MEMBER OF CONGRESS

Cory A. Booker

Democrat NJ 9 statements translated

Senate

Recognizing the 1960 University of Missouri Tigers Football Team

2026-08-06

“I want to close a prison. People have died there. It is bad. I used to be a mayor. I hired police. I worked with the FBI and ICE. I don't want to get rid of all law enforcement. But this prison is very bad. I want to close it. The company that runs it should be investigated. They have enough money. They don't need more. They are not using it well. We should close the prison now. Don't wait for more people to die. I believe in law enforcement. But this prison is very very bad. We need to close it now. People are suffering. People are dying. I have worked with Republicans before. We can work together to fix this problem.”

Official Congressional Record

Mr. President, I appreciate the good-faith words of my colleague, and I will take it to heart that he is against unnecessary deaths and that the GEO Group should be investigated thoroughly and be held accountable. I do want to make followup points. First of all, I live in North New Jersey. I used to run the police department as its mayor. There is nobody who feels more urgency for public safety in my city than I do. I hired many law enforcement officers and worked well with ICE, worked well with the FBI and with the DOJ--with all of the Federal law enforcement officers--in a coordinated effort to protect my community. This idea that Democrats want to defund ICE is wrong. I actually believe we need law enforcement in our communities to keep us safe. But I want to make sure we do it in a way that comports with our values and our decency. Let's be clear. There is no law enforcement agency in America that has more money than ICE has right now. As to this idea that the Democrats have done anything to defund it right now, ICE has more than the FBI, more than the ATF, and more than the Coast Guard combined. It is the most well-funded Agency there is. So the idea that they cannot provide for the basic needs of people who are in their facilities is a lie. This is not a money problem. ICE has all the money they need, and they are showing an inability to keep their inmates alive. Now, I like my colleague's metaphor that if a bridge is broken, you close the bridge. I know this because, again, I was a mayor. If people are falling through holes on a bridge, we close the bridge. Do the inspections, but don't leave people in a hellscape where people continue to die in that facility. Keeping that open is irresponsible. ICE has enough money to transfer to other facilities the people who are a real threat. ICE has enough money to run around my State and overspend for real estate, as they have done in one of my towns. They are throwing cash around in a way that should offend Republicans and anybody who is fiscally prudent, but we are not holding the people accountable. Yes, if something is broken, you stop using it. If people are dying because of a defect in a car, you don't use it. If people are falling through holes on a bridge, you close it. We have a responsibility to taxpayers' money, and we have shoveled this Agency more money than any law enforcement agency there is, and then we are not doing what is necessary to hold these people, like the GEO Group, accountable. I will continue to stand for law enforcement. One of the reasons I got elected by my State is that we drove crime down in the city of Newark. Everybody saw it. Investment came back, and the population came back. I believe in creating safety in my community. This is not about the accusations that somehow, Democrats don't believe we should have strong law enforcement. If anybody believes in that, I know my record here in the Senate speaks to that. How can we stand here and allow this from a facility in which multiple people have died in the most gruesome ways? How can we allow this from an organization that is supposed to be providing healthcare but is denying it? How can we allow this in accordance with our own values? Enough is enough. Delaney Hall is a nightmare. I did not come to the floor to talk about closing facilities all over the country; I am talking about one facility with a record of people dying unnecessarily, with a record of people being denied medical care, with a record of people being denied healthy food--one facility that is failing. For this body to keep it open while waiting for something to change while more people are suffering and may die is irresponsible beyond compare. I believe there is common ground on both sides of the aisle where we can achieve the highest levels of safety and also ensure that within our incarcerating facilities, people are treated with dignity. I have worked across the aisle with Senator Lindsey Graham, with Senator Chuck Grassley, and with Senator Mike Lee to improve conditions in the Bureau of Prisons. I hope that when it comes to ICE facilities and this private, for-profit company where people are dying that we can find some common ground to stop this nightmare from happening.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

“A man died in a detention center. It's because the government gave money to a private prison company. I want to close that prison now.”

Official Congressional Record

I am grateful for your recognition, Mr. President. And I am going to try to get this order right. This is legislative session. I am going to give some remarks and then ask for a unanimous consent on a bill. But I really want to, first, talk about something really challenging, tragic, that happened in the State of New Jersey. Edwin Lopez-Cornejo died. He is dead, and it is a death that did not have to be. He was detained by ICE on June 18. He was sent to Delaney Hall in my home city, in Newark, NJ--it is a detention center--and he never came out alive. Mr. President, 20 years--20 years--Edwin lived in the United States of America, 20 years of building a life here, 20 years of being connected to people and community, 20 years of making here in America a way forward. And yet, in less than 2 months of detention, the immigration system in our country led to his death. And in Delaney Hall, he is the third person in 9 months to die; the 23rd person to die in ICE custody this year--not the first warning sign, not the second, this is the third death at the same facility and yet nothing changes. Let me tell you exactly how Edwin Lopez-Cornejo died because his family deserves to have his name said on the Senate floor and his story told plainly. Edwin had diabetes. He had high blood pressure. He needed his medication to survive, and Delaney Hall denied it to him. The day before he died, he told his mother that his arm had gone numb, half his face had gone numb. And understand, this is not a minor complaint. This was a man that was having a medical emergency, telling someone exactly what was happening to his body. Did anyone come to his aid? No. Did he get his medication? No. Less than 24 hours, he was dead. Doctors have warned us, attorneys have warned us in New Jersey, families have warned us, a chorus of people in our communities--not politicians, not political activists--doctors, lawyers have been warning us, detainees who walked out of that building, with their testimony and the facts and the evidence, people have said over and over again that this facility is dangerous. It is not well run, and within it is a pattern of disregard for human decency. DHS has known that Delaney Hall is nothing short of a travesty since they reopened it over a year ago. So who runs what is, for so many, a house of horrors? Who runs the institution that I saw myself when I went there and met people? This is not for serious criminals. This is not a place for folks who have done serious crimes in our country. This is a detention facility for people, many of them have been in our country for decades, many of them have American spouses, American children. And when I went there, I saw mothers who were recently postpartum who were not getting the support. I saw a woman who lost her child while in that detention facility, had a miscarriage there, did not get the support that she needed. Story after story, people told me what is going on there, the horrors that are going on there. And who runs it? The U.S. Government does not run that center. It is a private group called the GEO Group, a private for-profit prison that has high-level Republican officials among its former employees. This group won a billion-dollar contract: no competition, no bidding, lots of campaign contributions, a phone call, a signature, and they have a billion dollars of taxpayer money. New Jersey had to sue this company just to get health inspectors through the front door of a facility operating on American soil, funded by American taxpayers, and our State couldn't even do basic health inspections. They did not get--they did not get--the permits to open that place. They did not have inspections before they did so. This is a private company taking a billion dollars of American taxpayer money. The less they provide sanitary services, the less they provide doctors and medical professionals, the more profit they make off of taxpayers. At whose expense? At the decency of American people and at the expense of the lives of the people who are there. We give them hundreds of millions of dollars. And what are the reports out of Delaney Hall? Spoiled food, contaminated water, staff who retaliate against people brave enough to speak up about the conditions. A billion dollars in inadequate accountability. A billion dollars in inadequate healthcare. A billion dollars and a man whose face is numb, whose arm is numb, who is asking for help--does not get treatment, does not get healthcare. So, here is the truth. It is clear for the GEO Group that part of their business model is this cruelty: cut medical staff, skimp on food, let the air-conditioning go out during the hottest days in New Jersey, let the roof leak, cram more bodies into less space. Every corner cut is a dollar of their profit. Every dollar of their profit is a dollar that the GEO Group's executives get to celebrate on their next earnings call. GEO Group's stock has more than doubled since February of 2026--more than doubled. You know why? Well, follow the money. Three million dollars from the GEO Group and its executives went into Donald Trump's campaign, into his PAC, into his inauguration. It is a pay-to-play that is worse than that. A pay-to-play and people get hurt. Lives are lost. Over $2 billion in Federal contracts to run facilities like Delaney Hall in our country. This is not immigration policy. This is not what we stand for. No one loses their humanity because they are incarcerated. No one should lose their basic rights because they are behind bars. Look, I am all for what this administration promised it would do. They said they would go after the ``worst of the worst.'' They said they would go after the people threatening our communities, menacing our families. We should all be supportive of that. I believe we should have strong borders. I believe we should get criminals off of our streets. But the people actually locked up in that building in Delaney Hall? We know that more than 70 percent of the people have never been convicted of a single crime. I met a high school student who had more of a Jersey accent than I do, who just wanted to walk with his class--rounded up. I have had the Catholic church reach out to me because of the sweeps they are doing around schools and churches. I have had family members beg me to get folks out in order to see their American children hit milestones like birthdays and graduations. I have been appealed to by everyone from priests to Republicans in our community. Many are following our laws. But we in the U.S. Senate, Congress, hold the purse strings the administration depends on. We should be a check and a balance. We should demand that our taxpayer dollars are being used. And when we see a body count climbing that is not normal, when we see more and more deaths, when we see a mother's son whose face went numb the night before, we should be asking for action and accountability. Edwin Lopez-Cornejo's death was not a tragedy. A tragedy is something that no one could have prevented. This is a choice. Every single day the DHS keeps Delaney Hall open is another choice to let this happen, three times already. We should not make this choice. Mr. President, I am now asking for a unanimous consent to pass the Delaney Hall Closure Act, which would close Delaney Hall within 90 days. They are out of excuses. We are out of time. How many more people should die? So as if in legislative session and notwithstanding rule XXII, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to immediate consideration of my bill at the desk; that the bill be considered read three times and passed and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. The PRESIDING OFFICER (Ms. Lummis). Is there an objection? The Senator from Missouri.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

