Immigration. He said the Trump Administration would have to double the number of Immigration Judges to work through the large number of pending cases. The subcommittee on immigration and Border Security will come to order. Without objection the chairs authorized to declare recesses of the committee at any time. We welcome everyone to todays hearing on oversight of the executive office for immigration review. And now i recognize myself for an Opening Statement. Todays oversight hearing focuses on a critical facet of u. S. Immigration policy. The executive office for immigration review or eoyr is the lynchpen as it administers of other components the u. S. Immigration courts and the court of appeals. We must ensure our Immigration Laws are interpreted as congress intended. As a former immigration who regularly appeared in Immigration Court i certainly appreciate how important it is that the courts are administered effect 11 and a way that maximizes daca management and minimizes fraud and lay. Unfortunately eoyr has been consistently plagued with problems. During the past administration the department of justices Inspector Generals Office found the office engaged in nepotism and other disturbing practices. It made it impossible to focus on much needed imp provement. Additionalally a 2014 serve crash paralyzed the courts nationwide for several weeks. Again necessitating the allocation of resources away from management and oversight of the agency. The policies and practices instituted during the Obama Administration served a decidedly political agenda throughout the federal government and eoyr was not spared. They racedt a minimum a specter of collusion between the department of justice and department of Homeland Security. The prioritization of recent inference including the surgeance of unaccompanied minors and immigrants were likewise ill advised and poorly executed. Ignoring the spikes of asylum fraud eoyr chose its Program Based on expediency rather than based on prudence. Of utmost concern to this subcommittee is the current backlog of pending cases. I am appalled but really not surprised that the Previous Administration created conditions that ult matly resulted in a backlog of almost 630,000 pending cases nationwide. This number represents a 22 increase in fiscal year 2017 and is simply unacceptable. The Government Accountability offices recent report on Management Practices at eoyr and the backlog identified several possible Solutions Including reforming the hiring process for Immigration Judges and updating internal oversight practices to ensure better daca management. The goa report noted coiniances were a contributing factor to the backlog. It found that court saw a 23 increase in the dprapts of continue witnesses. I would never suggest that continuances be disallowed. However, the rash of continuances used for the purposes of delay constitute an abusive process that must be stopped. The july 2017 memo of chief judge mary beth cellar out lining the tremendous step in curbing this abuse but represents only one of the solutions to reduce the number of pending cases. The goa report further noted the inefficiencies associated with hiring Immigration Judges as the written as acknowledged calling for the hiring of an additional 370 immigration suggests. I remain concerned that eoyr must evaluate hiring practices to meet even a fraction of this goal. Finally, i have long spoken about the need to modernize our imdpragz system. One of the key components must be the modernization of our Immigration Courts. Eoyr currently lacks in terms of basic items such as filings and other similar items. This was never a priority for a Previous Administration. Employing an efiling system would drastically reduce the need for more filing space and overall reduce the number of lost filings that could also lead to unnecessary delays. In addition, eoyr relies on other technology, but there are concerns that this equipment is either outidated in some locations or not operational at all in others. With the challenges facing eoyr today and the solutions of the administration, i am hopeful we can Work Together to bring real change to the agency and continue the goals of modernizing and reforming our immigration system. Before i recognize the general woman from c, i would like to place into the record a statement from judge ashley tabanor. Without objection this statement will be placed into the record. The last time the immigration subcommittee gathered for an eoyr or oversight hearing we heard testimony from the former eoyr director. In august of this year juan passed away this year suddenly. And id like to take a moment to acknowledge his life and service to this country. Juan worked for 17 years as a Legal Advisor in the Justice Department for both democratic and republican administrations. He was a form board of immigration appeals judge and former associate Deputy Attorney general in charge of immigration policy that the department of justice. Juan had a remarkable career in public service, and he will be greatly missed. And i would like to extend my heartfelt condolences to his family over his loss. We are are assembled here now to take a close look at the administration of our Immigration Courts system. The executive office of immigration