearing about, you know, what the percentage is that we're currently hitting on pedestrian and commercial vehicles. That are actually being scanned at the port of entry, do you believe you'll be able to hit the goals that you guys have laid out?

Ms. Diane J. SabatinoSPEAKER_06

So we have increased the scan rates already to 13% for passenger vehicles and 37% for commercial vehicles, and the goal in 2026 is to have it at 40% for POVs and 70% for commercial vehicles. But we are very very, um, uh, you know, welcome to continue keeping you updated as these deployments roll out and certainly let you know of any roadblocks or challenges that we hit that would prevent us from achieving that goal.

Rep. Elijah Crane (R-AZ)SPEAKER_03

Thank you. I yield back.

Chairman Michael Guest (R-MS)SPEAKER_02

Gentleman yields back. The chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas, Mr. Green, for 5 minutes.

Rep. Al Green (D-TX)SPEAKER_07

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I thank the ranking member as well. Thank the witnesses for appearing today. And Ms. Sabatino, I'd like to ask you a few questions, if I may, please. You're currently hiring persons who are working in the interior of the country. Is that correct, ma'am?

Ms. Diane J. SabatinoSPEAKER_06

Well, we do have people stationed at ports of entry, airports, the land border ports, maritime, but we do have people surged to support Immigration and Customs Enforcement and other partners, yes.

Rep. Al Green (D-TX)SPEAKER_07

Okay, would that include other partners, include ICE?

Ms. Diane J. SabatinoSPEAKER_06

Yes.

Rep. Al Green (D-TX)SPEAKER_07

So you have persons who are actually in the field and they are with ICE when they are raiding—well, let's not use that term, excuse me—when they are making arrests?

Ms. Diane J. SabatinoSPEAKER_06

Uh, we support in a number of ways. We do.

Rep. Al Green (D-TX)SPEAKER_07

But is— excuse me, is making arrests one of the ways?

Ms. Diane J. SabatinoSPEAKER_06

Yes.

Rep. Al Green (D-TX)SPEAKER_07

Okay, thank you. And these persons who are doing this, have they been trained to the same extent that the ICE officers have been trained?

Ms. Diane J. SabatinoSPEAKER_06

I'm not personally familiar with the ICE training. I imagine it's comparable, but we do recurring use of force training for all of our armed law enforcement officers.

Rep. Al Green (D-TX)SPEAKER_07

Well, if I told you that someone associated with Antifa is working with these ICE officers who happens to be someone associated with your area, would that concern you?

Ms. Diane J. SabatinoSPEAKER_06

If I had more context, like working with, like employed by?

Rep. Al Green (D-TX)SPEAKER_07

Well, let's let's take the example of a prosecutor in Dallas, Texas who had some affiliation with persons who are known to be dastards. This person was a prosecutor and seems to have a white supremacist account, makes or posts statements about Adolf Hitler, indicated we should make America white again, that sort of thing. Does that that sort of thing would offend you, wouldn't it, if you knew that some of your officers were were doing something like that?

Ms. Diane J. SabatinoSPEAKER_06

Well, we would certainly investigate any allegations. Good.

Rep. Al Green (D-TX)SPEAKER_07

And the best way to deal with this kind of circumstance is to prevent it from ever happening. You wouldn't want a person who's doing these kinds of things within your ranks, right? If the person is actually doing it.

Ms. Diane J. SabatinoSPEAKER_06

I think it's important to ensure that they're

Rep. Al Green (D-TX)SPEAKER_07

aware. I believe your answer would be yes or no, and anything less than a yes, I would assume is no. So do you— you would not want a person in your ranks, right?

Ms. Diane J. SabatinoSPEAKER_06

No.

Rep. Al Green (D-TX)SPEAKER_07

Okay, good. So, if you want to avoid it, the best way to prevent it from happening is to avoid it by good vetting from the outset. So, what are you doing to vet people who are new to this work with ICE or new to you? What are you doing to vet them? How do you vet?

Ms. Diane J. SabatinoSPEAKER_06

Speaking specifically to Customs and Border Protection, we do background investigations, they're subject to polygraph examinations, and interviews.

Rep. Al Green (D-TX)SPEAKER_07

And what does it take to trigger a professional responsibilities investigation?

Ms. Diane J. SabatinoSPEAKER_06

I would have to defer you to our Office of Professional Responsibility on how they triage allegations that are made, but investigations could be conducted by the Inspector General, by OPR, or by local management. But again, the nature of the allegation would determine that.

Rep. Al Green (D-TX)SPEAKER_07

But you do agree that you would not want someone who is affiliated with some sort of white supremacist movement to be associated with your officers or in your corps of officers, would you?