Senate

AGOA EXTENSION ACT--Motion to Proceed--Continued

2026-08-04

“I don't want the government to take the gray wolf off the endangered list. I want the government to follow science. I want the government to protect the gray wolf. The gray wolf is important to the ecosystem. The gray wolf helps other species survive. Humans have been very mean to the gray wolf. I want the government to keep protecting the gray wolf. I think the government needs to do more to protect wildlife. The government should not pass laws that harm wildlife. I object to this bill.”

Official Congressional Record

Mr. President, reserving the right to object, look, my esteemed colleague from Wisconsin--I don't mean to use any onomatopoeia here, but he is howling about the gray wolves and seeking to pass legislation to remove Federal protections under the Endangered Species Act for gray wolves across the entire United States. A hallmark of the Endangered Species Act is the requirement that decisions be made solely on the basis of scientific data. Congress is supposed to rely on that data. This act was brought to bear in 1973 under a Republican President with a very important mission: to protect species at risk of extinction and to promote the conservation of ecosystems and habitats necessary for the survival of those species. For a species to be considered recovered, science must show that it has returned to suitable habitats with durable populations that can persist safely and endurably into the foreseeable future. That is the law. Today, wolves have returned to only 10 percent of their historic range and do not meet the Endangered Species Act requirements for delisting. That is the law. Gray wolves once numbered in the millions across North America, from forests and plains to deserts and mountains. But wolves, with insatiable, rapacious cruelty, were hunted, trapped, and poisoned--and other actions to kill and eradicate them--to near extinction by the mid-20th century in all of the lower 48 States. There is this growing sympathy and empathy in the American public for a species that has endured such cruelty and ruthlessness at human hands over the centuries--a species that is the forbear of the dogs we love and cherish in our lives. As apex predators, gray wolves, we now know, play a vital role in keeping the entire natural ecosystem in America healthy. When wolves were brought back to places like Yellowstone National Park, it transformed the park. More birds, beavers, and fish returned. Research from Wisconsin, my colleague's home State, reveals the overwhelming net benefits of healthy, wild wolf packs to our landscapes. My colleague cites that there are problems in Wisconsin. There are so many Wisconsinites that speak out, especially the scientists, and some of those scientists are actually economists. Wisconsin economists proved that wolves are protecting human safety. One of the big ways they protect human safety--and they enumerated this--is by reducing vehicle collisions with the deer population, with deer. Other independent research in Wisconsin suggests that chronic wasting disease is suppressed where wolf packs hunt. And there are so many other benefits. But it is not just his State that this would affect; it would be so many other States. Look, we have a crisis in our country. We are living through a biodiversity crash. Some people call it the sixth mass extinction. This mass extinction is unique because it is being driven not by natural disasters but primarily by human activity and decision making. Current extinction rates are estimated to be hundreds to thousands of times higher than the normal background rate. We need to do better for what wildlife remains in our Nation, including the gray wolf. We need to stand up for the role of science in influencing our decisions, for expertise influencing the outcomes, and not harmful legislation like this. That is why I will not allow it to move forward, Mr. President. I object.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

Senate

AGOA EXTENSION ACT--Motion to Proceed

2026-07-30

“I don't like Todd Blanche. He helps Donald Trump too much. I think he is bad. He should not lead the Department of Justice. I want the Department of Justice to be independent. I think Blanche serves Trump, not the Constitution. I think it's bad that he delayed a law about Jeffrey Epstein. I think it's bad he gave tax immunity to Trump. I don't trust Blanche. I think voting for him is wrong. I want a Justice Department that follows evidence, not politics. I want a Justice Department that defends the Constitution, not Trump. I think sending Haitian immigrants back to Haiti is wrong. Haiti is very dangerous. America tells people not to go to Haiti. But we send Haitians back there. I think that's wrong. I want laws that reflect our values. I want a pathway for people who have lived here for a long time. I believe in an America that protects its borders and loves the stranger.”

