Last night, Greta Van Susteren interviewed the chief I.C.E. director, John Morton:



It’s all about money and limited resources. All of I.C.E. funding comes from Congress. If you want them to do more, write to your congressman and throw more money their way. Morton says they will do what they can with the resources available. He is trying to make the money work more sensibly. Nothing much has worked in the past, you have to admit.

According to the Washington Times:

New guidance telling U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents to focus on apprehending terrorists and criminals has many of ICE’s rank-and-file agents wondering who then is responsible for tracking down and detaining the millions of other illegal border-crossers and fugitive aliens now in the country.

The new guidelines are outlined in a June 29 memo from Assistant Secretary John Morton, who heads the agency, to all ICE employees regarding the apprehension, detention and removal of illegal immigrants, noting that the agency “only has resources to remove approximately 400,000 aliens per year, less than 4 percent of the estimated illegal-alien population in the United States.”

Mr. Morton said ICE needed to focus wisely on the limited resources Congress had provided the agency and would “prioritize the apprehension and removal of aliens who only pose a threat to national security and/or public safety, such as criminals and terrorists.”


“With this prioritization, we will ensure that our work has the greatest possible impact and most effectively advances our mission,” Mr. Morton said, adding that the new guidelines were necessary “in light of the large number of administrative violations the agency is charged with addressing and the limited enforcement resources the agency has available.”

Under the directive, ICE officials are authorized under a three-level priority system to use enforcement personnel, detention space and removal resources if they are assured that any deportations that do occur “promote ICE’s highest enforcement priorities; namely, national security, public safety and border security.”

Listed as the agency’s top priority, according to the memo, are illegal immigrants who pose a danger to national security or a risk to public safety; those convicted of violent crimes, both felons and repeat offenders; those older than 16 who participated in organized criminal gangs; and those with outstanding criminal warrants.

Described in the memo as lesser priorities are foreign nationals caught crossing the border illegally or using phony immigration documents to gain entry, and those identified as fugitives after failing to show up for immigration or deportation hearings.

To read more, to to Washington Times

This article is long and complicated. Contributors should read it for themselves and consider printing it out. Hopefully the BOCS will familiarize themselves with the contents. It might not be what you want to hear but its the way it is. Immigration enforcement costs money and the dollars just aren’t there. Without the cooperation of the federal government, it doesn’t matter what the states do unless they are ready to pony up and pay for the jail costs themselves.

15 Thoughts to “Greta Van Susteren: John Morton Discloses New I.C.E. Rules”

  1. Hopefully the contributors, especially those who keep calling for ICE to do something will read what is here on the blog, watch the video and check out the times link.

    There is critical information here. You might want to re-evaluate how much debt you want to lock your state into paying because ICE has its priorities.

    Make sure you know the plan.

  2. If their resources are so limited, then why are they fighting the help that they would get from states? Let the locals pick up the illegal aliens, criminals or not. Let ICE spend the money on the process to deport them.

  3. Wolverine

    The President is against amnesty? I wish Mr. Morton would have defined what he meant by “amnesty.”

  4. …….Because they couldn’t play by the rules in place…re AZ. They got in the fed’s face. You are a southerner. You know what happens if you get in the face of the feds.

    Actually, to simply describe SB 1070 as a little help from the states is disingenuous. When I say, you aren’t doing your job therefore I am going to do it for you…it isn’t a good opening line for creating a satisfactory partnership. This wasn’t a partnership, it was defiance.

    So this is what it has boiled down to…picking up illegal aliens, even if they aren’t criminals. That reminds me a little bit too much of something else…in another time. I am not happy with that concept, much less with turning the job over to every yahoo sheriff’s department in the land.

  5. Good thing I captured the Greta video rather than the Cavuto video. He was rude and cut Morton off every change he got…perhaps 40 times.

    I would imagine that amnesty meant the standard definition, unlike what is thrown around all the time. Amnesty generally means forgiveness without penalty…unless you are speaking with the anti-immigration crowd.

  6. Second-Alamo

    Picking up illegals even if they aren’t criminals is called immigration enforcement. It’s the law, and if we had enough agents it would be the norm, however that is sadly not the case. Amnesty generally means forgiveness without penalty, and that’s the problem! So if enough people break a law they should then be granted Amnesty? I don’t understand the whole concept. I never understood why those who fled to Canada to escape the draft in the 60’s were welcomed back into the country either. Neither group are true Americans in my opinion!

