Regular betty could find their seats. We are now delighted to welcome our final witnesses. We thank you for coming today. We thank you for your patience. We are joined by Timothy S Robbins the acting associate director for enforcement and removal operations in the us immigrations company enforcement in the department of homeland concert security and daniel, the associate director for Field Operations director at the us citizenship and immigration immigration system. The witness it would be please rise and raise her right hand. I will begin by swearing human. The truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help you god. The record shows that the witnesses were all affirmative. That went out objection you entire written statements are part of the record and that went out, director robbins, you know now recognize to give a presentation of your testimony. Chairman rosman, Ranking Member roy and distinguished member of the subcommittee. Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today. And clarify any public confusion arises role in this matter. As was stated in recent correspondence, from us eis, eight dhs may issue a notice to appear and commence removal proceedings on section 240 of the immigration and national act. Before immigration judge, against removable aliens. It is critical to understand that ice may only remove an alien from the United States when an alien hasnt issued a final removal order. Such orders are the result of a process provided for by law during which an alien has the opportunity to avail himself of a variety of procedural safeguards and to speak certain forms from removal. For example, in a alien in section 240 removal proceedings has a right to be represented by counsel to seek continuances and it can fit fast remove ability to apply for relief, to view and examine and object to a government evidence and witnesses into an appeal sent decisions to the board of immigration appeals. All while having the proceedings judge. Simultaneously translated at government expense into language that the alien understands. There are currently over 920,000 aliens in ina section 240 removal sections nationwide. Ice has broad discretion and exercise that discretion is appropriate. On a casebycase basis, throughout the Immigration Enforcement process, and a variety of ways. For instance, discretion may be exercised in the course of deciding which aliens to arrest. Which aliens to release from custody and in the removals proceedings what position of ice will be on a claim motion or appeal made by an alien in immigration court. And which aliens will be prioritized for removal. Ice does not exercise discretion on a categorical basis to exempt entire groups, 70 aliens from Immigration Laws enacted by congress. Deferred action, is the discretionary act of an administrative convenience by which dhs may be leg or declined to exercise Immigration Enforcement authority, in a given case. Its not a legal benefit and provides no lawful immigration status. In the United States. Ice does not accept applications for deferred action. However, consistent we put federal regulations and alien who become subject to a final removal, such as when his or her ina section 240 removal sit proceedings include. They may apply to ice removal using for my two his 46 application for say. A state of removal may only be saw it on by aliens subject final orders of removal. Ice will consider all relevant factors in deciding mother to issue a savory mill including a medical basis for this request. However, such assays are considered solely in isis discretion on a casebycase basis. Thank you again for inviting me today. I look forward to answering any questions you may have on ice his role in this matter. Thank you. Good afternoon. Thank you for this opportunity to discuss we put deferred action. In addition to the adjudication of applications and petition the required facetoface interviews, such as adjustment of status and naturalization, Field Operations is the directorate responsible for making decisions on certain deferred action request, made to us eis field offices, for both military deferred action and on military deferred action which of the subject todays hearing. My director does not decide applications or renewal roles of deferred application for child or children pride or other deferred action report was such as those related to the tea or you are class occasions. The asset, i want to restate what dhs related to the Committee Last evening. Because of a lawsuit has been filed against us eis, regarding the issues being discussed at todays hearing. I will be limited in what information i can provide in response to questions today. Deferred action is the discretionary act the administrative convenience by which deep hs and a delay or decline to exercise Immigration Enforcement authorities. In a given case. Deferred action is discretionary decision made on a casebycase basis. Deferred action its not an emigration of it or specific forum of relief. It is the decision not to act. Deferred action does not provide lawful immigration status. It does not excuse any periods, of an all lawful presence before or after the deferred action begins. Importantly, deferred action can be terminated at any time. At the agency his discretion. To better lying us eis we put his mission of administrating our nations lawful immigration system, on august 7th, 2019, us eis determined that field offices would no longer accept requests buying nonmilitary persons for deferred action. To be clear, this does not mean the end of all types of deferred action. This redirection of Agency Resources does not affect docket which remains in effect according to the nationwide injunction, while cases go through the court system. It also does not affect other deferred action request process at us eis service centers, on statute or on policy regulations or quarters. Keep in mind the us eis not enforce