Official Congressional Record

Madam President, I really believe there is a reason why some of my Republican colleagues themselves have delayed the Blanche nomination, because this is actually no ordinary nomination. We haven't had a moment like this under Donald Trump where Republicans themselves have stopped the vote. Because this is not simply a vote about one man; it is a vote about whether the Department of Justice will remain independent of the President of the United States. The Attorney General of the United States of America has one client-- not a political party, not a President, not a wealthy donor, not a political movement. The Attorney General's client is the Constitution of the United States and the American people. That is the sacred obligation of that office. When they are sworn in, they do not swear an oath to the President, to Donald Trump; they swear an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution. Unfortunately, Todd Blanche has spent months in office demonstrating his allegiance not to our Constitution but to the President. Time and time again, he has shown that he is only capable of serving the interests of one client--Donald Trump. That is why this nomination should not simply be delayed; it should be rejected. The evidence is overwhelming. Congress came together in a bipartisan way to pass the Epstein Files Transparency Act because survivors deserved answers, they deserved justice, and the American people deserved transparency. Todd Blanche was responsible for carrying out that law. Instead, he delayed and delayed. He was stalling. And there was a release after the date and deadline prescribed by Congress that was so careless that sensitive information belonging to Epstein's survivors was exposed by the very Department that was supposed to protect them--their phone numbers, addresses, images, personal details. Think about that. The survivors entrusted the Department of Justice with some of the most painful chapters of their lives. They deserved care. They deserved competence. They deserved honesty. They deserved an adherence to the law. Instead, they received delays, excuses, and a terrible, tragic breach of their privacy. Then came the request of meeting with the survivors. For weeks, Mr. Blanche insisted he could not meet with them unless their attorneys were present. This was not true. A first-year law student knows that this is not true. His own Department's policies and Federal law make that clear. When he finally did meet with them--the survivors--because a Republican Senator demanded that he do it, the survivors described the meeting as disappointing. They said they felt gaslit. They said they were skipped over. They said Mr. Blanche was condescending to the survivors of sexual assault. Even then, when the survivors pleaded for continued investigation into the Jeffrey Epstein coconspirators, Mr. Blanche once again hid behind claims that the law prevented him from answering. So we simply have to ask the question: Who is Todd Blanche serving here? Is he serving the survivors? No. Is he serving the interests of the Department of Justice? No. Is he serving the American people? No. But we know that he rushed to the Situation Room for high-level members of the Trump administration to strategize on how to protect the President. It is another clear example that the person he is there to protect is Donald Trump. (Mr. BUDD assumed the Chair.) Last week, my Democratic colleagues held a Spotlight Forum to examine Mr. Blanche's record. We heard from a courageous Epstein survivor. We heard from ethics experts. We heard from one of Mr. Blanche's own former colleagues from the Southern District of New York. We heard from a former Justice official appointed under a Republican President--who served a Republican Senator, Senator Hatch, here in this body--who was then fired simply because he had done his job on investigations involving Robert Mueller and Jack Smith. Different witnesses, different backgrounds, still one conclusion from every one of them: that Todd Blanche is unfit to lead the Department of Justice. And if there were any doubt, the events of recent days erased those doubts. Mr. Blanche, in his tenure, helped negotiate a corrupt, extraordinary settlement between Donald Trump's Department of Justice and Donald Trump. We have heard from the Federal bench already that there was no controversy. Donald Trump can't be on both sides of a negotiation. That corrupt structure was exploiting the judiciary to create an environment in which there would be a settlement, and out of that settlement, we saw an unjust and untoward creation that outraged Americans all across the political spectrum. They created a slush fund. Think about what this means: The lawyer who represented Donald Trump now oversees the Department of Justice and negotiates an agreement between Donald Trump and Donald Trump that is not merely an appearance of conflict, that is the definition of a conflict. It is precisely why the Department of Justice must be independent. If you look at this slush fund agreement, within it, there are immunity provisions that, according to that agreement, are, to the former senior Federal prosecutor--he said that this agreement and the immunity provisions are ``mind-boggling in scope.'' Donald Trump got a tax liability immunity that is extraordinary--mind-boggling in scope. The immunity provisions alone cover broad categories with no meaningful legal definition. When asked about those undefined terms during his confirmation hearing, Mr. Blanche effectively acknowledged that they could encompass almost anything--anything. According to Blanche, he negotiated a deal that gave Donald Trump immunity that could cover almost any kind of tax fraud that Donald Trump or his family committed. For Donald Trump, with his former lawyer at the head of the Justice Department, it seems like, for the President, justice has no rules, justice has no standards, justice has no limits. When one man receives special rules unavailable to every other American, this is not justice; it is privilege. It is unjust privilege. During his confirmation hearing, Mr. Blanche repeatedly promised that he would act independently. But independence is not something you promise; it is something you demonstrate. He has been in this position for months and has had the chance to show us not promises but actions, and at every important decision he has made, the same story comes out. Who was he serving? The Constitution or Donald Trump? The answer is unmistakable. This vote we have in the Senate on this nominee--every Senator is going to have to eventually cast a vote, but history is going to record something much larger. It will record whether in this moment, the U.S. Senate defended the independence of American justice, the independence of the Justice Department, or did we surrender it. Long after today's headlines are forgotten, long after today's politics have faded, one question will remain: When the independence of the Department of Justice was tested, where did we stand? I know where I stand. I stand for a Department of Justice whose only client is the American people; a Department that follows the evidence, not politics; a Department that defends the Constitution, not a President. No one--not even the President of the United States--is above the law. That principle has guided this great Republic for nearly 250 years. It is our responsibility to preserve it today. It is the oath that we took, the commitment that we made that we will serve the people and the ideals. To vote for Blanche is to surrender those ideals upon the altar of someone who wants to be a false god, where his interests are superior over everyone else's. That is wrong. History is watching. We should reject this nominee. Mr. President, somewhere in America today, a father kissed his children goodbye before leaving to work, a mother boarded an airplane to attend her father's funeral, a husband drove to his construction job, a woman walked into an airport believing that they were following the law of our land. None of them expected to disappear into our immigration detention system. Yet this is happening all over our country. Over the last several months, immigration enforcement has accelerated dramatically. In June alone, ICE arrested more than 43,000 people--the highest monthly total in years. People are being arrested outside of their homes, at airports, at workplaces, near schools, near our churches, across communities throughout our Nation. And many of them-- most of them--are nonviolent, with no criminal record. Many of them have lived here for years--many, for decades. Many of them are raising American children. Some have American grandchildren, American spouses, and are an integral part of the community. Many of these folks are working jobs, paying taxes, following the legal process toward citizenship. A woman traveling home to Texas for her father's funeral was detained at an airport while she was pursuing her asylum claim. Two other women, despite being married to American citizens and already in the legal process of obtaining permanent residency, were detained. These are not people that are hiding from the law; these are people trying to follow it. Yet, instead of helping them complete that process, our government took them, locked them away from their families, from the Americans that love them, the communities that cherish