GOP’s Mayorkas impeachment articles come under microscope

House Republicans’ novel approach to impeaching Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas has drawn criticism from both the left and the right, saying it does not meet the constitutional standard for Republicans to remove Cabinet members.

The article, which the House Homeland Security Committee is scheduled to mark up Tuesday, points to detention standards that have never been met under any administration, including the Trump era, and accuses Mayorkas of failing to follow immigration laws. ing.

They also accused him of a “breach of the public trust,” which they said amounted to “a breach of his oath to faithfully discharge his duties.”

Republicans say their cases rise to the level of high crimes and misdemeanors, while Democrats have stepped up their criticism.

It also contained false information in some cases because it failed to identify crimes, such as accusing Mayorkas of breaking agreements with Latin American governments that had actually been suspended by Secretary of State Antony Blinken. Some people see this incident as having various problems, both big and small.

“There is no treason. There is no bribery. There are no high crimes or misdemeanors. In the series of impeachment articles, there are two completely fabricated charges that simply list policy controversies that Republicans have accused President Biden of and I don’t like the way Secretary Mayorkas is trying to handle border issues,” said Rep. Dan Goldman (DN). Y.) Committee members said at a press conference on Monday.

Some Republicans have also criticized House Republicans’ approach to impeaching a Cabinet member for the second time in history.

“Please don’t impeach Alejandro Mayorkas,” former Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff, who served under President George W. Bush, warned in an op-ed on Sunday.

“They have failed to provide evidence that meets the criteria,” Chertoff wrote.

“This is why Republicans won’t hold Mr. Mayorkas to the Constitution’s ‘high crimes and misdemeanors’ impeachment standard. They are making baseless claims that he is derelict in office.”

“I just don’t think they have a clear basis for impeachment,” conservative commentator and legal expert Jonathan Turley said Monday.

In response, Republicans on the Homeland Security Committee released a summary of Democratic statements expressing concerns about the border.

Much of the article is devoted to defeating the immigration laws that Republicans say Mr. Mayorkas is defying.

This includes a focus on the language of the Immigration and Nationality Act, which “shall” be used to detain immigrants.

But the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has never met that standard since 1996, when the law was first passed. It would also be impossible to create this standard because DHS does not have the bed space or funding to do so.

Congress, not the executive branch, determines the number of detention beds. Last year, the number settled at 34,000, but this year’s spending bill would jump that number to 41,000.

“The current administration has deported, removed, and expelled more immigrants in three years than the previous administration did in four years,” DHS wrote in a memo in response to the article, adding that these numbers include more immigrants than immigrants over the course of the pandemic. It also includes a decline in

“A standard requiring 100 percent detention means Congress should impeach every DHS Secretary since the agency’s founding.”

Republicans have argued that allowing this type of disregard for the law could set a dangerous precedent.

“Congress can enact any language it wants. The point is, there’s no point in writing legislation if those words are rendered meaningless by executive officials,” said a Republican close to the impeachment process. the official said.

“It doesn’t matter whether the president is a Republican or a Democrat. If we allow a precedent that allows the secretary to unilaterally choose which laws to enforce, it will only create chaos. It may take advantage of precedent.”

Goldman said this logic creates a dangerous precedent in and of itself.

“If Republicans are going to open the door to impeaching a secretary because they don’t like the way she’s doing her job, what if there’s a different child separation policy? “What happens if we go against the grain and withdraw from the Paris climate agreement? There’s a slippery slope where there’s a lot of disagreement, and it could rise to the level of impeachment,” he said.

Republicans also criticized Mayorkas for creating a program that allows immigrants to be “paroled” into the country even if they don’t meet immigration standards.

DHS has used its authority to benefit Afghans, Ukrainians, and immigrants from certain Latin American countries.

But the Democratic report attacking the impeachment effort argues that Mr. Mayorkas is using his powers to benefit the masses, as has been done in the past in response to wars and global instability. He said he was doing well within the range.

“Secretary Mayorkas complied with individual sentencing requirements for parole applications. DHS’s parole program allows designated people to apply for parole, and each person’s application is determined on a case-by-case basis,” Democrats said. is written in the report.

The article also misstates other details.

The resolution criticizes Mr. Mayorkas for withdrawing from a deal signed under the Trump administration that limited the U.S. asylum rights of Guatemalan asylum seekers, but it was Mr. Blinken who abandoned the deal.

“If you look at articles of impeachment that refer to actions taken by a completely different Cabinet secretary, and the fulfillment of a binding obligation that everyone knows is impossible to achieve, this is a real problem that will arise. “I think it shows some of the increases if there’s a case in the Senate,” said Aaron Reichlin-Melnick, policy director at the American Immigration Council.

“The flaws in many of the factual assertions here are very highlighted. This has always been a rushed process.”

Republicans also claim Mayorkas “betrayed the public’s trust” by reversing the Trump administration’s immigration policies, including building a border wall.

However, while the article accused Mayorkas of terminating wall construction contracts, it did not mention that Mayorkas had restarted wall construction in Texas, which the Biden administration determined was required by spending law. Not yet.

Sunday’s article similarly alleges that Mayorkas misled Congress, an argument largely based on his answers to questions about whether the border is operationally secure.

During his appearance in Congress, Republicans repeatedly pressed Mayorkas on whether the border was operationally secure under the definition set out in the Secure Fence Act. This law creates a standard of integrity that has never been met before, defining it as a state in which no person or contraband crosses a border illegally.

Mayorkas said the law needs to be viewed with “a layer of rationality” and requires the secretary to maximize the resources he has to make the border as secure as possible. He told lawmakers that he believed he was complying with the law. Law.

“I do. And Congressman, I think the Secretary of Homeland Security would have said the same thing in 2020 and 2019,” Mayorkas said in the 2022 exchange.

The article also accuses Mayorkas of making misleading comments regarding scrutiny of Afghan evacuees and migrants’ insecurity, without directly identifying the content of the comments.

“They have failed to produce evidence that meets the standards necessary for impeachment,” Rep. Glenn Ivey (D-Md.), a fellow committee member, said Monday.

“They know it’s true. We know it’s true. Tomorrow, we’re going to make sure the American people know it’s true.”