owners of removal. As deferred action is largely a Law Enforcement tool, used to lay removal from United States, they do not historical received many. For the past few years, us yes coverage received very few rate deferred request military. Received by us eis, are due to Family Support for medical reasons. This has been incorrectly reported or mischaracterized by the media as a medical deferred action program. To be clear, us eis does not and has never administered medical deferred action program. Again, deferred action relates to military families not affected by the audit august 7th redirection resources and consideration of those cases is ongoing. In addition, all cases that were denied in august 7, 2019, are being reopened and reconsidered. Again, i want to emphasize that because a lawsuit has been filed against us eis regarding different action, it will be limited in what information i can provide in response to questions today. I can tell you that i have had the privilege of working for us eis and its predecessor center of Immigration Services for 31 years. Im extremely proud of the work and professionalism i see every day. Service to our nation and i will answer your questions the best i can given the current litigation. Thank you. Thank you. Im going to begin by recognizing missus schultz to do the questions. Just one question before she starts, or both of you able to watch the witnesses and the fire panel. The. Some but not all. Yes or. Thank you mr. Chairman, chairman welcome, thank you to the Oversight Committee. We heard the argument today, that ice his ability to provide Administrative States of final deed of partition is sufficient to take the place of the deferred action process but that is just not true. An individual can only request an Administrative State of removal from ice after that person is completed paperwork. They may pay significant consequences for future benefits. Ice is also does not grant benefits as Work Authorization eligibility for Health Benefits and finally, i sit administered its days are only available in one year increments. Do you agree that an administrative say of removal from ice does not provide the same benefits to immigrants as the deferred action process at ics. I cant speak as to the benefits that it provided based on his statement it can tell you that prosecutor discretion, we use it from a point of arrest throughout the enforcement. Why cant you speak to the benefits. But i just laid out accurate as far as your understanding question. My understanding is that and i would have to deferred my colleagues when it comes to employment authorization, we do not adjudicate employment authorization we do say requests. We adjudicate them on a casebycase basis. And their only available in one year increments permit. It could be less than one year. We do not. Or eligibility for Health Benefits. We do not. Through the process, you do grant those things correct. Think every question, if someone were to receive deferred action, they have the opportunity to apply for employment authorization. It is the discretionary decision made on this case basis. Also potentially eligible to work Health Benefits as well in that process. They would be applying for deferred action. Im sorry cant speak to both of they are eligible for Health Benefits. We do not provide a. Not on a deportation order process. Correct . We do not adjudicate Health Benefits so i would not be able to answer that. Although you would not come right out and say, in detail you have just described that they are quite different and one provides benefits and the other just its not. One program is longer than one year potentially and the other its not. In fact before us eis into the deferred action process, they could apply before being ordered removed. Us can also provide a family we put Work Authorizations, allowing them to super themselves while the child receive the treatment they need. Us eis deferral lacks up to two years which allows for greater certainties for these families. Finally a person granted by its not considered to be unlawfully present in the United States which can be an important factor in future immigration proceedings. Mr. Do you believe those are meaningful differences . Not having expertise in Administrative States im not able to differentiate between the two forms. Have i said anything inaccurate about the differences between the two processes. Again i cant confirm specifically. You are not familiar we put your own agency his procedures. It is us eis able to provide families we put artWork Authorizations. While the wait for the childrens to get the treatment they need . As ive testified, someone who is the recipient of deferred action, any individual for any reason who happens to have deferred action. And it does last up to two years correct . Deferred action is granted for periods not to exceed two years. Finally, do you agree that those are besides the fact that when he just outlined that there are meaningful differences, speaking to the differences in details, thats very clear, are either of you know aware my plans for ice to provide benefits to families who have critically ill children or other events that you shift to a process that has ice dealt we put this enforcement mechanism . Dhs is still considering a pathway forward and other internal discussions where not prepared to discuss. I appreciate making sure that the information that arose during this entire hearing, makes it very clear that what mr. Homan indicated was not accurate and that these are very distinct and different programs. One that provides a lengthy stay. And in the other is an enforcement action. I yelled back. I will recognize myself or five minutes now. Both of you gentlemen have done a good job describing the legal architecture of deferred action at least from the perspective of the agencies discretionary better thats conducted on a casebycase basis. You dont categorically