them, the businesses and jobs that sustained those families. Right now, today in America, roughly 70 percent of the people in immigration detention--often for-profit private companies--have never been convicted of a criminal offense--70 percent. This is not what Donald Trump promised--that he would go after the ``worst of the worst.'' This is a dragnet. These, unfortunately, are indiscriminate arrests, not the result of focused law enforcement. They are the consequence of arbitrary arrest quotas and no guiding principles of decency and support of a legal immigration system. It is taking people who are seeking to abide by our laws and throwing them in prisons for the profits of private companies, which also are big supporters and contributors to this President. When numbers become more important than justice, innocent people become collateral damage. And this doesn't just harm immigrants in our country or violate our values of decency; it harms all Americans. Too often, this debate is framed as though immigrants are taking from our country, that they are takers. Well, the facts tell a different story. According to the conservative Cato Institute, for more than two decades, immigrants have contributed more in taxes--way more in taxes-- than they have received in any kind of government benefit, many of which they are ineligible for. Together, immigrants have generated a fiscal surplus measured in the trillions of dollars. Undocumented immigrants alone paid nearly $100 billion in Federal, State, and local taxes in a single year. They work. They build. They start businesses. They strengthen our economy. They contribute to Social Security and Medicare. They help build prosperity for all of America. Yet this administration wants to punish many of the very people that are helping to strengthen it, violating the commitment to go after the dangerous people, to focus our taxpayer resources on getting criminals off of our street. But no, they are using our taxpayer money to go after people that have been in our country for years and decades, who are contributing to it and are working hard to abide by our immigration laws. Nowhere is this contradiction more painful than what we are seeing right now with Haitian immigrants in our country. Earlier this year, the United Nations described Haiti as ``one of the most complex crises in . . . recent history.'' Armed gangs control large sections of the country. Kidnappings are widespread. Sexual violence is used as a weapon. Thousands upon thousands have been killed. Natural disasters continue to deepen an already catastrophic humanitarian crisis. Trump's own State Department gives Haiti its highest travel warning, level 4; in other words, do not travel to Haiti. Think about that. We tell American citizens ``It is far too dangerous for you to go to Haiti,'' and then we tell Haitian families ``We are sending you there.'' How can both possibly be true? How could a nation of decency take people with temporary protected status and send them to the very country our Nation warns us not to go to because of the violence and destitution? Have we no decency in our policies? If a country is far too dangerous for an American to step into, how can it be safe enough for families that are now being forced to go back there? Temporary protected status exists for precisely this kind of moment. Congress created it. A Republican President signed it into law. It recognizes a simple yet profound moral truth: When extraordinary danger exists, Americans should not force human beings into it. The values of our country, the values of our collective faiths, the values of the best of humanity are being violated here. We are a moral nation, but forcing people here on temporary protected status back into countries where there is such violence and destitution violates our morals, our values. It cheapens us all. It is wrong. Yet this administration has canceled temporary protected status for more than 330,000 Haitians. Many have lived here for years and years. Many of them already have had American children in our country. Many of them have married Americans themselves. They have worked here. They have paid billions in taxes here. They built businesses here, served communities in some of the most humble jobs in our hospitals as assistants, helping the ill and the elderly. There are thousands that I have come to know are in New Jersey, many whom I know personally. They are woven into the fabric of our communities, but now from a callous President they face deportation into one of the most dangerous places on Earth. I ask my colleagues: Can we look these families in the eye and honestly say this reflects the best of who we are, this reflects the values of our faiths? Most of us here in this body are Christians. Would Jesus send someone from our Nation into danger, rip them away from their communities? Is that what our faiths dictate? Is that what our ideals dictate? Even some Republicans have been raising alarms. Members of the House voted to extend protections. The Republican Governor of Ohio called those deportations ``a mistake'' because this is not simply an immigration debate; it is a moral test. America has always been strongest when our laws reflected both security and humanity. These are not conflicting ideals. In fact, they are interwoven. When we violate our humanity, we violate our security. We can secure our borders, and we should. We can enforce our laws, and we must. But we can also distinguish between those who threaten America and those who have spent years here in our country strengthening it. This is not weakness. The Haitians in our community--keeping them here amidst the crisis in Haiti--it is not weakness; it is wisdom. It is justice. It is morally right. It is long past time that we, in Congress, modernize an immigration system that virtually everyone agrees is broken. I can't tell you the conversations I have had with Republican colleagues of mine. The late Lindsey Graham is a great example about how our immigration laws are so broken, it makes it hard for anyone who wants to follow the rules to be able to, in any timely way, become a citizen of our country. The Cato Institute calls it more likely to win the lottery than it is to come into our country. This is one of the reasons why our population is declining. We need laws that reflect our values, laws that are orderly, laws that keep us safe and secure, laws that protect the border, laws that affirm our values. We can have all of that. Do not listen to the false choice of a President, who wants to send people back to a human version of hell, rip people from our communities all in the name of safety and security. That is a lie. We must create laws that offer a realistic pathway for people who have lived, worked, contributed, paid taxes, invested their lives in this country for decades, especially those with American families and American children. The question before us is so much larger than immigration; it is about whom we are becoming as a society when we turn our back on our neighbors being thrown in private detention facilities that are profiting off of their pain, who we are as a nation when we want to rip people away from their families and their children and send them to modern-day's hell, who we are as a nation when we take those people that are good enough to work in our hospitals to take care of our elderly, but then we want to turn our back on them and let them be dragged out of our country even though they have been here for years, followed our laws, and are working toward a pathway to citizenship. Who are we if we continue down this road that creates false fears, that spreads lies about immigrants, that turns its very back on the fundamental precept to love your neighbor? Well, I still believe in America. I still believe we are strong enough to create safety and security and to embrace those who love our Nation and serve her faithfully even though they are not citizens. I still believe in an America that is big enough and bold enough to protect its borders and love the stranger. I still believe in a nation whose immigration laws can affirm our dignity and decency and not be an assault on it. I still believe in a nation that honors its faith traditions and knows that we have to love our neighbor and welcome the stranger, especially when they are fleeing persecution and hate and violence. I believe in the highest ideals of our Nation. That is why we have laws like temporary protected status in the first place. It reflected the best of us. But I fear this administration is showing the worst of who we are. I honor Republican think tanks, the Republican Governors who all have the courage to stand up and say: This is wrong. We need that kind of chorus of conviction here in the U.S. Senate. I ask my colleagues to not let this President so violate our collective values. This is not a right or left issue; it is a right or wrong issue. I pray for our Nation. I pray that we live our ideals and don't just talk about them. I pray that we teach our children whom we are not by what we say but by what we do. I pray that in this crisis, we do not allow a President to undermine decency and grace and send innocent people back to environments where they will face nightmares and violence. We can be the America we say we are, but this Chamber must stand up. I yield the floor.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