Ms. Diane J. SabatinoSPEAKER_06

I would agree in theory.

Rep. Al Green (D-TX)SPEAKER_07

In theory? Well, that's fair enough. And, um, I'm going to just ask you if you would do this. Please give some additional thought to how persons are being vetted, and I may have more to say about it at a later time. Thank you. I yield back, Mr. Chairman.

Rep. Elijah Crane (R-AZ)SPEAKER_03

Thank you. I'd now like to recognize Ms. Biggs from South Carolina for 5 minutes of questioning.

Rep. Sheri Biggs (R-SC)SPEAKER_01

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The Trump administration has made great strides to secure our borders and to stem the tide of illegal immigrants. Encounters at the— at the southwest border are down from a high of over 300,000 under President— I'm sorry. Encounters at the southwest border are down from a high of over 300,000 thousand under President Biden to under 8,000 in July of 2025. This is a historic achievement, but now is not the time to let our guard down or to rest on our laurels. We ensure that our ports of entry are equipped with the proper technology and personnel needed to ensure the accomplishment of their mission. Smugglers often go through ports of entry. Commercial containers and personal vehicles alike are modified to have spaces to hide illicit cargo, such as cocaine and fentanyl. Contraband cargo is often in locations that are not immediately obvious to the naked eye or even older detection technology. This is where modern NII technology is important. Vehicles and containers can be thoroughly examined without having to be torn apart. Full implementation of the newest and best non-intrusive inspection technology across all ports of entry will save time and lives by catching more illicit drugs and staying one step ahead of criminal elements. So my question is to Ms. Sabatino. What new and novel technologies is the CBP innovation team investigating and fielding at ports of entry through initial research and pilot programs, and how will these new technologies complement the existing fleet of NII machines?

Ms. Diane J. SabatinoSPEAKER_06

Thank you for the question. There's a number of emerging technologies that we are looking at. I think certainly in complement to the image scans, the artificial intelligence/machine learning that's going to help identify anomalies. We have a number of algorithms deployed along the southwest border today that are in training that we hope will be able to actually peel back resources as the NII—the algorithms will help officers streamline identifying those anomalies. I think in terms of other technology in our mail and express consignment facilities, leveraging CT scanners complemented by artificial intelligence/machine learning to help our officers, again, increase efficiency in the work that they do. Looking at millimeter and thruwave technology and working with vendors to help build their repository, because, frankly, we have the types of substances to help them identify and build the information database.

Rep. Sheri Biggs (R-SC)SPEAKER_01

Okay, great. Thank you. How can current and future implementations of NII technology be improved and streamlined to ensure that our borders remain secure in an evolving threat environment?

Ms. Diane J. SabatinoSPEAKER_06

Certainly with the deployment of the pre-primary technology, which is the technology that has experienced and challenges in moving out because of the interference, we have a number of lessons learned, including contracting an engineering firm to assist with those initial site surveys that, frankly, when they were first done, were not substantive enough and didn't address some really critical engineering issues, including, like, ground penetration with radar. But happy to provide, you know, a more fulsome briefing on all of the different lessons learned, how we've incorporated them into our resource strategy moving forward, moving forward and what the outcomes of those lessons learned in implementing have been.

Rep. Sheri Biggs (R-SC)SPEAKER_01

Okay, great. Thank you so much. I yield back.

Chairman Michael Guest (R-MS)SPEAKER_02

Gentlelady yields back. The chair now recognizes the gentleman from Virginia for his 5 minutes of questioning.

