Politics

(WASHINGTON) — Rep. Angie Craig’s physical injuries healed relatively quickly after a February assault in her apartment building — but her “mental and emotional” recovery has taken “much longer” and is ongoing while she grapples with continued safety concerns, she said in a new victim impact statement.

Her remarks were filed by prosecutors on Tuesday ahead of Kendrid Hamlin’s sentencing in federal court in Washington. In June, he pleaded guilty to assault.

A police report previously obtained by ABC News stated the altercation began when Craig saw a man acting erratically in her building, as if “he was under the influence on an unknown substance.”

Craig said she told the man — Hamlin — “good morning,” according to the police report. She went to the elevator where he followed her, then started to do push-ups in the elevator.

In her victim impact statement this week, Craig detailed what happened that day.

“While this case has received much attention because I am a Member of Congress, that morning I was simply a woman followed into an elevator by a man and assaulted there,” Craig, a Minnesota Democrat, wrote in her statement.

She recalled how Hamlin “trapped me inside.”

“He grabbed my neck and slammed me into the steel wall. He punched me in the face. He attempted to pull me back as the doors opened, and I screamed for help,” she wrote.

During the attack, Craig fended Hamlin off by pouring hot coffee on him, but he escaped before officers could arrest him, according to the police report.

“Physically, the attack left bruising and a cut to my lip, as well as several days of soreness and discomfort,” Craig wrote in her victim impact statement.

“While my physical recovery was days, my mental and emotional recovery has taken much longer and is ongoing. My sense of safety and security has been significantly impacted,” she wrote.

Craig was left with “periodic anxiety” in the aftermath of the attack, which had “significantly broader consequences” than how he injured her, she wrote.

A media outlet disclosed the address of her apartment, forcing her to break her lease because of security concerns, she wrote. And “following comments by media personalities about my assault, I received a flurry of additional targeted physical violence and death threats to myself and my staff.”

Her wife and their four sons had been shaken, too.

Though she felt “very fortunate” to have escaped Hamlin’s assault without greater harm, she wrote that she wanted to highlight the suffering it did cause.

She also wrote that she hoped Hamlin can get mental health and addiction treatment while he is incarcerated.

“Until that occurs, given his history of previous convictions and my own experience, I believe he would continue to be a further threat to others,” she wrote.

A lawyer for Hamlin did not respond to ABC News’ request for comment.

Copyright © 2023, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — President Joe Biden said he will continue to pursue remedies to the threats caused by climate change following the release of the Fifth National Climate Assessment on Tuesday — but he acknowledged that it’s still not enough and that some Republicans are getting in the way of more progress.

“This assessment shows us in clear scientific terms, that climate change is impacting all regions, all sectors of the United States, not just some, all,” Biden said in his remarks Tuesday at the White House.

Biden said he’s seen the destruction firsthand as president when he’s visited states like Louisiana, New Jersey, New York and Florida after hurricanes and floods and talked with firefighters in Idaho, New Mexico, California and Colorado.

“The impacts we’re seeing are only going to get worse, more frequent, more ferocious, and more costly. Last year alone, natural disasters in America cost $178 billion — $178 billion — in damages. They hit everyone no matter what their circumstances, but the hit the most vulnerable the hardest,” he said.

But, he added, “none of this is inevitable.”

Biden also made a dig at past inaction on climate change, calling out Republicans and former President Donald Trump, who withdrew the U.S. from the Paris Climate Accords.

“We’ve come to the point where it’s foolish for anyone to deny the impacts of climate change anymore. But it’s simply a simple fact that there are a number of my colleagues and other side of the aisle, MAGA Republican leaders who still deny climate change, still deny that it’s a problem. My predecessor, much of the MAGA Republican Party, in fact, are still — feel very strongly about that,” he said.

“Anyone who willfully denies the impacts of climate change is condemning the American people to a very dangerous future,” he said.

White House National Climate Adviser Ali Zaidi also told ABC News Live that some Republicans in Congress want to “bury their heads in the sand.”