“I want to talk about someone. I said bad things about him before. Now I want to say good things about him. I was wrong to say bad things. He is a good man. I respect him now. I want people to know that I think he is good. That is all I want to say about him. Now I will talk about something else.”

Official Congressional Record

Madam President, before I begin my formal remarks, I just want to stand here and give a formal apology to John Merlino. I have for years maligned him. I have disrespected, disregarded him. You know how I operate sometimes. And I just want to say he is a man of honor. I have taken him off my list, and now he is on the good list. So just for anyone who wants to know, the U.S. senior Senator from New Jersey has praised John Merlino--perhaps for his first time because he is not a man that really generates a lot of praise usually. So I just want you to know, before I go into my formal remarks for the day, that John Merlino--you the man. Now, I would like for the record to separate a little bit so I can start some of my formal remarks after I have tried to redeem the soul of a friend and colleague.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

Senate

Sudan

2026-07-22

“People are dying in Sudan. I traveled there. It was sad. The government should spend money to help. I demand we spend more money. We should send a diplomat. The world should pay more attention. This is genocide. We must act now. I want the U.S. to lead. I think we have a moral duty.”

Official Congressional Record

Mr. President, 3 years. For 3 years, the people of Sudan have lived through an unimaginable nightmare and hell: 3 years of the worst raging war on our planet, 3 years of displacement, 3 years of starvation, 3 years of children growing up surrounded by violence instead of possibility. Perhaps what is most shocking is not only the horror that is unfolding in Sudan, it is how little of the world seems to be paying attention. Twenty years ago, the horrors of Darfur captured the conscience of the international community. The world declared: Never again. Yet, today, another generation of Sudanese civilians is being terrorized while the world looks away. Since April 2023, the Sudanese Armed Forces and the Rapid Support Forces have waged an unimaginably brutal war for power. But it is not those fighting for power who have paid the ultimate price; it is ordinary people--mothers, fathers, children, families. This war has become the world's worst humanitarian crisis, period. Entire communities have been cut off from food and medicine and lifesaving humanitarian assistance. Large parts of the country are experiencing severe food insecurity, with some areas facing outright famine and famine-like conditions. Women, children, families, journalists, aid workers--civilians of every kind have endured horrific violations of human rights and human dignity. Consider what this war has done. More than 15 million people have been driven from their homes. More than 4 million have fled Sudan altogether. More than 30 million people now depend on humanitarian assistance simply to survive. Nearly 19 million children--roughly 90 percent of Sudan's school-age children--have lost access to formal education. Think about that. An entire generation is being robbed not only of their safety but of their future. The United States has determined that the Rapid Support Forces have committed war crimes, crimes against humanity, ethnic cleansing, and genocide. The Sudanese Armed Forces have also committed horrific war crimes. The Trump administration has maintained that the genocide determination against the RSF is correct. Two administrations. Two declarations of an ongoing genocide. None of this, though, is inevitable. None of this war is inevitable. The war is continuing because outside actors continue to arm it, continue to finance it, and continue to sustain it. Every weapon that enters Sudan prolongs this crisis and the suffering of the Sudanese people. Yet, despite the staggering scale of this crisis, the Trump administration terminated bilateral humanitarian assistance to Sudan. And despite the need for sustained American leadership, the Trump administration has still not appointed a Special Envoy for Sudan. The people of Sudan deserve more than divided attention. They deserve more than the American public looking the other way. They deserve focused American leadership in this time of crisis. Today, the warning lights are flashing all over the city of El Obeid. We have seen the crisis already when it comes to El Fasher and the horrors that existed there. But now we see the pattern starting again in another major community. We know this pattern. First, roads are cut. Then humanitarian aid is blocked. Then electricity disappears. Then water disappears. Communications are shut down and disappear. Civilians are trapped. And then the killing begins. Strategically located between Darfur and Khartoum, El Obeid has become the RSF's next major target. It is home to nearly 1 million people. They are at risk again. Most roads into and out of El Obeid have already been cut off. Only one major route remains, and it has already come under repeated drone attacks. Those attacks are growing more frequent and more destructive. Water systems, powerplants, telecommunications infrastructure, health facilities--the very infrastructure civilians depend on to survive is under assault. We know this story, and we know how it ends. It is a call to the conscience of all of humanity and the conscience of this country. The only question now is, Will we act before history repeats itself in this city of 1 million people? The head of the United Nations Fact-Finding Mission for Sudan warned: The warning has been issued. The question is whether we will listen-- because we know what happened in El Fasher. Families were hunted down house by house. Civilians were massacred at an unimaginable rate. Women were subjected to horrific sexual abuse. Children were caught between the shelling and the starvation. Thousands and thousands were killed. People who stayed were killed. People who tried to flee were killed. And the tragedy is this: None of it came without a warning. The warning signs were there. The intelligence was there. The risk was known, but the urgency was not. We cannot allow history to repeat itself in El Obeid, nor can we allow the violence consuming Sudan to continue simply because it has fallen from the world's headlines--fallen or never been in the U.S. headlines. I traveled to the Chad-Sudan border. As this crisis raged, I went there to witness with my own eyes. I met humanitarian workers forced to make impossible choices because they simply did not have enough food, medicine, or resources for the overwhelming need before them. I met mothers carrying children who were obviously malnourished. I met families who had watched their loved ones be murdered. I met survivors of horrific sexual violence. I met people surviving on grass because there was simply nothing left to eat. I saw what seemed like an ocean of humanity in desperation. Those images will stay with me for a lifetime. The conversations are seared into my memory, the cries for help--not just from those who were suffering as victims but from the aid workers themselves, from Americans themselves--for all of us to do more, to pay attention. Even when the United States increased humanitarian assistance under the last administration during the first 2 years of the war, the need still exceeded the resources available. Yet, as the crisis deepened, the new Trump administration chose to terminate or allow bilateral humanitarian programs in Sudan to expire. While the administration's contributions of $200 million to the U.N.- managed humanitarian fund is important--it is not nothing--but it is nowhere near enough to meet the scale of this catastrophe. The reality on the ground demands far more from our Nation than expressions of concern; it demands action. That is why I call on the Trump administration to restore and increase lifesaving humanitarian assistance to the people of Sudan. That is why the United States and our partners must increase pressure on the outside actors who continue to fuel this conflict. That is why I introduced a bipartisan resolution calling on the United Nations Security Council to fully enforce the existing Darfur arms embargo and expand it to cover all of Sudan and hold accountable anyone who breaks that embargo. I urge my colleagues in this body to join me in supporting this effort; to not turn away from this crisis; to stand, as America has stood in past generations, and call out the crisis and answer the call of humanity; to lead to end it. It is too long overdue. This administration--I demand that Donald Trump appoint a Special Envoy to Sudan. It is required by the law of this body for him to do so, and the people of Sudan deserve an American diplomat whose full attention is dedicated to ending this war, not one whose focus is divided upon multiple crises. The biggest humanitarian crisis on the planet Earth demands that we have a Special Envoy. If not this, then what? If not now, then when? If the staggering human suffering is not enough to compel action, then the growing threat to regional stability should be. But I hope we don't act because instability threatens our interest alone, even though it does; I hope we act because humanity demands it. History has a way of asking really difficult questions: Where were you, what did you know, and what did you do? No one will be able to say that we did not know about this crisis, that we did not know children are starving by the thousands upon thousands, that we did not know civilians are being massacred at rates and levels seen nowhere else on the planet Earth. The genocide wasn't declared by the United Nations simply or some outside Agency, our own government has declared it a genocide. And now another city of a million people stands at the edge of a catastrophe. The call of humanity now is who will act. Indifference has never saved a single life but has condemned millions. Silence has never stopped a genocide, but it has allowed them to continue. Sympathy without action is impotency and failure. The people of Sudan deserve more. They deserve our action. They deserve our focus. They deserve our urgency. They deserve a nation of people in solidarity to say: This should never exist amongst humanity. It should never exist in our world. This is not just a call for the full weight of the international community, it is a call for who has led the international community since World War II. We have been the Nation that has answered the call on so many occasions. We have been the Nation united in our conviction that such horrors and atrocities should not exist. It has been American compassion that has led other nations to move. It has been American urgency that has led other nations to move. It has been American leadership that has helped to end crises across the world. It has risen to meet the AIDS crisis. It has risen to help people in natural disasters. We are the United States of America. The test of our values is not how much we preach them but how much we live them. The core of the faith of our Nation is to love thy neighbor, and who is your neighbor? The people of Sudan are our neighbors. They are part of our human family. There are children and families now calling to God, but it is not up to some deity to answer that call, it is up to His children to do so. Another city is in peril. The horrors that might emerge in these coming days will rage again and thousands upon thousands could die or we could act. Let's not wait until another massacre to discover our conscience. Let our Nation rise to its truth. Let our Nation rise to this crisis. In this dark time, let our Nation be a light to the world. Let us act now. May we act now. I yield the floor.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

Senate

Iran

2026-07-21

“A bad thing happened to some people. That means you should pass this bill.”

