Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) ignored the pleas of his Senate Judiciary Committee colleagues and attempted, in the wake of the Islamic State (ISIL) Paris massacre, to rush through the chamber citizenship-stripping legislation.
The Republican presidential candidate attempted on Thursday morning to advance the Expatriate Terrorists Act on the Senate floor by unanimous consent. He was stopped by Senate Minority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.)
The judiciary committee had held a hearing earlier in the morning to advance the legislation through normal procedure, but that motion was “heldover”–a common move meaning the panel will take up the measure next week.
“We’re in the eleventh month of this Congress and I think every bill that has been voted out of here has either been done by a wide bipartisan majority or has been done by consent,” Senate Judiciary Committee Chair Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) said at the conclusion of the brief meeting. “And I hope to continue working that way.”
Unanimous consent procedures allow the Senate to quickly advance a bill, but can be stopped by a single lawmaker. Cruz attempted to use the motion to advance his bill when he first introduced it, in September 2014. He was thwarted then by Sen. Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii).
Ranking member Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) told Grassley Thursday morning that he’d “work with you on these bills,” bemoaning that Cruz “wanted to circumvent the committee and ask unanimous consent on the Senate floor.”
“He did not show up to do that, but I understand he may do that today,” Leahy added. “I want us to get back to having the committee work and actually talk about the various issues.”
The committee also agreed to holdover a nuclear security bill cosponsored by Grassley and Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.).
The Expatriate Terrorist Act of 2015, written by Cruz and co-sponsored by Grassley, would make grounds for loss of US citizenship, among other acts, taking an oath to foreign terrorist organization (FTO), serving with one, or providing “material assistance” to one.
It would also prevent the Secretary of State from issuing passports to those who belong to or are “attempting to become a member” of an FTO.
White House Press Secretary declined to take a position on the bill when Cruz first introduced it in September 2015.
In previous hearings, however, both Secretary of State John Kerry and Secretary of Homeland Security Jeh Johnson questioned its usefulness.
The Secretary of State already has the right to revoke Americans’ passports. Kerry most prominently did it in 2013, when he briefly left Edward Snowden stranded at Sheremetyevo International Airport, just outside of Moscow.
In September 2014, Kerry told Congress that he hadn’t revoked the US passports of American citizens believed to be fighting with ISIL in Syria or Iraq due to concerns the move could derail criminal investigations.
“What I want to make certain is anybody who has a passport and returns, returns in handcuffs, not through customs with a passport,” he said.
Later that year, a State adviser told a House committee that the department only rescinds passports on the recommendations of law enforcement officials, and it hadn’t received “requests from law enforcement authorities to cancel passports of [ISIL] or foreign fighters.”
“This is something we would only do in relatively rare and unique circumstances,” he also said.
In April, Johnson told Cruz that he believed the legislation would not create “the most effective tool” for counterterrorism. He has also said last year that “the suspension of passports should be considered on a case-by-case basis.”
In April 2014, the House Foreign Affairs Committee also advanced similar but more narrow legislation targeting ISIL members, and Rep. Alan Grayson (D-Fla.) objected on civil rights grounds.
“The Supreme Court has recognized that there is a Constitutional right to travel. And I think that comes directly from the right of freedom of assembly under the First Amendment,” he said. “Therefore, in my view, and I hope this becomes part of the record on this, I don’t think that you can promptly deny someone a passport or the right to travel without clear and convincing evidence.”
When Cruz introduced the legislation, a Georgetown University law professor and volunteer for the Center for Constitutional Rights blasted it, describing US citizenship as an inalienable right
“Just as one could not strip an accused criminal of his rights to a jury trial against his will, or strip a member of a church of his religious freedom against his will, so Congress cannot strip citizens of their citizenship against their will,” David Cole argued.