In response to the speech, some Republicans argued Biden has misplaced priorities.

“Biden believes climate change is the ‘ultimate threat to humanity.’ He should take the threats posed to Americans by Iran-backed terrorists and Chinese aggression as seriously,” Sen. Joni Ernst, R-Iowa, tweeted.

Biden said climate change was a recurring theme in the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, Inflation Reduction Act and the CHIPS Act. The White House also announced more than $6 billion in what it said was an effort to “strengthen climate resilience” on Tuesday, a large amount of which comes from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and the Inflation Reduction Act, according to a White House fact sheet.

The funding includes $3.9 billion to “strengthen and modernize” the electric grid, $2 billion in EPA grants for community clean energy and environmental justice projects, $300 million from FEMA for communities impacted by catastrophic flooding, and $100 million in grants to support drought resilience in Western states.

“We’re just getting started. … All told, my investing in America Agenda and those bold climate laws are the most ambitious in American history,” he said.

“Today’s release — the Fifth National Climate Assessment — is a critical part of that effort. It lays out the threats and dangers, but most experts would acknowledge it also shows solutions are within reach,” he added.

Biden has frequently discussed the importance of climate change to his administration, but he has also faced criticism from climate activists for decisions like the approval of a controversial oil drilling project in Alaska and the fact that he has not declared a national emergency on climate change.

The report issued Tuesday, the Fifth National Climate Assessment, warns that all parts of the U.S. are already experiencing serious impacts of climate change, including more severe extreme weather events like heat waves and extreme rainfall. It says climate change is making it harder to “maintain safe homes and healthy families” in the U.S. and the country needs to do much more to adapt.

The report issues a stark warning that extreme events and harmful impacts of climate change that Americans are already experiencing, such as heat waves, wildfires, and extreme rainfall, will worsen as temperatures continue to rise. But it also found that while climate action is still incremental, there are areas for economic opportunity in the United States, including clean energy.

Copyright © 2023, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — In a bipartisan vote, the House has passed Speaker Mike Johnson’s plan to avert a government shutdown just days ahead of a Friday deadline.

The vote passed 336-95. The bill needed a two-thirds majority to pass.

In his first test as the newly-appointed speaker, Johnson pitched a two-step government plan that he described as a “laddered CR” or continuing resolution that would keep the government funded at 2023 levels.

Johnson leaned heavily on his Democratic colleagues after dozens of Republicans opposed his plan.

The bill now goes on to the Senate for approval. Senate leaders have indicated they support the bill.

This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.

Copyright © 2023, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — Accusations of a former House speaker elbowing a member. A senator challenging a witness to physical fight during a hearing.

Two tense moments played out in both chambers on Tuesday — and that was all before two members of the House Judiciary Committee got into a shouting match.

Let’s start in the House.

Rep. Tim Burchett is accusing fellow Republican Rep. Kevin McCarthy of bullying him, telling ABC News: “He just elbowed me in the kidneys … It was deliberate. It was just a cheap shot.”

The altercation initially unfolded in front of an NPR reporter who was talking with Burchett.

The reporter later published audio of what she saw. In the clip, Burchett is heard saying, “Why’d you elbow me in the back, Kevin? Hey Kevin, you got any guts? Jerk.”

He followed after McCarthy to confront the former speaker.

“I chased after him. I mean, because, you know, you’re sitting there thinking, ‘What the heck just happened?'” Burchett told ABC News, saying he and McCarthy exchanged words afterwards.

According to NPR’s audio, McCarthy denied intentionally jabbing at Burchett: “I didn’t elbow you in the back.”

He later repeated that to ABC News, saying, “I would not hit him in the kidney. I guess our shoulders hit, because Burchett runs up to me afterwards. I did not know what he was talking about.”

“If I would hit somebody, they would know I hit them,” he said.

The two are hardly friends: Burchett was one of the eight Republicans who voted with Democrats to oust McCarthy from leadership last month.

“You just don’t expect that kind of thing from an adult, especially a guy that was at one time the third person in line for the White House,” Burchett said.

