[{"_1":2,"_87":-5,"_88":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":72,"_74":72},"mediaId",6167440,"mediaKeyId","5411113-95a262b77f2da81e0a1227e948dd0437","parentId",5411113,"title","Committee tables multiple subpoena motions during hearing on NGOs and border policy","audioSeconds",2497,"startMs",1975000,"endMs",4472000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5411113-95a262b77f2da81e0a1227e948dd0437&start=1975&end=4472","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5411113-95a262b77f2da81e0a1227e948dd0437/thumbnail_1975000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6167440/Committee-tables-multiple-subpoena-motions-during-hearing-on-NGOs-and-border-policy","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6167440-4e89936d71a02bed13f79a6b4fd708fc/orig.mp4?Expires=1771022317&Signature=doGjvsRUzlamQY-nmTwYQsYS0dE3W7AY1copqCswMAd6-LrlD90TEGlfmZmE0LYZGXeQ8qszCXIFJ0a4qmXccKdTUwnzxULktnJE~IXAGv4a3KSp~xEXMRqbd3xkpoWbV8A9ldaByH99UPtd95PXjJQiGiAVbdPT7pH~AdiPrBcLdYkDpn9ar76DArm33TC5bcu0s56E8Lxs7T-EsdPUrPIkdC-Dbuh0IfPoFO1Ej5wz9fuSIu1L8~UQQKX6eYxxAo7F5icb7JcJz2XZl6t-4FL-zgxEGKgur2rrCui26idCwY2SVxqGv-80tNv2HSo70KZLAJ3bQ46n0xm8e0p4Xg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","U.S. House Committee on Homeland Security","date","2025-07-16T20:49:49Z","article","Several members introduced or moved to subpoena current and former federal and state officials during the hearing. Committee leaders repeatedly treated those motions as privileged procedural questions and many were tabled following recorded roll calls.

Key recorded outcomes (motions to table):

- Motion to table appeal/challenge to the chair’s ruling concerning an opening witness (motion first moved during early testimony): Tabled by the committee; recorded tally reported in the hearing: 9 ayes, 8 noes (chair announced tally during roll call). The motion was reported as agreed to during the proceeding.

- Motion to table a subpoena for DHS officials referenced by Ranking Member Thompson (motion to subpoena — ranking member asked to subpoena “Department of Homeland Security secretary”): The motion to table was carried in a recorded vote later in the hearing; recorded tallies reported at different points in the transcript include 12 ayes, 11 noes and similar subsequent roll calls. Committee minutes show repeated privileged tabling motions and recorded roll calls during the hearing (see transcript roll‑call excerpts for full member votes).

- Multiple subsequent privileged motions to table subpoenas (including motions referencing subpoenas for the DHS inspector general, ICE leadership, and others) were presented and tabled during the hearing; several had recorded votes that produced tallies in the transcript (examples reported by the clerk and announced by the chair include recorded counts such as 12–11, 13–11, 14–12 and 16–12 on various procedural tablings at different points). Those tablings ended consideration of the associated subpoena requests during the session.

What the votes mean. Because the committee repeatedly treated the subpoena proposals as privileged and nondebatable motions to table, the effect during the hearing was to end immediate consideration of the named subpoenas. Committee members repeatedly requested recorded roll calls; the clerk recorded and the chair announced the tallies. Several members objected to the repeated tabling and to the chair’s practice of holding votes open while members returned from the floor.

Record and next steps. Each tabling motion withdrawn or agreed to on the floor terminates the immediate subpoena effort; members may reintroduce subpoenas or seek additional procedural routes to compel testimony. The hearing record remains open for 10 days for additional materials and follow‑up responses — and several members indicated they would pursue further oversight through additional letters, requests for agency documents or future hearing activity.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","An Inside Job: How NGOs Facilitated the Biden Border Crisis","oneSentenceSummary","During the hearing, members repeatedly moved to subpoena federal and state officials; the committee repeatedly voted to table those motions in privileged procedural actions recorded by roll call.","taxTitle","Homeland Security: House Committee, Standing Committees - House & Senate, Congressional Hearings Compilation, Legislative, Federal","taxId",1831,"location","","headline","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":72,"_74":72},6167445,"House Homeland Security hearing examines role of NGOs in border crisis and gaps in tracking unaccompanied children",22878,594000,23472000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5411113-95a262b77f2da81e0a1227e948dd0437&start=594&end=23472","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5411113-95a262b77f2da81e0a1227e948dd0437/thumbnail_594000.jpg","/articles/6167445/House-Homeland-Security-hearing-examines-role-of-NGOs-in-border-crisis-and-gaps-in-tracking-unaccompanied-children","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6167445-da08b0b77aee1d36bf1a556e86f38d53/orig.mp4?Expires=1771022317&Signature=FjPXoAymME7QxFS4T17mPzweIVXhxpyWKVk79~m63KUQ1Fr2Zz~Y3weKoKTGstH3ywOzVZl50mgeICcFfH360tNWX9eRWcHb-BTARIIOQGjYLD1TQiqEb6~mK97NO5vnpnMdksNlgHaLNq7~P41eAv9No4OglUerAHkx3gZuODJY~ZA-fAADv8BTrrt5Mq1jktp1Y7IRoAARTvENCQbEl3DW8ZmRO6JWL70rwFDHGeDGdNsofolszIUU~pN5Co8zVhOT3BDSjgNE6OY2Xx5uFHTitl70L3LOlujQjHfOaRVdqcaACdcMdDencsFvgV1krdy6Ew4wrXHY8KXUPoFXaA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The House Committee on Homeland Security held a contentious hearing to examine the role federally funded nongovernmental organizations played during what Republican members termed the “border crisis,” focusing on how grants and contracts were used and how unaccompanied children (UACs) were tracked after placement.