review currently employs 339 Immigration Judges in 58 courtrooms around the country. Immigration judges have a complex often thankless task of making sophisticated legal decisions with decisive speed. Because there is no right to government appointed council Immigration Judges often have to act as a fact finder and legal researcher to ensure the result in each case is just, fair and in accordance with legal precedent. The difficulty of this task is magnified by the severity of the consequences. Immigration judge dana lee marks once said theyre, quote, Death Penalty cases heard in traffic court. This is particularly true for asylum seekers, children and other vulnerable populations. Yet despite these difficulties the Trump Administration has taken steps towards imposing numeric and performance quotas. This could add difficulties by in his written testimony our witness states at eoyr is transforming its Institutional Culture to emphasize the importance of completing cases. He claims this will improve the efficiency of our court system, but i dont think itll do more except increase the removals, speedy deportations and also increase appeals in our federal court system. Much of the discussion today will focus on the immigration back and the ways this can be reduced. I want to start by saying congress can fully fund hiring Immigration Lawyers, clerks and infrastructure. The backlog will not be fully remedied by policy shifts alone. But the immigration backlog is not one that happened overnight. There are reasons for the backlog. First Immigration Enforcement specifically funding for i. C. E. Are out paced by fundsing for Immigration Courts. In 2002 to present day funding increased by over 400 . I. C. E. And cvp went from a budget of about 5. 5 billion in 2002 to about 7 billion in 2017. This means at the same time i. C. E. And cvp are fundling cases into the court system the courts are not given amounts of resources to judeicate the speed and efficiency, and its created a massive bottleneck in backlogs which were seeing today. Eoyr currently has 60,030 cases pending. And in some cases courts can wait three to five years to receive a decision on their case. On perspective the average caseload of a u. S. District court judge is 440. Second, both under the obama and Trump Administration eoyr implemented policies under president obama eoyr implemented a rocket docket. These cases primarily consisted of children and families from Central America who are fleeing violence and seeking asylum. Eoyr implemented a last in, first out strategy which meant that removal cases of immigrants who had been waiting for months or years were further delayed. Now, under the Trump Administration eoyr moved the Immigration Judges along it the southern border. Reports that many of these judges sat in empty court rooms with little to do. The mobilized judges completed approximately 427 more cases expecteden if they had not be detailed. But what he fails to mention is the socalled surge of these immigration suggests over 4,000 hearings were rescheduled. Immigration courts must ensure those who enter our country seeking protection be afford a due process and a full and impartial hearing in a prompt manner. But this cannot come at the expense of Immigration Court backlogs in the interior of the country. And lastly one of the primary reasons for the Immigration Court backlog is the continued lack of representation particularly for children and other vulnerable populations. When particularly a child appear ins Immigration Court without legal representations, an immigration judge will spend a considerable amount of time in assessing the child and determining her legal options. This is precisely what a judge should do when a one is presented in Court Without legal remtation. The National Association of Immigration Judges has explained that, quote, when noncitizens are represented by attorneys, Immigration Judges are able to conduct proceedings more expeditiously and resolve cases. It was save the country 38 million through expedited processes. My bill would provide Government Counsel to children and particularly vulnerable individuals. It would save the government money and ensure the Due Process Rights of children are protected. I hope my republican colleagues will join me in sponsoring this bill, and i look forward to substantive conversation today. I yield back the remainder of my time. Thank you, chairman. And i want to let my colleague from california know that i cosponsored the legislation with great pride. Members of our committee and to our distinguished witness, i too want to note the passing of juan osana who served as the director of immigration review and who testified before this subcommittee in that capacity. Mr. Osana was a model Public Servant who devoted the last 17 years of his life to the department of justice. He was a consummt professional known for his leadership and his ability to balance access to justice with court efficiency. And im sure hes deeply missed by the department and those that work with him there. Now, turning to the focus of todays hearing, we have an important opportunity to consider the current challenges facing the executive office for immigration review, particularly under the current administration. To begin with, rather