Elsewhere at the Capitol, Republican Sen. Markwayne Mullin of Oklahoma stood up during a hearing as he appeared ready to physically fight one of the witnesses, Teamsters union President Sean O’ Brien.

Back in June, O’Brien — who has a history of tense exchanges with Mullin — tweeted at the senator, calling him a “clown” and a “fraud” and ended his posts by inviting Mullin to a fight “any place, anytime cowboy.”

Mullin used his time at a Tuesday hearing of the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee to confront O’Brien over the comments.

He read off some of O’Brien’s tweets, adding, “Sir, this is a time, this is a place. You want to run your mouth? We can be two consenting adults — we can finish it here.”

“OK, that’s fine. Perfect,” O’Brien responded.

“You want to do it right now?” Mullin asked.

“I’d love to do it right now,” O’Brien said.

“Well stand your butt up then,” Mullin replied.

Mullin, a former mixed martial arts fighter, then stood up from his chair — as Chairman Bernie Sanders started pleading for both men to come to their senses.

“You’re a United States senator, sit down,” Sanders said, banging the gavel.

“This is a hearing, and God knows the American people have enough contempt for Congress let’s not–” he added before being cut off by the two men.

Mullin said, “I don’t like thugs and bullies.”

“Well, I don’t like you,” O’Brien replied. “You just described yourself.”

The two started going at each other yet again, before Sanders cut them off yet again.

“We’re not here to talk about physical abuse,” Sanders said.

Mullin later told reporters that he has “no beef” with O’Brien and was simply responding to O’Brien’s tweets calling for a fight.

“People have been fighting for a long time. I mean, go back to the 1800s …. It was legal to do duels. If you have a difference, you have a difference,” Mullin said. “I didn’t start it.”

“This doesn’t have to do with policy. This doesn’t have to do with politics. This had to do with a guy who called me out. And I simply responded to it,” he maintained.

Finally, back in the House, Judiciary Chairman James Comer, a Republican, grew heated responding to Rep. Jared Moskowitz, a Florida Democrat, who suggested Comer had done something improper in his personal finances with his family.

Comer called that “b——” and “completely false.”

Meanwhile, Congress faces major issues like whether to provide military aid to Israel and further money to Ukraine — with no deal in place — and later Tuesday, the House will vote on staving off a partial government shutdown that could leave millions without pay.

Copyright © 2023, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — Tennessee Rep. Tim Burchett, one of the eight Republicans who voted to oust Kevin McCarthy from the speakership last month, claimed to ABC News that McCarthy elbowed him in the back after a House GOP meeting on Tuesday morning.

“He just elbowed me in the kidneys … It was deliberate. It was just a cheap shot,” he said.

McCarthy denied this, according to an NPR reporter who said she witnessed part of the altercation and published the audio of what she saw.

He later told ABC News Senior Congressional Correspondent Rachel Scott, “I would not hit him in the kidney. I guess our shoulders hit, because Burchett runs up to me afterwards. I did not know what he was talking about.”

“If I would hit somebody, they would know I hit them,” he said.

But Burchett said he was speaking to the NPR reporter when McCarthy walked behind him and allegedly put his elbow intentionally into Burchett’s back. Burchett said he was pushed forward and then followed McCarthy down the hallway to confront him.

“I chased after him. I mean, because, you know, you’re sitting there thinking, ‘What the heck just happened?'” Burchett said.

According to the NPR reporter, Burchett asked McCarthy: “Why’d you walk behind me and elbow me in the back?”

The former speaker responded: “I didn’t elbow you in the back.”

And Burchett replied: “You got no guts, you did so.”

On Tuesday afternoon, asked to respond to Florida Rep. Matt Gaetz, another Republican critic, filing an ethics complaint against him over the alleged episode, McCarthy jokingly expressed relief, adding that he may run for reelection just so he can be the chairman of the House Ethics Committee in the 119th Congress.

Gaetz has long been under an ethics investigation but has pushed back, suggesting its politically motivated.