Official Congressional Record

Mr. President, I know I share this with 99 colleagues; that there is grief yet again hanging over the U.S. Senate and hanging over America because soldiers who have sworn an oath to our Constitution--who have sworn to serve and defend this Nation--have fallen. Several weeks ago, I had a conversation with someone who had been my colleague who is now the Secretary of State. I asked about this war, and Secretary Rubio looked me in the eyes, under oath, and told me that the war was over. Several weeks before that, the President and his administration stood before the American people and told them we had won the war. I want to tell you right now that the soldiers who died this past week died in the war, and we are mourning the loss. This is not a left or a right thing. This is a time when we come together beyond anything partisan and understand that soldiers have fallen--three soldiers and possibly a fourth. They were killed in action in a war that we have been told is over and a war that I believe firmly should end. Their names deserve to be spoken on this floor and in the Congress of the United States. I want to speak their names: 1LT Tyler James Feehan of Hawaii; he was 25 years old. Private Isabella Gonzales of Texas; she was 19 years old. SGT Michael Emmanuel Swinton of North Carolina, killed at Erbil Airbase in northern Iraq--30 years old--19, 25, and 30. My prayers are with their families. I can't even begin to imagine the grief. As it stands today, 17 American servicemembers have paid the ultimate price for this war. There are 17 Americans and 17 families who won't sit for a meal with their loved ones--17 lives that a nation cannot get back. No matter how many times we say it, the pain still lasts. These are 17 reasons I believe the American people and the men and women who wear this country's uniform are owed more from us. We know, in this body, that every single day we are privy to information; that every single day we go into classified settings and hear about the fact that every single day there are Americans standing up for our country in dangerous places who are doing dangerous things. It is one of the more sobering parts of this job to know that I bear a responsibility, along with my 99 colleagues, for those men and women who step forward, swear their oath, put on their uniforms, and go all over the globe for us under the Commander in Chief, the President of the United States. Now, the idea behind our democracy is that they don't go at the orders of their commanders, but they go to represent a country that has a form of government, a Republic, that is a nation of laws. They swear an oath to the Constitution, and we, too, swear that same oath. We stand right there in the well of the Senate. We raise our hands, and we swear an oath. There is no measure of courage to do this job. Rarely, have I seen Senators face real imminent danger. The truth of the matter is that the courage evidenced by men and women in uniform should serve as an inspiration to us in that maybe we are not putting ourselves to the physical tests that they are but that we, too, have to make a decision to honor their courage with our moral courage. This week, we learned--to my surprise and, frankly, inciting my anger--that the Pentagon severely undercounted the number of servicemembers who have been injured. We were told that over 400 servicemembers have been injured since February 28. Now we are learning that, in the last 2 weeks alone, more than 100 more American servicemembers have been injured in spiraling strikes between the United States and Iran. Some have been seriously injured, and some have already been back at work--many of them back in harm's way. I fear that we are seeing a pattern. The administration has not told Congress or the American people the truth about the cost of this war, nor the cost to our men and women who put on the uniform; not the cost to the military families who have family members in harm's way, nor the 17 families who will not have family members coming home. Now we are listening to the Congress of the United States in both Chambers. We have seen votes in majorities in both Chambers to end this war, but instead of listening to that will, instead of listening to the American people as to a war that is immensely unpopular, we seem to be repeating over and over again what I believe is an unjust continuation of a war that is not upheld or supported by the law of our land or by the Constitution we swore an oath to. This brings to me the urgency of this moment, and the death of more American soldiers highlights what we are doing here. History is looking at us in this moment. Right now, as we speak, there are people in harm's way. History is looking at us in this moment. How will our moral courage stand alongside those courageous people who are representing our country? My heart is heavy; my spirit grieves. And I know I am not alone. When deaths like this happen, we shouldn't just go on like this is normal. When people die in service of our country, in combat, we shouldn't treat it like another day here in America. It is not. So how do we express our commitment to country? How can it lie in congruency with theirs? How can we honor them in this body beyond condolences, thoughts, and prayers? I believe what the call of this body is in this moment, in the shadow of their immense brilliance, that we have an obligation to honor them, not with words, but in how we give the best measure of our devotion to the laws of our land. I find it unconscionable that the stakes are so high in this country where we are spending tens of billions of dollars--that factually could be going to our schools, tens of billions of dollars could be going to our healthcare, tens of billions of dollars that could be paying down our national debt, tens of billions of dollars that don't just come out of nowhere, but they come from hard-working taxpayers who pay their taxes into a system that they put faith and trust in. And what is happening with this money that we are expending for bombs and missiles and planes and personnel? What is happening is we expend this money. Well, what is apparent to me is what is not happening. You see, our Founders understood the nature of war, and they understood--in light of Kings and Queens and Monarchs who so easily pushed their country into war with no consequence, how easily they put lives on the line, sent men and women into battles--it was such a significant understanding that they had that they said: No individual should be able to unilaterally send our men and women, our children, into war; that we should put appropriate checks and balances on those decisions. Our Founders knew the consequence of war, the burden of war. They knew the hell of war, the tragic consequence to families, the pain and agony of death, and they knew that those decisions should not be made by an individual who might be overcome with some kind of ill-conceived notions and draw our country into war where we give the best of who we are. The best of America is not our wealth; it is the young men and women who hold the hope of America. And so the Constitution is clear: Do not let one person drag our Nation into war. They took that power and placed it not with an Executive. They placed that power with this body, with Congress so that there would be debate and discussion; so that there would be arguments into the night; and so that people would understand with the gravity of such a commitment that we would make sure that the will of the people would be the first decisionmakers for a war. And that any President that was conducting the war would not conduct it above accountability but would have checks and balance. That is the Constitution of the United States. Those imperfect geniuses understood that in moments like this when our Nation is at war, where men and women are coming home not alive but in body bags, that we should honor them by making sure that the will of our Nation was behind that war. And here we are, since the end of February, month after month. Soldiers injured by the hundreds. Lives lost. And the question is: What are we doing in this body? Have we granted the authority to the Executive to go to war? No, we haven't. Have we exercised our constitutional authority? No, we haven't. Have we debated this war and had to make a decision by voting yes or no to allow the President to conduct this war? We have not. We have men and women who are fighting to defend our Nation's laws and Constitution, and here we are not living up to it. To me, that is a living shame, that men and women are risking their lives for the Constitution we serve, and we can't even live up to the roles that we are to play within that constitutional Republic. What does it say that men and women are dying for this country and we are not even living up to its laws? That men and women are paying the ultimate sacrifice for our Nation and we can't even stand up and do the specific duty spelled out by our country? All hundred of us grieve these losses. No one should say any different. I know my colleagues. There is not a person here that doesn't anguish over the loss, but that is not enough in this moment. That is inadequate when it comes to honoring these men and women. What this moment calls for is more than thoughts and prayers, more than the hurt and the grief. It calls for us to do our job. We owe it to them. We owe them truth. We owe them accountability. We owe them checks and balances. We owe them transparency. We owe them a government that lives up to its obligations. They gave the best measure of their devotion to the Nation they loved, and their love was not mere words or symbols or salutes. Their words alone did not show their sacrifice. They understood to love your Nation is to stand up and work for her, sacrifice for her, risk for her. It is time for this body, the U.S. Senate, to honor those men and women by giving our best measure of devotion to our Constitution. This body must end this unconstitutional and unjust war. And if they are unwilling to do so, they should hold the vote whether we authorize this war. It has not been done yet. How many more men and women will die before we do our job, rein in this Executive, hold him accountable, and bring an end to a war that our Nation does not want to be in? Today, my thoughts and prayers are with their families. But I stand here as 1 out of 100 Senators offering more than thoughts and prayers. I yet again demand this body to fulfill its constitutional obligations and do its job.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

Senate

Iran

2026-07-14

“I am upset about the war against Iran. I don't think this body is doing enough. I do not agree with the President's actions. I want this war to end. The President's goals have not been achieved. The war is costing a lot. I want the President to testify before Congress. I want investigations into the war. I want Congress to do its job. I want this to end. It is bad.”