  7. I don’t consider a fine and jumping through hoops ‘amnesty.’

    I don’t like the idea of rounding up people who are doing nothing wrong. I think too much needs to be fixed with our immigration law and practices to justify just rounding people up. I understand it is our right to do that….but there is something about it that makes me ill at ease.

    I have mixed emotions about those who fled to Canada to avoid the draft. I understand why they did it. However, they made a choice and I don’t think they should have been allowed back without some penalty simply because there are 50,000 plus names on that wall. Lots of someones died while those folks were living in Canada. I am not sure they should have been allowed back at all. How many of those whose names are on the wall would have liked to have been given the opportunity to live to a ripe old age in Canada?

  8. I can’t leave this Canada thing alone, SA. I think those who went to Canada did a far worse thing that those who come in to this county to earn a living AND BEHAVE THEMSELVES.

    I understand Canada. In fact, there are situtations where I might have considered sending my son to Canada to avoid a war. However, that move also bears some serious consequences–like never being able to come back. In a draft situation, the randomness of situation just changes the playing field. Leaving is cheating someone or something. You are letting others down–other people who don’t want to go any more than you do but who feel duty bound.

    Not so sure I would have been willing to send my son to Iraq if he were the right age to be sent. (Thank goodness no draft) That war was so fundamentally bogus. However, if our government says go….

    Sometimes its difficult to distinguish between honor to country and honor to country. How do we differentiate?

  9. Second-Alamo

    MH, the only reason ’rounding up people’ makes you feel ill at ease is because there are SO MANY! If we were talking about rounding up several thousand, then given the size of the US population it probably wouldn’t appear so intense. Had we been ’rounding up people’ long before now we wouldn’t be having this national PROBLEM.

    As far as Amnesty, how about applying your sentiments about the draft doggers to those entering the country illegally while others do the honorable thing and go through the legal process? It isn’t that much different except for the possible involvement of death. Where does all this fairness come into play? Make them pay a penalty for sure, but how do you enforce that? Same problem of enforcement all over again, and just think of the cost of administering a process of tracking them down, ensuring they pay, and then going after them if they don’t. Much cheaper to deport them don’t you think? Eventually we will be looking at another Amnesty, but without penalty, because again we can’t afford to enforce the original Amnesty that calls for a penalty. Face it, we’re screwed unless with prevent the ability to earn a living (for illegals that is) here in this country, but the bleeding hearts will point to the children and there you go again!

  10. Second-Alamo

    Doggers, did I say doggers? Well I meant dodgers, and no not the baseball team!

  11. If I had evidence that the legal process worked, I would give that more consideration. I know first hand from scores of people that it does not work unless a person has some outside pull.

    I think most illegal immigrants would gladly do what is necessary to get themselves legal including paying fines. Those who don’t want to be bothered then run the risk of expulsion. Perhaps the commraderie seen now would be less if you just paid 15 grand to get all your family on the right path and some slob down the street didn’t.

    The plans I have seen don’t involve tracking people down to force them to do the right thing. It would be voluntary and those who didn’t would be removed. No one would feel sorry for them if they hadn’t at least registered and started the process.

    Having some compassion for children doesn’t make a person a bleeding heart.

    No amnesty calls for penalties. If it does, then it isn’t amnesty…by definition.

    When immigrants married to American citizens…birth American citizens…can’t get a status adjustment, something is wrong. When an immigrant married to a US soldier who has been here since being a toddler can’t get a status adjustment for years, something is wrong. When an American citizen can’t come back to the USA with his immigrant wife who he met here because she overstated her visa at some point, then something is wrong.

    These are not isolated incidents. Immigration reform needs to take place.

    That immigration reform also needs to include impact aid for localities that have been hard hit by immigrants who are following the work. It doesn’t have to be this way.

  12. Most importantly, supervisors like Corey Stewart don’t have to vote for developments that will attract new immigrants to the area just so he will have something to rail about.

    Why do people keep falling for this trick? Again and again and again and again.

    He throws out the immigrant magnet and they come…and he howls about them ….once the houses are finished and he has campaign money….and some of you just vote him back in office because he howls about immigration.

    Primal scream!!!!!!!! Don’t listen to me. Listen to NTK. He is one of your own.

  13. SA, I knew what you meant. Its early.

  14. Second-Alamo

    We can build houses in this country without hiring illegals, and if we can’t then things are worse than I feared! See ya.

  15. Can and will are 2 different things. We won’t as long as developers use subcontractors who want to go on the cheap. How you want things to be isn’t how they often are.

Comments are closed.