The House Homeland Security Committee is demanding to know the names of the border crossings where the government says it’s too busy to check the identities of all the people coming across in vehicles.
Chairman Mark Green has asked the Homeland Security Department’s inspector general to turn over a full copy of its report from earlier this month detailing the holes in America’s border defenses. Mr. Green also asked for the supporting evidence.
The inspector general released a version that redacted key information about the border crossings that can’t screen everyone.
“To assist the Committee to better understand the OIG’s findings and evaluate DHS’s handling of this important national security matter, we ask that you please provide the complete unredacted report and case file,” Mr. Green, Tennessee Republican, wrote to Inspector General Joseph Cuffari.
Mr. Green also plans to have a subcommittee hold a hearing on terror threats from mass illegal immigration in the coming months.
Mr. Cuffari’s June 7 report examined vetting by Customs and Border Protection, which mans the ports of entry, and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, which rules on asylum cases.
DOCUMENT: Rep. Mark Green's letter to Homeland Security's inspector general
The audit found that USCIS was slow to screen affirmative asylum cases, and CBP can’t access some relevant security databases when it’s checking the identities of travelers at the border.
CBP struggles in particular with those arriving in vehicles at land border crossings.
The inspector general said he found three border crossings where CBP “did not query all vehicle occupants” to look for outstanding criminal warrants, national security flags or other worrying information.
The audit redacted the names of the crossings but indicated they were among the busier locations.
“This practice leaves officers unaware of potentially derogatory information about persons in a vehicle other than the driver,” the audit concluded.
Some CBP port officers said they use their own judgment to decide if others in a vehicle need screening, but other officers said they “felt pressured by management to release vehicles into the country” without the full checks, even in cases where the officer suspected something.
As for USCIS, the inspector general said asylum cases can take years to process and the agency needs to re-screen asylum applicants continuously during that time. Currently, the agency does an initial screening but doesn’t generally re-check until someone is ready for a final asylum interview.
“This means that, in the interim years, USCIS did not continuously screen applicants to identify persons who committed crimes or should otherwise have been considered a potential threat while residing in the United States without permanent legal status,” the audit said
The inspector general found 20,221 cases between October 2017 and March 2023 where someone received an initial favorable affirmative asylum screening but was flagged in subsequent screenings.
In 2020, under the Trump administration, USCIS did a one-time review of 330,000 cases stuck in the backlog and found derogatory information on nearly 54,000 of them. At least 620 involved “national security concerns.”
USCIS says it was too time-consuming to repeat.
The Washington Times has reached out to the inspector general for this article.
The inspector general’s report was initially marked “law enforcement sensitive.”
Homeland Security, in its official response to the report, agreed with all five of the inspector general’s recommendations.
Affirmative asylum cases are ones where someone is successfully admitted into the U.S. and then requests asylum. Those cases are decided by USCIS.
That’s separate from defensive asylum cases, which are lodged by unauthorized migrants at the border as a means of staving off deportation. Those cases are generally heard by immigration judges, though the Biden administration has proposed giving USCIS more of a role in hearing them as well.
• Stephen Dinan can be reached at sdinan@washingtontimes.com.