At Wednesday's House Homeland Security Committee hearing, Rep. Eli Crane (R-AZ) questioned DHS Sec. Kristi Noem about the actions of Rep. LaMonica McIver (D-NJ) at an ICE facility.
Category
🗞
NewsTranscript
00:00you've got in this position. Thank you.
00:02The chair now recognizes the gentleman from Arizona, Mr. Crane, for five minutes.
00:07I want to thank you, Ms. Noem, for coming here today and giving us your testimony. I also want
00:12to thank you for the amazing work that yourself and everybody at Homeland Security have done to
00:17not only secure our border within just a couple weeks, but also to start deporting folks that
00:24aren't supposed to be here in the first place. Secretary Noem, I'm very concerned about the
00:29behavior of one of my colleagues on this very committee who we saw assaulting both verbally
00:34and physically federal law enforcement officers just last week on national television. Ms. Noem,
00:41what kind of message do you think it sends to the country and radical political agitators that she
00:46sits here today not being charged for a crime to participate in today's hearing?
00:51Well, Congressman, I believe that what you saw last Friday at Delaney Hall was not oversight. I
00:56believe that it was breaking into a federal facility and assaulting law enforcement officers.
01:02This Congresswoman was surrounded by people who were criminals that were taking criminal actions.
01:08And so we need to be honest about what happened there. And we also need to talk about the fact
01:12that we have always facilitated visits and tours of federal facilities. We would continue to do that
01:18as well. And we would encourage that they work with us to do that in the future rather than to
01:23do the unprecedented destructive actions that the Congresswoman and her colleagues engaged in last
01:28Friday. Ms. Noem, do you think her presence here today emboldens others to behave in the very same
01:33way? I think it would be sad if that's the testimony of what happened last Friday that gets
01:39perpetuated. I was shocked when I watched it and saw it and was extremely discouraged to see that
01:47the colleagues that surround those three defend them. Because those actions, we wouldn't want our
01:55kids to act that way, our children, our grandchildren to act that way. That's not the America that we
02:00dreamed and envisioned for our country. America should be a land of opportunity and where laws
02:06are enforced. And there's consequences for breaking the law. Thank you. Ms. Noem, are you familiar with
02:11Article 1, Section 9, Clause 2 of the Constitution that covers the suspension of the writ of habeas corpus?
02:17Yes. It says that the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended unless when cases of rebellion or
02:26invasion, the public safety may require it. Are you aware of which presidents have suspended the writ
02:33of habeas corpus? I know that President Lincoln did. Yeah, also Roosevelt and President Grant. You
02:40testified under oath, I believe, that the Biden administration allowed an invasion into our
02:45country. Is that correct? That is correct. So do you think it falls under the constitutional
02:50guidelines that I just read to you? I think I'm not a constitutional lawyer, but I believe
02:55it does. You've also witnessed that the Democrats here today and also radical activist judges are
03:03trying to halt and deny the president's agenda to carry out his constitutional duties to keep Americans
03:08safe and carry out his promise to the American people to secure the border and carry out mass
03:13deportations of those who have entered the country illegally. Knowing this, are you open and supportive
03:20of this constitutional option to suspend the writ of habeas corpus to keep Americans safe
03:25and carry out the president's agenda? Well, this is something that's not in my purview to weigh in
03:34on. This is the president's prerogative to pursue, and he has not indicated to me that he will or will not
03:40be taking that action. I want to thank Rogan O'Hanley for his efforts to bring this constitutional solution
03:46into the national conversation. Now I want to shift gears real quick. Ms. Noem, on May 5th, 2025,
03:53I joined Congressman Zinke and eight of my fellow Republican colleagues in asking why it was
03:59appropriate for DOD and DHS to require real IDs for entry into Arlington National Cemetery. I did see
04:06that letter this week, sir. My question, what information can you share on the security posture
04:12of Arlington Cemetery that require a real ID? Well, sir, I'm not certain as to the procedures
04:18and the requirements at Arlington Cemetery. I do know that a real ID at our airports
04:23for travel was required by statute and law change over 20 years ago. So that has been implemented
04:29on May 7th, and we have over 90% compliance that has happened at our airport since then,
04:36and overwhelmingly the vast majority of travelers have had a real ID and have utilized that or a
04:42federally recognized ID going forward. But as far as what is required at Arlington Cemetery, I have not
04:49been in the knowledge of what those requirements are. In that case, would you consider taking a look at
04:58that and also consider recommending repealing that requirement? I can certainly take a look at that
05:06and follow up with the conversation with you, absolutely. Thank you. I yield back. The chair now
05:12recognizes the gentleman from Tennessee, Mr. Ogles, for five minutes of questioning.