than the rule of law is guiding Immigration Court policies under the Trump Administration, the antiimmigrant ideology. Now after all since the earliest days of his campaign now President Trump has shown troubling disregard for that rule. Hes attacked the judiciary, issued an unprecedented pardon of a sheriff convicted of criminal contempt of court, and fired the fbi director during an Ongoing Investigation by that agency into his own campaign. Pardon me. Unfortunately, the executive office for the immigration review appears to have not escaped this broad erosion of rule of law principles based on the administrations policies that threaten judicial independence, due process and fundamental fairness within our Immigration Courts. First, media accounts report tat the Trump Administration could impose numerical and timebased case quotas on Immigration Judges. All of us regardless of Party Support common sense measures for reducing Immigration Court backlogs. But quotas are not the solution. Their implementation would force already overstressed judges to hurry through lengthy dockets regardless of the circumstances of individual cases. Hearings would become lightening fast, fundmentally unfair and unfair due process. It would turn it into a forced march towards deportation. Secondly, the administration issued a memorandum effectively pressuring judges to deny motions for continuances, which often represent a vulnerable immigrants only chance for obtaining counsel essential to protecting his or her rights. Together with case quotas this will force many respondents even Young Children to face immigration and Custom Enforcement prosecutors without counsel, which all but ensures their unjust removal. Thirdly, the executive office for immigration review has moved to strip children in immigration proceedings of other vital protections. In a callus break with prior policy, the Agents Office of general counsel issued an opinion concluding that Immigration Judges may revoke minors, unaccompanied alien child status and associated legal safeguards. As with the first two measures, this will substantially increase removals of minors. The common denominators among these three measures are clear. Far less due process and fairness, far less deportations, this is anything but the rule of law of instead these policies undermine that rule in the service of the president s antiimmigrant ideology intended to drive immigrants out of the United States. Our task today must be to gain a greater understanding of how this administratives executive Office Immigration review policies concretely advance that agenda and how they serve to further his mass deportation plan. I thank acting director mckenly for his appearance before the committee and look forward to a substantive dialogue with him on these critical matters. I thank the chair and yield back any time that may be remaining. Thank you, mr. Conyers. Without objection other members Opening Statements will be made a part of the record. We have a distinguished panel here today, a panel of one. And the witnesss written statements will be entered into the record in its entirety. I ask you summarize your testimony in five minutes or less. To help you stay within that time there is a timing lith on your table. When the light switches from green to yellow, you will have one minute to conclude your testimony. When the light turns red it signals that your five minutes have expired. I will give you a little bit of leeway because youre the only witness, but dont go much beyond the five minutes. And before i introduce your witness, id like you to stand and be sworn in. Do you swear that the testimony youre about to give is the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth . I do. Let the record reflect that the witness answered in the affirmative. Thank you, please be seated. Mr. Mckennelly was appointed on may 30th, 2017. Prior to his appointment he served in the office of the associate attorney general. He was previously an Administrative Law judge in the Social Security administration. Hes also worked as an at or near for the u. S. Immigrations and customs enforcement. He earned a bachelor of science from the georgetown Universe School of service, a master of arts in Political Science from the vanderbilt Universe School and a juris doctorate from the vanderbilt universe law school. I now represent the witness for his statement. Thank you for the opportunity to speak with you today about the department of justices executive office for immigration review or as we affectionally call it eoyr. This is my third stint and i have a deep respect for eoyrs position. I returned to the agency several years later as an Administrative Law judge. I am honored to now serve as its acting director and to be able to appear before you to discuss some of the challenges and opportunities it currently faces. At eoyr our primary mission is to adjudicate immigration practices. We do under delegated authority from the attorney general by conducting immigration hearings, and appellet reviews. As policy changes and daca Management Practices have contributinged contributinged to a pronounced increase. The caseload has almost tripled since fy 2009 and doubled since 2012. Eoyr has formulated a plan to achieve our goal. Wer