Rep. James Walkinshaw (D-VA)SPEAKER_04

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to thank you and Ranking Member Correa for convening today's hearing and our witnesses for joining us. Last week, I and 27 other members of the House visited Minnesota, and we saw firsthand the negative impacts of the mass deportation, the mass destruction machine that the Trump administration has assembled. American citizens and our law-abiding immigrant neighbors are terrified. Businesses and schools in Minnesota are closed. American citizens, again, are staying home because they don't want to be the next person pulled through the streets, put in a chokehold, or, God forbid, fatally shot by a federal agent, maybe ICE, maybe CBP, dressed and armed as if they're in a war zone. Reported this week that local law enforcement leaders in St. Paul in Minnesota have shared that their officers, off-duty officers, have been stopped, detained, and harassed by ICE. The masked and, in many cases, minimally trained officers have dragged pregnant mothers, pepper-sprayed children, placed their knees on the necks of American citizens. And recently, they detained a 5-year-old, a 5-year-old, and then used that 5-year-old—you might not be able to see it, this is him, this is Liam Ramos, 5 years old—detained him, used him as bait to lure his family members out of their home. Then they shipped him to a detention facility 1,000 miles away, 5 years old. In city after city, CBP Commander Greg Bovino has strutted around spreading terror: LA, Chicago, Charlotte, New Orleans, Minneapolis. This Congress must take immediate action to rein in the outrageous abuses we're seeing by ICE and CBP officers. We need to end the masking, end the secret police, require use of force standards and enforce them, and withdraw the thousands of federal agents from Minnesota. And Secretary Noem and the leadership of these agencies must be held accountable for the egregious abuses that we've seen. Ms. Sabatino, I have a 5-year-old. I dropped them off at preschool this morning. I won't ask you if you have children. It's not my business, not the committee's business. You have had an honorable career in law enforcement. You're highly trained. You've been a leader in your field. I just want to ask you a simple question. Were you ever trained to use a 5-year-old in a law enforcement operation in the way that Liam Ramos was used? Were you ever trained to use a 5-year-old as bait to get his family members to open the door? Were you trained to do that, and would you countenance one of your officers doing that?

Ms. Diane J. SabatinoSPEAKER_06

I'm not familiar with that. I'm

Rep. James Walkinshaw (D-VA)SPEAKER_04

not asking you about this situation. I'm saying, were you trained, and would you allow allow a child to be used in a law enforcement operation? Would you allow your officers to do it?

Ms. Diane J. SabatinoSPEAKER_06

I'm not familiar with that case. It's not part of our training.

Rep. James Walkinshaw (D-VA)SPEAKER_04

What would you do if one of your officers at a port of entry perhaps did that, used a 5-year-old to get their parents or a family member to open their car door? What would you do to one of those officers if they used a child in a law enforcement operation like that?

Ms. Diane J. SabatinoSPEAKER_06

Any allegation of unprofessional behavior or use of force would be investigated by the appropriate third party.

Rep. James Walkinshaw (D-VA)SPEAKER_04

Okay I yield back, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman Michael Guest (R-MS)SPEAKER_02

The gentleman yields back. At this point, we would like to do a second round of questioning, but after consulting with Mr. Correa, we'd like to do a lightning round. So not 5 minutes of questioning, but three. So we'd like for all members to have an additional 3 minutes to ask questions. If there are other members who have not come in, they will also be included in the queue, but would like to explore this just a little bit further. So if we could set the clock at 3 minutes. And so, Ms. Sabatino, my question will just be, we've heard testimony that there will be, at least at certain ports of entry, there will be some period of time before we're able to get fixed, permanent scanners there at those locations. And we know that there's infrastructure issues, there's interference issues. We've talked about some of the challenges that CBP faces. And so I guess my question is, in the interim, what is the plan? What is the possibility again to use mobile scanners, handheld scanners so that we will have coverage at those ports of entry? And again, the coverage may not be to the same level. We may not be able to screen as many vehicles as we would like. But is there a plan within CBP to use those handheld scanners, those mobile scanners to supplement some of the deficiencies that we may see, particularly at the nine ports of entry that Ms. Benedict has made us aware of?

Ms. Diane J. SabatinoSPEAKER_06

Yes, we're going to continue to use all of the technology that's available to us, as well as additional technology that we'll be procuring with funding from the One Big Beautiful Bill Act. And that's in complement to also our canine assets, our targeting models, and the intelligence available to us.

Chairman Michael Guest (R-MS)SPEAKER_02

And I do want to say, look, you've got some incredible men and women who work at the ports of entry. They do a great job of identifying uh, individuals for secondary screening. Uh, y'all do an amazing job of stopping a large number of narcotics that come across, but we want to make sure through the use of our artificial intelligence, through the use of technology, that we are making those agents more efficient, more effective, and that we're doing everything that we can on behalf of the American public to stop the flow of drugs coming into the country. So please when you return, uh, please tell the men and women that you serve with, uh, that we have great respect for the work that they do, and we thank them for their commitment and dedication to serving this great nation. With that, I would yield, uh, 3 minutes to the ranking member, Mr. Correa.

Ranking Member Lou Correa (D-CA)SPEAKER_00

Thank you again, Ms. Sabatino and Ms. Benedict. Thank you for being here today. Let me say that I know San Ysidro quite well. I've I've traveled that place. I've been with you, with your officers. 60 to 70%, 60 to 70% of all the fentanyl coming into the United States goes through San Ysidro. Yet we're not scheduled to put any of these high-tech scanners there, not scheduled to even begin to plan to put them there. So it becomes extra critical to have the personnel there. Ms. Sabatino, I kind of asked you, are you fully staffed? I'll ask it again. Are you fully staffed?

