The House plans to hold endless hearings on the conditions of the detention facilities holding illegal aliens. What few in government and the media plan to focus on is what we are not seeing but that is still coming into our country, since Border Patrol has been transformed into Walmart greeters and babysitters. Moreover, what nobody in the media wants to discuss is the number of people who come in openly and go on to commit crimes in this country.

Despite so few agents left patrolling the line, Border Patrol still caught over 19,000 criminals at our border so far this fiscal year. These are just the ones they caught, and these are only the ones who are already convicted criminals. Can you imagine how many new criminals are getting through, strategically brought in by the cartels with the certainty that Border Patrol can’t catch them because they are dealing with the bogus asylum? Can you imagine how many are first-timers who have no criminal record or known record that is communicated to our national security officials, but are still threats?

This is the issue the political class will not discuss. You never hear them discuss sex trafficking of kids, smuggling, cartels, drugs, gangs, and crime. You only hear narratives about conditions of the detention facilities. But none of these problems would occur if we actually held the line at the border and upheld both the letter and spirit of our laws and turned back illegal aliens or prosecuted them. Instead, Border Patrol is being told to rush these families in as quickly as possible, serving the interest of nobody. All of Border Patrol’s operational capacity is being diverted to cater to the Left’s demands rather than protect our national security, yet it still gets accused of running concentration camps.

In what should be national news but instead happens almost every day without any media coverage, a 17-year-old illegal alien from Guatemala, Baudilio Salomon Diaz Ambrocio, allegedly raped a seven-year-old girl in Cobb County, Georgia, so badly that she needed surgery. ICE confirmed to me that there is a detainer on him and he is indeed a removable alien, but would not answer my question about his history and whether he was resettled as an “unaccompanied minor.” “We are not able to provide any case specifics on our end regarding a juvenile,” said the regional public affairs spokesman.

As I’ve reported before, a number of the Central American teens resettled in the country have turned out to be violent and have ties to gangs. Roughly 40 percent of those caught in Operation Matador, an ICE operation against MS-13, turned out to be resettled as UACs. Acting Customs and Border Protection (CBP) Director Mark Morgan, who briefly served as acting director of ICE, said earlier this year, “As chief of the Border Patrol, I would tour the detention facilities filled to capacity with unaccompanied minors. … As I looked as these groups, I saw both hardened young men as well as vulnerable and lost youth. With every encounter, I walked away wondering how many would be lured into joining a gang.”

Yet, thanks to privacy rules of DHS, almost all of their crimes go unreported to the public. While every death of a Central American is publicized in every media outlet with every piece of biographical information imaginable, nearly every death or harm caused by criminal aliens goes unreported.

The purpose of Border Patrol is to protect Americans from foreign nationals who would do us harm, not to protect foreign nationals from sickness and dehydration, although agents certainly do a heroic job of saving thousands of them every year, which also goes unreported in the media.

Every day, I struggle to get information regarding crimes committed by those who should never have been here in the country. ICE has an internal policy against divulging immigration history without a formal request, and even after the request, information is very limited.

This week, I’ve been working on the story of Victor H. Ortiz, who allegedly killed Barbara Gaulke and Sandra Forscht in a drunk driving incident in Lake County, Illinois, on June 8. He had a history of driving drunk and was even caught driving drunk 20 days after this incident, before he was arrested, after local officials confirmed through blood and urine tests that he had been driving drunk in the previous fatal accident.

I inquired about his immigration status because local media reported that he attempted to flee to Guatemala. Now, Breitbart’s John Binder is reporting from his sources that the man is a naturalized citizen, but he originally came in as an illegal alien. It’s unclear how he obtained a green card.

Even in areas that are very supportive of open borders, some of the local leaders are starting to admit they have problems. Dona Ana County, New Mexico, the ultimate sanctuary jurisdiction, has experienced seven fatal shootings over the past few weeks. Five of them were related to drug cartels. The local sheriff and police chief now admit that with border checkpoints down and with agents diverted away from countering the cartels, the criminal networks have a free lane. “With asylum seekers coming to the border and throwing up their hands to every Border Patrol agent they can see, the cartel is a very active observer,” said Kim Stewart, Doña Ana County Sheriff, in an interview with the local ABC station.

While House Democrats hold hearings on behalf of illegal aliens, the question nobody in the Republican-controlled Senate is asking is why should Border Patrol be forced to allow in so many criminals, yet still get called Nazis? And if not Border Patrol, then why can’t the military actually defend our border?

Ultimately, this all boils down to one question: Are the assets of the United States government for the protection of the American citizen or for the welfare of those seeking to subvert our sovereignty? (For more from the author of “The Open-Borders Crime Wave That Doesn’t Seem to Bother Congress at All” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

A majority of Americans want mass deportations of illegal aliens if Congress fails to reach a deal this week that closes loopholes in the country’s asylum system that allow mass flows of foreign nationals to pour through the U.S.-Mexico border.

The latest Harvard/Harris poll finds that 51 percent of American voters say they support mass deportations of the 11 million to 22 million illegal aliens living in the U.S. should Congress fail to reach a deal that closes loopholes in the asylum system.

More than 8-in-10 Republican voters, as well as more than 5-in-10 swing voters, said President Trump should carry out mass deportations of illegal aliens following Congressional inaction. Nearly 9-in-10 Trump supporters said the same.