McCarthy also said he had no knowledge of allegedly shoulder-checking former Illinois Republican Rep. Adam Kinzinger, as Kinzinger wrote about in a book.

“You’re bringing something up I know nothing of,” he said.

ABC News’ Arthur Jones II contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2023, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — President Joe Biden and Chinese leader Xi Jinping are set to meet Wednesday in the San Francisco area at an undisclosed location for their first face-to-face meeting in a year.

The bar for success is low – anything that stops the relationship from getting worse would be a win. In fact, the two countries just agreeing to talk more would be considered a victory.

Ahead of his departure to San Francisco, Biden said the goal of the meeting with Xi is “to get back on a normal course of corresponding, being able to pick up the phone and talk to one another when there’s another crisis, being able to make sure our militaries still have contact with one another.”

U.S. officials say they’re going into the meeting with realistic expectations. Rather than yielding major breakthroughs, they hope to manage tensions, keep U.S.-China competition in check, and maintain lines of communication so miscommunication doesn’t veer into conflict.

“We’re not trying to decouple from China. But what we’re trying to do, is change the relationship for the better,” Biden said.

Yet, one meeting, no matter how long or substantive, won’t change the broader trajectory of the U.S.-China relationship. It also will not reset deep ideological differences between these two superpowers over everything from technology, trade, defense, Taiwan, South China Sea, and conflicts overseas.

“Both in Washington and Beijing, there is some pretty deep-seated distrust and antagonism,” said Jude Blanchette, the Freeman Chair in China Studies at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. “The Chinese have a number of transient, tactical reasons to want the meeting, even as Xi Jinping remains broadly, very skeptical and cynical about the United States.”

Blanchette says Xi will want some reassurances on Taiwan and a slowdown on any future U.S. curbs on China’s high technology industry. Also, amid an economic downturn in China – with rising unemployment and foreign investment slowing — Xi will want to show the foreign business community that China is open for business.

There will be few areas of agreement on those fronts. Biden will likely defend U.S. export controls on semiconductor chips, while again stressing the U.S. is not trying to decouple from China.

U.S. officials say Biden is coming into the meeting in a strong position, given the strength of the U.S. economy.

“From my perspective, if in fact, the Chinese people who are in trouble right now economically … if the average citizen in China was able to have a decent paying job, that benefits them and it benefits all of us, but I’m not going to continue to sustain the support for positions where if we want to invest in China, we have to turn over all our trade secrets,” Biden said Tuesday.

When U.S. Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo visited Beijing in August, she said U.S. companies have told her that China has become “uninvestible,” because of fines, raids, and other actions from the Chinese government that have made it difficult for foreign corporations to do business in China.

On Taiwan, U.S. officials have stressed the U.S. is not trying to change the status quo. The U.S. maintains a one-China policy, which means the U.S. acknowledges China’s position that there is only Chinese government. Under the policy, the U.S. does not have formal diplomatic relations with Taiwan. But China, which views the self-ruled island as part of its territory, views contact with Taiwan from high-level U.S. officials as undermining the one-China policy.

The most concrete outcome of the meeting would be if the two countries agree to restore military-to-military communication. China suspended talks last August in retaliation to then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan last year.

National security adviser Jake Sullivan said the U.S. has been having “constructive” discussions with China to restore military communications.

“Having our two militaries in communication is the way you reduce mistake, you avoid escalation, you manage competition, so it doesn’t veer into conflict.”

Restoring military communications is a key point of leverage that Beijing will not give up until they have extracted the concessions they want, according to Blanchette, because Beijing views many of the friction points as the U.S. interfering in its internal affairs, including in the case of Taiwan. Beijing thinks military dialogue is “really just a way for the U.S. to tie the PLA down,” Blanchette said, referring to China’s armed forces, the People’s Liberation Army.

The talks may yield promises of cooperation in areas like climate change and combatting fentanyl trade. But statements of goodwill out of the meeting will not point to a fundamental change in Xi’s view that the U.S. is trying to contain China’s rise, according to Blanchette.