Official Congressional Record

Mr. President, I don't have written remarks for this, but I have been stunned that we here in this Nation are at war. We are unequivocally at war. And I did write down what I have heard from leaders. Let me quote, on March 9, the President of the United States said: On April 7, the Vice President of the United States, JD Vance, our former colleague here in the Senate, said: On April 8, Pete Hegseth, the Secretary, said we had ``achieved every single objective on plan, on schedule, exactly as laid out from day one.'' In June, Secretary Rubio came to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, upon which I sit, and testified under oath declaring that ``the war is over.'' Yet that same day, we had kinetic exchanges with Iran. June 18, Donald Trump said the United States had ``defeated'' Iran ``totally militarily'' and that the memorandum of understanding ``probably is unconditional surrender.'' Let's fast-forward to July 14: Missiles and drones are still flying. The war is still raging. The President has achieved none of the goals. I know what has happened though is that we lifted sanctions on Iran. They got billions of dollars of oil sales done. We have seen the greatest energy crisis in my lifetime upending global oil markets, but more important to me, seeing people's gas prices go up but not only their gas prices, what have we seen? We have seen that everything that touches that fuel source, the transportation of goods and services, has made prices go up for families all across our country. I have seen the suffering, not just of the American people with higher costs but American military who are being held over and over and over, put in harm's way, hundreds injured, 14 dead, and what have we achieved? The Strait of Hormuz is still closed. The President said that he wanted to deal with the highly enriched material. It is still in country. The President said he wanted regime change. We have a more extreme regime. The President said he was going to get unconditional surrender. They have not unconditionally surrendered. They are firing at our soldiers right now. Every goal he laid out for a war that he did not come to Congress, as the Constitution says--everything he laid out has not been achieved. And even the memorandum of understanding that he said was so great had so many holes of Swiss cheese that it fell apart, and here we are back at war. And what is the President's plan? Can one Senator here say, tell us, what the President of the United States is trying to achieve as we spend billions and billions of dollars a day, a week, in this conflict? What is he trying to achieve right now? Nobody knows the plan. This is ``deja vu all over again,'' as the great New Jerseyan, Yogi Berra said. This is yet another quagmire in the Middle East with no plan, with no strategy, with no clear objectives, with Americans putting their lives on the line. And what are we doing here in this body? Nothing. We are going on this week as if this is business as usual. A bunch of us are trying to force more oversight votes or--excuse me--war powers votes. But this body is doing nothing as a President is spending billions of taxpayer dollars, upending our national economy, putting lives at risk in a war that has achieved nothing but made things worse with the Strait of Hormuz closed. And what are we doing, Congress? Nothing to check a President that is clearly out of control, who is clearly out of his depth, who is clearly not the great dealmaker because he failed in making deals with Iran before this deal and--even though he claimed to have one--it clearly fell apart. We have war powers. The Constitution is clear. Yet, you are letting him for month after month after month--since February--conduct a war that is depleting our military reserves, coming at a great cost and sacrifice to military members and their families, and every American is paying the price for it in their everyday costs. This is outrageous. This is unacceptable. And this body is trying to normalize this: Oh, just another day in America. Well, no, we are at war right now, and we have an obligation to either stand up and vote in favor of that war or stop it. This is one of the most unimaginable, dystopic realities we are in right now, where the very body that has the power to declare war is not doing anything and letting this President continue to get us into a quagmire. And now he can't even tell us why we are in it, what he is trying to achieve. He is desperately scrambling to get the Strait of Hormuz open, which was open before he started this war. This would be funny if it wasn't so tragic, if it wasn't costing so many lives, if it wasn't costing so much of our taxpayers moneys, and if so many Americans weren't hurting as a result of it. Come on, now. How could we be complicit in this unjust war that has no clear objectives and that nobody could articulate a strategy to achieve any objective or get us out, conducted by a President who has lost all authority as our Commander in Chief because of his blunder and mistake and lack of strategy and lack of forethought? And the very body that was put in place to provide checks and balances, to provide oversight, to hold on jealously, as our Founders said, to the powers assigned to this body, we are doing nothing but surrendering. And I am not going to surrender on this. I am not going to let this be normalized. This is wrong, what we are doing. This is wrong in every way you look at it. It is a folly. It is a disaster. It is a failure. And all we need is the majority of this body to say enough, that we are going to hold hearings, that we are going to do investigations, that we are going to bring the leadership of the executive branch here to sit before the American public and explain these months--this 6 months of this war--what it has truly cost us, what we have lost, and how we are going to exit. It just makes sense, but I am seeing none of that. I am going to yield the floor, but I am going to, again, ask this body to do its job, to create a democracy people can rely on, to end the suffering of the American people, to stop this heinous cost of a war with no strategy, no clear objectives, no reason, that is unconstitutional. Thank you.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

Senate

Democracy

2026-07-14

“Something bad happened. I want to talk about it. I want to talk about what our country should do. I am worried we are not doing a good job. I want there to be more investigations when someone dies. Power without accountability is bad. I want more oversight. I am angry. I want my colleagues to demand an independent investigation too.”