Ms. Diane J. SabatinoSPEAKER_06

I can provide you what our target onboard number is as a follow-up, specifically for San Ysidro. But we're actively hiring 5,000 officers

Ranking Member Lou Correa (D-CA)SPEAKER_00

We've been trying to hire thousands of officers for years, and as you know, the background checks are very tough. Polygraph tests are almost impossible to pass. They're tougher than for the folks applying for the FBI. It's very hard to hire people. And this is my concern. When you have officers at the border stopping fentanyl deployed into the interior of the country, it concerns me we're not doing the job of protecting Americans from fentanyl. These officers are now deployed into my district. Southern California is the manufacturing capital of the United States. Do a lot of economic activity. A lot of these immigrants are the workers there. So I look at this as a lose-lose policy. We're not doing the best we can to stop the fentanyl, and we're missing out on common sense economic activity, economic growth that we have in Southern California that is done by these immigrants. I'm not going to belabor this issue, but what I would like to do, I'm going to submit some questions to you in writing. But essentially, I want to know, how many folks are you down? How many open slots do you have? Is this something that just happened? You used the words to describe that this is something that you do on a regular basis, which is redeploy officers off the border to the interior of the country. I'd like to have the data from the last 5 years. Have you really deployed them? How many numbers over the last 5 years? Because I believe my citizens, American citizens, want to make sure that fentanyl is not getting into this country. Again, I've been to San Ysidro. I've spoken to your folks over there. Wonderful individuals that have these skills. I don't know how they do it—sixth sense—but they can figure out where this fentanyl is at. When you transfer them to somewhere in the US, they're not doing their job that we hired them to do. Thank you very much. I look forward to getting your data from you. Thank you.

Chairman Michael Guest (R-MS)SPEAKER_02

gentleman yields back. The chair recognizes the gentleman from Arizona.

Rep. Elijah Crane (R-AZ)SPEAKER_03

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Obviously, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle continue to attack Homeland Security, ICE agents. Their newest attack is ICE just detained a five-year-old child, right? We keep hearing that on the panel today. It's all over social media. That would be atrocious if true, but it's not. And this is exactly what Homeland Security put out officially. ICE did not target a child. The child was abandoned. On January 20th, ICE conducted a targeted operation to arrest Adrian Alexander Conejo-Arias, an illegal alien from Ecuador who was released into the US by the Biden administration. As agents approached the driver, Adrian Alexander Conejo-Arias fled on foot, abandoning his child. For the child's safety, one of our ICE officers remained with the child while the other officers apprehended Conejo-Arias. Parents are asked if they want to be removed with their children, or ICE will place the children with a safe person that the parent designates. This is consistent with past administrations' immigration enforcement. Parents can take control of their departure and receive a free flight and $2,600 with the CBP Home app. By using the CBP Home app, illegal aliens reserve the chance to come back the right and legal way. I just wanted to clarify that with all the outrage on the left and trying to generate hysteria in these chambers right now. That's not the truth of what happened, and I'm glad that officials at ICE made sure that the real story was made public.

Ranking Member Lou Correa (D-CA)SPEAKER_00

The gentleman yields.

Rep. Elijah Crane (R-AZ)SPEAKER_03

Thank you. And I yield back.

Chairman Michael Guest (R-MS)SPEAKER_02

Gentleman yields back. The chair recognizes the gentleman from Virginia.

Rep. James Walkinshaw (D-VA)SPEAKER_04

I yield back, Mr. Chairman. I'm okay. Actually, I'll yield to the ranking member.

Ranking Member Lou Correa (D-CA)SPEAKER_00

Thank you very much. And to my colleague, From Arizona. You make an interesting point, which is what are exactly the facts? Because it's not only one 5-year-old. I've heard a number of stories about young individuals being left when their parents are apprehended, some with orders of deportation, others essentially picked up randomly off the streets and children left to their own. I would welcome the opportunity with my colleague to do an investigation, to study what exactly is the truth. And as you've said, sir, this has been an issue for a number of administrations, not just one. And I say to do a study because we want to have the truth somewhere. The truth is there's probably in the middle somewhere, but we all have an interest in making sure children are taken care of. So I'd like to look under the hood, so to speak, and look at the facts. And see what the policy is when a child's parents are apprehended, because that child is an American citizen, most likely. And so I think we do need to look at this issue a lot closer. Thank you very much.