“You can see Xi Jinping in important ways preparing the Chinese political and economic system for a period of prolonged, intense geopolitical struggle with the United States,” Blanchette said. “And amidst that struggle, there are going to be moments and opportunities for, you know, tactical adjustments, maybe even small compromises, but on the broader trajectory, I think Xi Jinping believes this is going to be a contest to see who outlast the other.”

President Biden is expected to bring up the war in Israel, according to U.S. officials. Given warm diplomatic relations between China and Iran, President Biden is expected to urge Xi to use his leverage with Iran to convince Iran and its proxies not to further escalate the conflict.

“President Biden will make the point to President Xi that Iran acting in an escalatory, destabilizing way, that undermines stability across the — broader Middle East is not in the interests of the PRC,” Sullivan said.

U.S. officials say Biden is also expected to warn China not to interfere in Taiwan’s elections next year or in U.S. elections.

Copyright © 2023, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(NEW YORK) — Sam Miele, a fundraiser for embattled Rep. George Santos, R-N.Y., pleaded guilty to wire fraud Tuesday in connection with impersonating an aide to then-House Speaker Kevin McCarthy.

Miele was charged in August with aggravated identity theft and four counts of wire fraud.

Miele is the second person charged alongside Santos to plead guilty following campaign treasurer Nancy Marks last month.

Miele agreed to pay $109,171 in restitution, $69,136 in forfeiture and a separate stipulated payment of $470,000 to a contributor.

“The defendant used fraud and deceit to steal more than $100,000 from his victims, funneling this money into the campaign committees of candidates for the House, and into his own pockets,” United States Attorney Peace said Tuesday.

Prosecutors said Miele sent emails and phone calls seeking campaign contributions while claiming to be a “high ranking aide to a member of the House with leadership responsibilities.”

According to court records, Miele misrepresented himself as a high-ranking congressional aide to then-Speaker Kevin McCarthy to deceive donors and then used their money to pad his own pocket and the coffers of Santos’ campaign.

As part of his plea, Miele admitted he committed access device fraud by charging credit cards without authorization for contributions to the campaigns of Santos and other candidates.

Miele faces up to 20 years in prison.

Miele was the subject of a similar Federal Elections Commission complaint in February.

He will be sentenced in April.

Santos has pleaded not guilty to 23 counts as prosecutors allege he stole people’s identities, made charges on his campaign donors’ credit cards and lied to federal election officials. He survived a Republican-led effort to expel him from the House on Nov. 1.

ABC News’ Alexandra Hutzler contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2023, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — The House is set to vote Tuesday afternoon on Speaker Mike Johnson’s plan to avert a government shutdown just days ahead of a Friday deadline.

But because of opposition from hard-line Republicans, he will have to rely on dozens of Democratic votes to pass his unconventional idea with the needed two-thirds majority.

Johnson huddled with Republicans behind closed doors Tuesday morning, giving one final pitch for his two-step proposal before he puts it on the floor for a vote later in the day.

But several left the meeting unmoved. Rep. Andy Ogles of Tennessee called Johnson’s plan a “surrender.” Texas Rep. Chip Roy called it a “mistake.”

At a later news conference, ABC News Senior Congressional Correspondent Rachel Scott asked Johnson about those Republicans outraged about his going forward.

“We’re not surrendering, we’re fighting but you have to be wise about choosing the fights. …You got to fight fights that you can win, and we’re going to and you’re going to see this House majority stand together on our principle,” he said.

“Look, it took decades to get into this mess, right, I’ve been at the job less than three weeks, right? …I can’t turn an aircraft carrier overnight. But this was a very important first step to get us to the next stage so that we can change how Washington works,” he added.

Meanwhile, some Democrats are calling this a victory.

After their meeting Tuesday morning, House Democratic Caucus Chairman Pete Aguilar said House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries and other Democrats were still evaluating Johnson’s continuing resolution.

“We have not taken a family position on the bill,” Aguilar said.

“And I think the concern is Speaker Johnson — this is very similar to the position we had been before. He is bleeding votes within his conference,” he said. “There is no prospect of him delivering the votes to achieve this success to achieve the continuing resolution.”