The hearing opened with Chairman Michael Guest saying the committee would \"examine the role that taxpayer supported nongovernmental agencies played in facilitating the border crisis under the Biden Harris administration,\" and alleging that FEMA grant programs and other federal funding were routed to NGOs that helped process and move migrants after release from custody.

Why it matters: Republican members and several witnesses described a system they said created both perverse incentives and accountability gaps — with large sums moving through FEMA and other programs to organizations that grew rapidly during the period of high migration. Democratic members and other witnesses objected to broad allegations that charities and faith-based organizations intentionally facilitated illegal conduct, and repeatedly warned the committee not to conflate the majority of humanitarian providers with actors accused of mismanagement.

Oversight and funding. Mike Howell, president of the Oversight Project, testified that FEMA’s Emergency Food and Shelter program and related shelter-and-services grants were used to place migrants in hotels and other temporary housing the government funded. Howell said his group’s research tracked cell-phone movement from a small sample of devices associated with service locations and found those devices reached many congressional districts. Howell characterized the system as a \"border industrial complex\" and said nonprofits that relied heavily on federal grants had seen large increases in revenue during the period under review.

Children and safeguards. Ali (Lehi) Hopper, president of Guard Against Trafficking, described field research, audits and interviews that she said showed failures in vetting sponsors, inadequate post‑placement follow up and instances of abuse. Hopper told the committee that, in her view, \"it was easier to sponsor a child than to adopt a dog,\" and said an HHS audit had found that many sponsor applications were fraudulent and that thousands of calls to a UAC welfare hotline went unanswered. When asked by members, Hopper cited an estimate she and her research partners reported that more than 325,000 children were, at some point, unaccounted for in placement records — a number she said came from compiled reports and program audits.

Allegations of misuse and weak documentation. Committee members and witnesses referenced multiple audits and news reports that found poor documentation for millions in grant spending, contracts awarded without bids, and steep increases in CEO compensation at some large providers. Howell and Hopper cited examples including Endeavors and Southwest Key (as named in testimony and reporting), and described auditors’ findings that raised questions about receipts, sponsor vetting, and living conditions at surge facilities.

Defense and disagreement. Democratic members, including Ranking Member Bennie Thompson, cautioned against broadbrush attacks on all NGOs and stressed that many faith‑based and secular nonprofits provide lawful, lifesaving services. Thompson said the committee had not invited some federal agency witnesses he would expect to see, such as FEMA officials, and argued that the hearing risked targeting religious organizations that perform humanitarian work.

Policy recommendations and next steps. Witnesses recommended several remedial steps repeatedly in testimony and questioning: standardized federal tracking for UAC placements, forensic audits of large contracts (Hopper urged audits of ORR contracts above specified thresholds), clawbacks for misspent funds, and stronger contractual requirements that recipients maintain records and permit oversight. Several members said legislation could be required to clarify data and reporting responsibilities when federal funds are issued for migrant shelter and placement.

What the record shows and what it does not. Committee members and witnesses used audits, IRS filings and news reporting as evidence of rapid revenue growth at some large contractors and gaps in sponsor vetting. The hearing record contains competing claims about the scale of abuse, the proportion of NGOs that mismanaged funds, and the legal reach of particular agencies; where claims were made in testimony, the article attributes them to those speakers rather than treating them as established fact.

The committee did not adopt policy at the hearing. Members on both sides announced intentions to pursue additional oversight, and several members moved or threatened subpoenas during the proceeding (see related “Votes at a glance” brief). The hearing record remains open for additional submissions and responses from witnesses and agencies.

Ending note: Members repeatedly returned to the same policy tension — how to ensure care for vulnerable migrants, including children, while tightening accountability for federal dollars and protecting lawful charities from politically motivated scrutiny. Several lawmakers said they planned to pursue legislation or oversight steps to address gaps in recordkeeping and sponsor vetting discussed in the hearing.","Witnesses and committee members clashed over whether federally funded nongovernmental organizations helped sustain mass migration at the U.S. southern border and whether program oversight failed to track and protect hundreds of thousands of unaccompanied children.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Committee tables multiple subpoena motions during hearing on NGOs and border policy

House Homeland Security hearing examines role of NGOs in border crisis and gaps in tracking unaccompanied children