Rep. James Walkinshaw (D-VA)SPEAKER_04

Reclaiming my time. I appreciate the gentleman's comments. What he didn't address and what the DHS statement didn't address is a question I posed to Ms. Sabatino. And that's the use of a 5-year-old child in a law enforcement, immigration enforcement operation. That doesn't seem to be in dispute, whether the agents on the ground use that child to ring the doorbell to lure his family members who are inside the home out. There should be an impartial investigation of that and the hundreds of other allegations of abuses, violations of policy from ICE, and as Ms. Sabatino here today, CBP officers. The American people don't trust that this administration and this Secretary of Homeland Security will conduct that kind of fair and impartial investigation in the case of Liam Ramos or others. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman Michael Guest (R-MS)SPEAKER_02

Gentleman yields back. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas for 5 minutes.

Rep. Al Green (D-TX)SPEAKER_07

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Again, I thank you and the ranking member and the witnesses. Ms. Sabatino, you and I were talking earlier about unacceptable character information being reported, and I think we concluded that it can be reported to your Office of Professional Responsibility. Is that correct?

Ms. Diane J. SabatinoSPEAKER_06

Yes.

Rep. Al Green (D-TX)SPEAKER_07

And can anyone report to this office, Ms. Sabatino?

Ms. Diane J. SabatinoSPEAKER_06

I believe there's a publicly available number and email.

Rep. Al Green (D-TX)SPEAKER_07

And does anyone include you, ma'am,

Ms. Diane J. SabatinoSPEAKER_06

if I could report allegations?

Rep. Al Green (D-TX)SPEAKER_07

Does anyone include you when I say anyone? Yes. Okay. Now let's, let's talk about criminal activity. Is a similar circumstance available for persons who are aware of something that may be criminal in nature?

Ms. Diane J. SabatinoSPEAKER_06

If we had allegations of criminal behavior, yes, that would be called in.

Rep. Al Green (D-TX)SPEAKER_07

And do you recall that Miss Renee Nicole Goode was shot by an officer?

Ms. Diane J. SabatinoSPEAKER_06

I did see the media attention to it, yes.

Rep. Al Green (D-TX)SPEAKER_07

And has that been reported to the Office of Professional Responsibility?

Ms. Diane J. SabatinoSPEAKER_06

I think because the agent that was involved was with Immigration and Customs Enforcement, I'm not aware of any specific call into either our or ICE's Office of Professional Responsibility.

Rep. Al Green (D-TX)SPEAKER_07

But there is an Office of Professional Responsibility for these kinds of things. It's sort of internal affairs. Is that correct?

Ms. Diane J. SabatinoSPEAKER_06

Yes.

Rep. Al Green (D-TX)SPEAKER_07

And you have the ability to report these things, do you not?

Ms. Diane J. SabatinoSPEAKER_06

Everyone in the public can report.

Rep. Al Green (D-TX)SPEAKER_07

Does everyone include you?

Ms. Diane J. SabatinoSPEAKER_06

Yes.

Rep. Al Green (D-TX)SPEAKER_07

So you have the ability to report, do you not?

Ms. Diane J. SabatinoSPEAKER_06

If I believe that there was criminal activity or

Rep. Al Green (D-TX)SPEAKER_07

misconduct. You said you saw the video. There was statements made that by the wife of Ms. Goode that we had whistles, they had guns. You saw what happened. You can report this as something that should be investigated by the Office of Professional Responsibility, can't you?

Ms. Diane J. SabatinoSPEAKER_06

Um, I don't think it would be appropriate for me as I was not there and I saw clips of videos on

Rep. Al Green (D-TX)SPEAKER_07

the news. Excuse me, excuse me. The question is If you wanted to, you could, couldn't you?

Ms. Diane J. SabatinoSPEAKER_06

Anyone who believes that there's criminal—

Rep. Al Green (D-TX)SPEAKER_07

Are you, are you a part of the anyone?

Ms. Diane J. SabatinoSPEAKER_06

Yes.

Rep. Al Green (D-TX)SPEAKER_07

So you can report it. How can you, ma'am, see what happened on that video and not report it to the Office of Professional Responsibility? Just ask them to look into it. This woman lost her life. And not no investigation is said to be taking place, and you won't report it to the Office of Professional

Chairman Michael Guest (R-MS)SPEAKER_02

Ethics. Time has expired.

Rep. Al Green (D-TX)SPEAKER_07

I yield back. Thank you.

Chairman Michael Guest (R-MS)SPEAKER_02

I'd like to thank the witnesses for being here today, and I'd like to thank the members for their participation in this hearing. Members of the subcommittee may have additional questions for the witnesses, and we would ask the witnesses to respond in writing pursuant to Committee Rule 7(e). The record for this hearing will be held open for 10 days. Without objection, the subcommittee stands adjourned. Thank you.