“Our caucus still has questions about what that path ahead is,” he said.

The irony is that Johnson is pushing forward with the same type of stopgap plan that led to Kevin McCarthy being ousted as speaker.

Still, some Republicans are signaling they’re willing to give Johnson a break.

“Speaker Johnson came in kind of like the backup quarterback, you can’t blame him for the score of the game when he enters the game,” Rep. Dan Meuser or Pennsylvania said.

Other Republicans acknowledge the realities of a divided government and a deeply divided party.

“In the Republican conference, you couldn’t get 217 of us to agree that today’s Tuesday,” Rep. Troy Nehls said.

“Mike is having to reach out to the Democrats, because you can’t get the Republicans to agree on anything,” he added.

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said Tuesday morning he was “very heartened” by Johnson’s government funding proposal, and said that he and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell would work to move the stopgap bill to the floor expeditiously if the House passes it Tuesday.

“We’ll see over the course of how the House moves today whether it comes forward, when it comes here, if the House should pass it and I hope they do,” Schumer said. “Leader McConnell and I will figure out the best way to get this done quickly. Neither McConnell nor I want a shut down.”

Schumer has embraced the House proposal because it does not include any spending cuts.

“The proposal before the House does two things Democrats pushed for,” Schumer said. “One: not making the hard-right cuts that the MAGA wing demands and second, making sure that if they are going to do this sort of goofy ladder that defense is in the second part of the ladder — not the first.”

Schumer was asked about his break from the White House, which originally dismissed the GOP proposal as “unserious.”

“I think that we all want to avoid a shutdown, I’ve talked to the White House and both of us agree, the White House and myself, that if this can avoid a shutdown, it would be a good thing.”

McConnell gave a ringing endorsement of the House stopgap funding proposal Tuesday, and said he looks forward to passing the bill into law if it clears the House. He said he was “happy for” Johnson and that he “looks forward to passing the short term bill on a bipartisan basis.”

“It’s nice to see us working together to prevent a government shutdown and to deal with all of the other big issues that we have ahead of us during this period between now and the time the CR expires,” McConnell said.

Copyright © 2023, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — The House of Representatives voted Monday night to refer a resolution to impeach Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas to the House Homeland Security committee.

Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., initiated the impeachment resolution last week. On Monday evening, though, eight of her fellow Republicans voted with Democrats on a proposal from the Democrat side of the House, which ended up halting a full House vote on Greene’s proposal. Democrats earlier in the evening decided to pull their original effort to table the impeachment resolution and introduced the resolution to send it to committee.

Greene, one of the most controversial and House hardline lawmakers, filed her resolution last Thursday, claiming Mayorkas has failed to secure the southern border from undocumented migrants and drugs. She filed it as a “privileged resolution,” forcing the House to vote on the matter within two legislative days.

When ABC News asked Greene last week why she introduced the resolution, she responded, “Because these people just died yesterday,” pointing at a photo of two of her Georgia constituents killed during a police car chase last Wednesday with a human smuggler near San Antonio.

“People are dying every single day in America because Secretary Mayorkas is breaking the law, breaking his oath of office. So, nothing matters more than that,” she told ABC’s Jay O’Brien.

House Republicans were divided on the effort, with some moderates not fully backing the move without completing a full investigation beforehand.

“Look, Mayorkas has been an abject failure in his position. I believe he has committed impeachable offenses, and I have been on a record saying that for a long, long time,” Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., said during an interview on Fox News with Sean Hannity earlier this month.

Greene previously brought forward articles of impeachment for Mayorkas in May, but House GOP leaders never brought them to a vote.

The Department of Homeland Security has cast Greene’s push as misguided, insisting Mayorkas has effectively done his job.

“While the House Majority has wasted months trying to score points with baseless attacks, Secretary Mayorkas has been doing his job and working to keep Americans safe,” DHS spokesperson Mia Ehrenberg said in a previous statement.