exempt entire groups. If im reading you you correctly. But what i dont get, is what is the motivation behind new policy. What is the rationale. I know some of my republican colleagues were asking me to relay the sin same question. Why did all of this happened. Can i other of you answer that. Unfortunately, we are not going to be old to answer that because of the ongoing litigation. We are not able to respond that today. What is the new policy as you understand it. There is so much confusion around it. Because of the litigation specifically, encumbers what the current policy is, as you know informed last evening by a letter, these are areas we are not going to be able to that im not going to be held to discuss. You cant tell me why theres a new one or what motivated it and you cant only we put the new policy is. Is that a correct assessment . That is my testimony, yes. Lets say mr. Robbins will become due, i can see theres an effort to find some shelter for the government and the idea of prosecutor to discretion. Over the prosecutorial and if it be in removing from the country departing from the country, the young person who has Cystic Fibrosis or cancer or another serious disease. So i think its safe that weekend agree that when it comes to very sympathetic cases, that is exactly what discretion is for. Ice his enforcing Immigration Law, has always use discretion and will always use discretion. What changed. I assume you saw the anxiety and pain these families are going through. What changed. Currently ice does not have a process, navigation processor adjudicated process or an affirmative stays of deferred action. We use our press israel discretion from a rest for removal then we have the ability to adjudicate say requests in this application process for that. And therefore, what is the answer to my question. What has changed. I cant speak to the rationale or what has changed in regard to the adjudication of the deferred action requested gis, i would ask that to my colleagues. Would you agree that theres been a change in the mood thats produce the writing of these letters. I cant. I cant answer that question. Homeland security just to reverse this whole disastrous road that went on when a sent out those letters. We are currently having ongoing discussions we put dhs of the outer pathway forward. When it comes to deferred action and we are just not prepared to comment on that. Those discussions are ongoing. I appreciate your candor and honesty about that. Can i just tell you, i know i speak for a lot of colleagues, certainly in my side of the aisle and i suspect that i dont want to say for sure the other side of the aisle. This really is the moral crisis in the country. I understand your describe numbers of people affected in terms of the overall number of people when he got a deal we put it. Understand that that but it is still a thousand more people and as representatives in congress, we hear from them. And their families and its our job to take into account those reallife situations. Anything that weekend do to work we put the administration to reverse this, to enter into discussions about new regulation or new legislation to bring greater clarity and transparency to the process. I think youd find a lot of support here. But the United States of america is the big country. It is the great country and it is the big heart. When the people of america see this kind of testimony, and we know they were in a very forefront of medical and scientific progress in the world, people come to america to get their lives saved, not to get their lives messed up. I think thats why its caused such crisis and anxiety not to just in the family, but across the country and in congress when we see this thing done in the name of our people. Let me just ask you finally, when will you be ready to conclude your deliberations we put or that went out our assistance and when will you be ready to answer a committee about what is the precise policy going forward. Mr. Robbins. I want him to be able to give you an answer when the conversation will conclude. Those conversations are ongoing and i dont have an answer. Can you refer us that none of the people that we saw today on the situation, will be removed from the country until you get back to us we put a policy as to what the policy is. I can assure you that when it comes to ice in our discretion, the people that the population, correct me if im strong, these are affirmative actions. They are not in proceedings. They are currently, not a population that we currently target but i do not have an exhaustive list of those people. Of actually who has previously applied for deferred action. And you can assure us, they are not targeting anyone in a situation removal at this. I can assure you that enforcing Immigration Law is the very devote responsibly the ices does very professionally and we put the passion. This is the very vulnerable population that is never been, we would use prosecutor discretion on cases very similar to these. I cant speak to these specific cases because i do not have the facts. I cant assure you that every case that is applied through cs Deferred Program or process, would not be removed. I just dont know all of the cases. I appreciate the fact that you know telling me you are not ready really to articulate what the policy is. But i want you to know that we are going to be zealous and diligent as the Oversight Committee and making sure the people in the situation have their rights and its rest consider consistent we put the values of the American People. [applause] thank you. I recognize now ms. Presley for five minutes. Hello gentlemen, i think we were able to have a committee today. I understand there was some frustration we put the urgency we put which we are asking all of you to come but i can you assure you that whatever inconvenience you may have experience certainly compares in pale in comparison that the l