Official Congressional Record

Mr. President, I think there are profound moments in the course of our 250 years when our Nation was at an inflection point, and I believe this is one of those inflection points where, as we look at the events in our Nation, we don't just ask the question ``What is happening?'' we have to ask the question ``Who are we becoming?'' There are moments where this question of ``Who are we as a nation?'' has to come with the understanding that every generation of Americans has to define themselves. This is a question right now, with the events of recent days, where we must ask that question--who are we as a nation? What do we stand for? This is a question that is larger than politics, larger than left or right, larger than immigration policy, larger than any one party. It is a question that really asks about the immense power that we entrust to our government and is that still constrained. Do we still live under a Constitution where, by our very definition as a nation, we should have accountability and transparency; that when we do things like pledge allegiance to a flag, it is not simply the banner, but it is also the values, this idea that every single life has worth. Think about these conceptions of humanity that we put forth 250 years ago--that we are all created equal. I believe this is an inflection point in our Nation that should not be normalized but should really force us to ask this question as American citizens and ask this question as Members of this body. Every life--every life--was created equally, has equal dignity, equal worth. And when government, our government, takes a life, there must be accountability; that is something precious in this Nation, the value of life and the responsibility of those who wield power. It is not just confidence in government that I am talking about. It is not just faith in how our laws are enforced. It really is the very idea of our Nation. That is how I want to set my remarks here because this is an inflection point in America. We are a nation that stands for something. Our Nation was founded on the belief that all are created equal, endowed by their Creator with inalienable rights, and among them are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. But today, I am rising because of my growing concern that we are not living up to those ideals, and the consequences of that are that we are normalizing something so utterly tragic. Two more people have fallen in our Nation. Two more families are grieving in our Nation. And I refuse to believe that this is simply the cost of doing business in the United States of America. Last Tuesday morning, Lorenzo Salgado Araujo climbed into his work van like millions of Americans do all over our country every single workday. He wasn't headed to a protest or a political rally. He wasn't headed into conflict. He was headed to work. He was 52 years old. He was a husband, a father of American children, a man who spent decades in this country building a life, supporting his family, contributing to his community, paying taxes. On his way to work, Federal agents in unmarked vehicles began following his van. Moments later, an officer fired through the passenger side window, and Lorenzo stumbled from that vehicle. Agents forced him to the ground, and he died right there on the pavement. Yesterday morning, it happened again. Joan Sebastian Guerrero. He was 26 years old and also a father. He was authorized to work in our country, has a Social Security number. On his way to work, another shooting. Another grieving family. Another life, precious life, gone. I stand here today because I am deeply worried about something so fundamental to our country that is now in crisis. I worry that we are becoming accustomed to things that should horrify us, that we are becoming so exhausted, so polarized, so overwhelmed that another death just becomes another headline, another investigation, another news cycle, another family left to grieve. The greatest danger to democracy is not simply injustice; it is when injustice no longer shocks us, no longer moves us, no longer compels us to meet that injustice. It is a poverty--a poverty of empathy, a poverty of concern. It is a tragedy that in the midst of tragedy, our hearts stop breaking, when outrage gives way to indifference, because indifference is where accountability goes to die. And this is not the first time. Earlier this year, Renee Good was killed, and Alex Pretti was killed. American citizens. Families forever changed. Lives forever interrupted. And what happened? Investigations were literally shut down by our Justice Department. Think about that. The highest law enforcement officers in the land shut down an investigation into those murders. Those investigations were not completed. They did not follow where the evidence led. They were simply stopped, halted. Justice denied. Every police officer--and I have worked closely with many of them-- every police officer knows that when deadly force is used, there must be scrutiny, not because we assume any guilt but because accountability protects everyone in our democracy. It protects the public; it protects the officers; it protects the confidence in the very idea of the rule of law upon which our country and our Constitution is built. No badge and no police officer I know fear transparency. So many of the honorable officers that I dealt with every day as a mayor, they want the truth. In fact, those incredible officers demand it because accountability is not the enemy of law enforcement. It is what gives law enforcement its strength and its true moral authority. It is what gives the laws of this land and those who conduct them their very legitimacy. To not investigate, scrutinize, have transparency and accountability when tragedy strikes, erodes the very foundation of our democracy. Amidst the tragedy of those depths, we see our very constitutional principles at stake, and this is where Congress has an obligation. Right now, we are seeing with ICE in America, this Congress appropriated billions upon billions of dollars, handing this Agency unprecedented sums of taxpayer money but also in that process allowing oversight to be stripped away, less accountability. Think about this: We have appropriated to this one law enforcement Agency over $200 billion, more than the FBI, the ATF, the DEA, the Marshals Service, the Bureau of Prisons, Secret Service, TSA, and the Coast Guard combined. ICE in America has a bigger budget than those eight law enforcement organizations, billions upon billions of dollars, over $200 billion. And yet what do we get? Greater accountability? Greater oversight? No. We get lowering of hiring standards. We get reduced oversight. We get internal watchdogs removed or weakened. We get body cameras still absent, as we saw in these last two murders, as if we can't afford them. More money, more power, less accountability, less scrutiny, less oversight--this is not conservative government. The fiscal conservatives on both sides understand that you don't shovel money toward an organization, outstripping most law enforcement Agencies in the entire United States of America, whether those that are investigating drug trafficking or insurance fraud or illegal arms smuggling. No, $200 billion--the most spent for ICE--and you get less accountability for those taxpayer dollars and then when tragedy strikes, less accountability for actions of horror. This is dangerous, not just to families that are being pulled over and detained and thrown onto pavement. It is not just dangerous to the horrible deaths of the names that I have mentioned. But it is dangerous to our democracy. But perhaps those who have passed under these circumstances, we should listen to them. Perhaps we should listen to their last words. Lorenzo Salgado Araujo, his last words: Joan Sebastian Guerrero, his last words: Nicole Renee Good, her last words: Alex Pretti, perhaps words that should penetrate us now, his last words: Now, I thought about those words: ``Are you OK?'' And that is the question. Are we OK? Are we OK? Are we OK when fathers are killed on their way to work? Are we OK when systems of oversight have virtually disappeared? Are we OK when we entrust the extraordinary power, when we entrust that power and yet the people in power face less accountability to the people that put them in power? Are we, as a nation, becoming so numb that the death of law-abiding people by agents does not motivate us to ask: Why is this happening in America, under what justification? Are we shrinking from our duty as Americans to value every life and understand that injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere? I don't think we are becoming numb, but I worry that the Senate is consciously looking away; that we are not doing our sworn constitutional duty. Our Founders, in their genius, decided to set up a government with checks and balances. What happens to that government when the article I branch of the government here in the Senate does not ask questions like Alex Pretti did, does not look for answers like people are demanding, does not ask for oversight, not just over the $200 billion being spent but doesn't ask for oversight when the most horrific imaginable thing can happen, when law-abiding people are killed? Are we not asking for answers? This Senate swore an oath to the Constitution. We have an obligation to provide checks and balances, to conduct oversight, to demand transparency, to hold the executive branch accountable when power is abused. Today, we are failing in our constitutional duty. Today, we are failing our democracy. Today, we are failing families that are mourning and grieving. Look, this is not an immigration speech. It is not a speech about whether we support strong borders. I do, unequivocally and firmly. America must have secure borders. It must enforce its immigration laws. America must protect all of its communities from any threats. The first words of our founding document talked about forming a government of common defense and the safety and security of our communities. But we can never ever abandon the fundamental precept that this is a democracy, and therefore we must have accountability. We are not an autocracy. We are not an authoritarian government. We are not a monarchy where we have Kings and Queens above question, above accountability, and above the law. We are a democracy, and the very mission of this body is to hold the Executive accountable when they are taking Executive action, especially when they are using the greatest power that could be entrusted into a government that is to take lives, to kill people. To minimize that, to watch people die in our streets without accountability or transparency is a direct assault on the foundational ideals of who we are as a people. ``Are we OK,'' he asks. Are we OK? This is the revolutionary idea of America. No person, not a President, not Senators, not judges, no person is above the law--not a Federal agent in an unmarked car and undistinguished uniform with a gun in their hands firing through a window and killing someone. Power without accountability is not strength. It is the beginning of tyranny. Every government is asked whether it will preserve the principles it inherited. This is our moment. This is why the Constitution envisioned this body. And yet we are failing in that duty to provide oversight, accountability, checks and balances. And the consequence is the repeated tragedy within this Agency of seeing people killed on our streets. We owe these families, we owe our democracy an independent investigation. I demand that from my colleagues. I call upon an independent investigation, and I should be joined by a chorus of my colleagues with the conviction that this is not right or left. This is why we were elected in the first place and why we put our hands on our Bible and swore an oath to that Constitution. I am anguished. I am angry. This is an inflection point in our democracy, another one that seems to be coming with increasing speed and rapidity. We make this presumption that this Nation sits upon a bedrock that will never crumble. Well, I am telling you, I am not afraid of any nation outside of our own. What I am afraid of is the corrosive, cancerous corruption of a nation who swears an oath to ideals but does not fulfill them in their duty. I don't know what to say when we have another dead person, when we are seeing people in our streets, law-abiding, loving their families, and they are asking those questions: Who are we in this Nation? I pray that this Senate changes course, and instead of silence they answer with a commanding conviction that we are the United States of America. We are a nation of laws; that no one, be they the President, be they a Senator, be they an officer in the street, no one is above the law.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