“Instead of continuing their reckless impeachment charades and attacks on law enforcement, Congress should work with us to keep our country safe, build on the progress DHS is making, and deliver desperately needed reforms for our broken immigration system that only legislation can fix,” she said.

Copyright © 2023, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(AUSTIN, Texas) — The Texas House of Representatives is expected to review on Tuesday what would be one of the strictest immigration laws in the country if passed.

SB 4 is being considered as part of the fourth round of a special legislative session ordered by Texas Gov. Greg Abbott to consider several immigration-related bills.

It creates two new state crimes for migrants who enter or re-enter into the state illegally from another country, punishable with up to two years in prison.

One of the most controversial aspects of the bill would authorize local and state law enforcement officials to arrest migrants they suspect unlawfully crossed into Texas. It also allows judges the option to order some migrants to return to the country they illegally crossed from instead of pursuing prosecution.

Officers and state agencies would be cleared to transport them to ports of entry to make sure they comply. If migrants refused to comply with an order to return, they could be charged with a second degree felony and face up to 20 years in prison.

SB 4 has sparked fears among immigrant rights advocates that the bill would lead to widespread racial profiling and a circumvention of protections asylum seekers have under constitutional law and international obligations. The bill does not provide any funding or requirement to train officers on immigration law, despite the fact it would authorize them to quickly make decisions about a person’s immigration status.

“There is no U.S. federal analogue to a lone officer in their own discretion escorting someone to the border and saying get out. That is a very scary prospect that is categorically different from what the federal government does. In addition to that, in the federal system people would be able to present their claims to an immigration officer and an immigration judge,” said David Donatti, a senior staff attorney with the Texas ACLU.

There’s also growing concern that parents may be separated from their children if they are arrested under these new state crimes.

Aron Thorn, a senior staff attorney at the Texas Civil Rights Project says that if passed, the law could trigger lawsuits and an international dispute with Mexico since it would lead to migrants being sent across the southern border regardless of their legal status there.

Some opponents of the bill have also suggested that it is being introduced to prompt a challenge of a 2012 Supreme Court decision in Arizona v. United States which upheld the federal government’s authority over immigration enforcement. That case revolved around a law similar to SB 4, which authorized police officers to question migrants about their immigration status and arrest them.

Thorn says because the new crimes created by SB 4 only apply to undocumented immigrants, it will cause law enforcement officials to use race as probable cause apprehending people.

“We know our history is replete with examples of race being used as a proxy for immigration status. We live in Texas, our history books are full of it, and I think people are right to be concerned, specifically because there is no possible way to violate this without being an alien, which means they have to have some sort of idea that you are a noncitizen and race is used as a proxy for that,” Thorn said.

A spokesperson for the Department of Homeland Security declined to comment on the specific legislation being proposed in Texas, but said the removal of noncitizens is the federal government’s responsibility.

“Generally speaking, the federal government — not individual states — is charged with determining how and when to remove noncitizens for violating immigration laws. State actions that conflict with federal law are invalid under the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution,” the spokesperson said.

Lawmakers have reviewed several versions of SB 4 and other similar proposals throughout the year, but have failed to send it to the governor’s desk in previous sessions. Hearings have been marked by strong opposition from Democrat and Republican infighting.

During a Senate floor vote on the bill last week, Republican state Sen. Brian Birdwell, who authored a previous version of the bill last session, said this version undermines the constitution by challenging the federal government’s jurisdiction over the removal of migrants.

“Members that is why all my attempts to carry this legislation and the bill language therein had the proper federal authority responsible for disposition and deportation of those that we detain,” said Birdwell.

He added that the bill would set a “terrible precedent” by violating the constitution.

“President Biden’s failure to obey his oath does not compel us to violate ours. Instead, it compels our federal representatives to constrain him and for the electorate to remove him in the coming year,” Birdwell said.

State Sen. Charles Perry, the current author of the bill, defended its legality.

“While I agree we are testing and pushing envelopes, the state has every right to protect its citizens, and this nation has every right to expect Texas to do that when called to do it,” said Perry.

Copyright © 2023, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.