Working and middle class Americans, those earning $75,000 a year or less, support mass deportations of illegal aliens if Congress fails to act by a majority of 53 percent. A majority of Americans 35 to 49-years-old also support mass deportations following inaction from Congress. . .

The poll comes as Trump delayed a nationwide plan to mass deport thousands of illegal aliens who have final orders for removal. Former acting Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Director Thomas Homan accused acting Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Kevin McAleenan of leaking the plans to mass deport illegal aliens in order to halt the operation. (Read more from “Poll: Majority of Americans Want Mass Deportations of Illegal Aliens” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Thomas Jefferson told us in the document we celebrated this week that we have a right to be governed by officials “deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.” Yet 243 years later, our governing elites believe that an unelected and life-tenured Seattle-based judge can dictate to the entire country that we can no longer regulate who comes into our country and who is released into our communities.

This latest radical judicial ruling, in a series of stupefying rulings attacking the foundation of our sovereignty and immigration laws, demonstrates once again that we don’t have an immigration law problem; we have a judicial supremacy problem.

On Tuesday, with the flick of her pen, a random federal judge in Seattle expanded the judicially created catch-and-release loophole from family units to all single adults. U.S. District Judge Marsha Pechman, a Clinton appointee, nullified the 1996 immigration law mandating detention of those coming here seeking asylum and created a Fifth Amendment right for them to be released on bond. She went a step further and required that all those within custody receive bond hearings within seven days, that the proceedings of the immigration court trials must be recorded, and that the immigration judges must provide explanations for the basis of denying bond. Also, in contravention to 130 years of case law, she placed the burden of proof on the government, not on the alien, to show why these people shouldn’t be released.

There are no words in the English language to describe the radical nature of this ruling. Section 235(b)(1)(B)(ii) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, which passed the Senate unanimously in 1996, says that those seeking asylum “shall be detained for further consideration of the application of asylum.” Now, in a growing trend among judges in the district courts within the Ninth Circuit, a judge is saying that the law itself violates the Fifth Amendment. Pechman claimed that this administration’s implementation of the 1996 law violates “50 years of statutory and case law supporting the right of persons detained for non-criminal reasons to be released upon posting bond.”

In fact, her application of bond hearings to aliens within the context of immigration proceedings is a violation of settled case law. As the court established in U.S. v. Ju Toy (1905), “The petitioner, although physically within our boundaries, is to be regarded as if he had been stopped at the limit of our jurisdiction, and kept there while his right to enter was under debate.” There is no Fifth Amendment right because one cannot unilaterally assert jurisdiction before being admitted to the country. Jurisdiction for constitutional rights is a legal distinction, not a physical one.

Judge Pechman wrote that denying bond hearings is a violation of due process, but due process for aliens in the context of immigration decisions is whatever Congress says it is. As the court said in Lem Moon Sing v. United States (1895), “The decisions of executive or administrative officers, acting within powers expressly conferred by Congress, are due process of law.”

The court therefore said that one cannot assert that “if the alien is entitled of right, by some law or treaty, to enter this country, but is nevertheless excluded by such officers, the latter exceed their jurisdiction, and their illegal action.” How ominously the court warned: “That view, if sustained, would bring into the courts every case of an alien claiming the right to come into the United States under some law or treaty, but who was prevented from doing so by the executive branch of the government.”

Indeed, that is where we are today!

President Trump is going to have to recognize at some point, a recognition he should have internalized with the census ruling, that he must draw a line on lawless judges. He keeps asserting that our laws are broken and that they need to be changed. But the reality is that our laws were designed to prevent this very rush at the border, yet judges are now saying our sovereignty laws are unconstitutional.

The Ninth Circuit earlier this year ruled another provision of the 1996 law unconstitutional, even though Congress explicitly stripped the courts of jurisdiction to hear such cases. Through every stage of the immigration process and in every class of immigration filings, the district and circuit judges within the Ninth Circuit keep playing a game of “catch me if you can” with the Supreme Court. They create a right to bond hearings in one case, and it will take at least four years for the high court to slap it down. But then rather than applying the rationale to every other case, lower court judges continue to mandate bond hearings in slightly different cases. Meanwhile, thousands of aliens are irrevocably released into our communities. This cannot continue.

Just this week, the Ninth Circuit ruled that Trump could not build a wall with defense funding. Trump has no choice but to assert executive power and finally demonstrate that it is the courts that are engaging in civil disobedience against immigration laws. If any district judge can legislate any new law he wants, there is quite literally no purpose to Trump’s presidency. He has agreed to halt dozens of policies in which he was merely countermanding a lawless action of a predecessor, thanks to the courts. If he can’t even end Obama’s unilateral executive actions, then we as may as well invite Obama himself back to the White House.

For over a year, even right-leaning commentators have been wrong about the border crisis. They are suggesting that we can’t secure our border until we pass new laws while they continue to miss the point that we already have laws against illegal immigration, especially the ones strengthened in 1996. If we agree that judges have the power to nullify them, there is nothing about the new proposals that will change the game. What laws could possibly be drafted that are stronger than the ones written already that are ignored by the executive branch and violated by the judicial branch? If we keep agreeing that courts have such power, then no new statute can rectify the problem.

Either we push back against judicial supremacism, or we have no country left. There is no middle ground. (For more from the author of “Forget New Border Laws; Federal Judges Say We Can’t Even Enforce Current Ones” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE