The Volokh Conspiracy
Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent
Customs and Border Protection Chief Refuses to Step Down (UPDATED)
The Biden Administration has reportedly asked for Commissioner Magnus's resignation, but he has refused to go.
(See Update Below)
Customs and Border Protection Commissioner Chris Magnus is under fire. Migrant encounters along the southern border are increasing and his handling of the border has has been criticized by members of Congress and officials within his own agency, some of who are threatening to quit.
Yesterday, Politico reported, Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas told Magnus to resign or he would be fired, but Magnus has refused to resign. In response, the Politico accounts notes, DHS has sought to remove some of Magnus's authority until he is replaced.
From the story:
Magnus was told on Wednesday by Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas that he should either resign or be dismissed and, so far, the CBP chief has refused to step down, according to the four people.
Some executive assistant commissioners at CBP have indicated they would leave the agency if Magnus does not resign, according to one of the current DHS officials and the former DHS official.
Mayorkas has since shifted Magnus' duties and responsibilities to his deputy secretary, John Tien, and has deputy CBP commissioner Troy Miller, a career government official, running the agency's day-to-day operations, according to three of the people.
One of the current officials said all CBP decisions now must first go through the DHS front office. In addition, all of Magnus' direct reports are reporting to Tien and Miller, according to one of the other officials.
"I want to make this clear: I have no plans to resign as C.B.P. commissioner," Mr. Magnus, the head of the agency, said in a statement shared with The New York Times. He said the Department of Homeland Security cut off his access to his Customs and Border Protection Twitter account. Mr. Magnus, 62, said he intends to go to work on Monday.
UPDATE: Magnus has resigned.
Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Why not just follow through on their threat to fire him? Is this some civil service position which can't be just summarily fired? The only other idea I had was a hangover from Andrew Johnson's impeachment and I'm not curious enough to actually read the reports. I guess government, like God, moves in mysterious ways.
Firing him is bad optics. That would be admitting he is screwing up whereas if he resigns it can be swept under the rug.
But he isn't screwing up. He's competently executing an unpopular policy.
They're getting rid of him to replace him with somebody else who will execute the same unpopular policy, but the switch will let them pretend for some time that all the problems they deliberately engineered were one guy who was screwing up. The new guy will just be struggling to repair the damage...
Looks like he's not keen on being the fall guy; hope he kept good records of the orders he was given.
they could only blame it on orange hair for 2 years
Some might see the results of the 2022 elections and realize that just because they don't like things doesn't mean those things are actually unpopular. But not Brett!
Other people might realize that if the policies were popular, they could admit to pursuing them, and wouldn't NEED to blame them on some fall guy's incompetence.
The 2022 election was not a referendum about border security.
It did reflect the extent to which the American public has been deceived or bought off -- with money borrowed from our children -- by lying Democrat politicians and media goons.
I have to admit, I'd thought that half emptying the Strategic Petroleum reserve right before the election to drive down gas prices wouldn't work, because it was so transparent, and everybody would understand prices were going to go back up after the election.
That was pretty stupid of me.
The 2022 election wasn't a referendum on ANYTHING, which is why the results were so meh. The GOP establishment, back in control of the party at last, didn't want a referendum election, (Because you have to run on doing something to get one of those.) didn't think they needed a referendum election, because of inflation and it being midterms.
That was pretty stupid of them. Or maybe not, perhaps they didn't really want the majority all that badly, having it comes with responsibility, after all.
Well, with the Senate still in the Democrats' hands, the GOP's House majority being tiny enough that the RINOs can hand all the important votes to the Democrats, and Biden increasingly not bothering to pretend he needs legislation to pursue his policies, I'm not terribly optimistic about the state the country will be in two years from now. And he's saved half the Reserve for the 2024 elections, no reason that shouldn't work again.
I think the GOP just blew their last chance to stop the Democrats. Erdogan's train is now stopped in a station Democrats like, and they've got the next two years to spike the engine so it won't be pulling out again.
From big tech layoffs to the Diesel shortage with a general angst thrown into the mix, I can see the bleep hitting the fan in early January, and 2023 being a very bad year.
2022 hasn’t been great. Every trip to the supermarket and gas station hurts a little more.
Reg. gas approaching $4.00/gal. in north NJ.
2023 isn't an election year, though, is it?
1979 wasn't an election year, either.
Does anyone on the planet have the slightest doubt that if the GOP had actually done well in these midterm elections, that Brett would be saying that it was a referendum about Biden's performance and the democratic agenda?
Some might see the results of the 2022 elections and realize that just because they don’t like things doesn’t mean those things are actually unpopular. But not Brett!
One would have to be pretty stupid (or just a blind partisan...but I repeat myself) to draw any conclusions on the popularity (or lack thereof) of the WH's border security policies and the outcome of a mid-term election...especially when most polls show the public heavily in the "Disapprove" camp when compared with the "Approve" one on the question of Biden's border policies.
Magnus was confirmed on December 7, 2021, by the Senate 50-47 on a virtually party-line vote. (Republican Susan Collins voted for confirmation, the only senator to cross party lines on the vote). There were several controversies around Magnus, who was the Tuscon police chief at the time, but the main argument against him was, frankly, that he was a terrible law enforcement officer who would be lax on immigration enforcement.
If Biden fires him, less than a year into his job, it would be an admission that the Republicans were right.
Civil servants have killed vets in the past for bonuses and they couldn't be fired.
I thought you were talking about the Bonus Army in 1932.
Not MacArthur’s finest hour.
Nor Hoover’s, who should have fired MacArthur on the spot, saving Harry Truman the trouble of doing it 20 years later.
Presidential appointees that have to be confirmed by the Senate aren't eligible for civil service protections.
The Tenure of Office Act was repealed in 1887. Remember that Nixon's "Saturday Night Massacre" was NOT an article of impeachment.
And as to optics, this is worse than outright firing him.
What I remember is that any time Dr. Ed makes a statement starting with the phrase "remember that," it is wrong.
https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artII-S4-4-7/ALDE_00000695/
The theory is presumably that the Saturday Night Massacre was covered by Article I, item 4: "interfering or endeavoring to interfere with the conduct of investigations by the Department of Justice of the United States, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Office of Watergate Special Prosecution Force, and Congressional Committees".
Yes. And also Article 2, Item 5:
"In disregard of the rule of law, he knowingly misused the executive power by interfering with agencies of the executive branch, including the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Criminal Division, and the Office of Watergate Special Prosecution Force, of the Department of Justice, and the Central Intelligence Agency, in violation of his duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed."
Because he can then sue for wrongful termination. They're trying to scapegoat the border situation on him when I guarantee he has receipts that the majority of policy was decided by Mayorkas and the White House.
Doesn't he "serve at the pleasure of"?
he's an SES. I don't think that civil service rule applies.
Magnus was chief of police in Tucson before he got picked for his current job.
He was horrible. Crime went up, response times went way up, morale went way down, officers left/retired, officers were hung out to swing in the wind for doing their job when wokersters disapproved.
He was monumental unqualified, never having run anything near the size or scope of Customs and Border Protection Commissioner.
He was chosen for his pro immigrant stance and being Hispanic.
I was in Tucson and saw just how incompetent he was.
I was not aware that incompetence in public service was unusual or a particular reason for being fired. Being noticed in a bad way might be though.
If Biden wants him gone I don't see why he doesn't just have the press secretary go on Fox News and announce the termination.
That's how Trump would have done it. Did do it, actually.
Does anybody still expect the Biden administration to show competence in anything? Giving this guy that ultimatum without having a resignation letter drafted for him, and without being willing to walk him out of the office right then, is just another example of how Mayorkas's team half-asses whatever they do.
Mayorkas should be following him out the door.
Did it while he was out of the office on a trip. It's actually an industry standard procedure, to make sure somebody can't do any mischief on their way out.
Telling somebody you're firing them, and taking your own sweet time of it, is madness, unless you're all just play acting.
"He said the Department of Homeland Security cut off his access to his Customs and Border Protection Twitter account. Mr. Magnus, 62, said he intends to go to work on Monday."
Seen this in hostile takeovers many times. Guessing your keycard doesn't work either and nobody is going to side with the about to be fired guy over the new boss, everybody is one paycheck away from transferring loyalties. Enjoy standing outside the building on Monday.
Maybe he can get his own Twitter account to make his case.
On another note, why does any government agency have a Twitter account? Official or otherwise.
The same reason anyone else does?
It does have legitimacy on the local level, eg "Major fire at 5th & Main, avoid area. Use Elm Street instead."
Not being contentious, but why is that? I'm not question a personal account, only an "official" government account.
Bumble,
I think Ed gave an excellent example of why an agency might want one official account. One that people could go to for the official information.
Anyone know how to unflag?
Might as well wait to be fired officially as long as you're still being paid.
THEY SHUT DOWN HIS TWITTER ACCOUNT?
I am utterly shocked. How cruel! What next, thumbscrews? The rack? Being tied down and forced to listen to Lionel Ritchie for hours on end?
No, only 'All Night Long' 🙂 = Being tied down and forced to listen to Lionel Ritchie for hours on end?
Good one.
Magnus is giving off a definite Michael Peroutka vibe.
Perhaps Peroutka and Magnus can get together for a nice lunch next week, and compare conspiracies.
Imagine being suspicious of electoral misconduct in Maryland? What’s next, suspicious of electoral misconduct in Chicago?
Sounds like Magnus is being made a fall-guy for Biden’s failures enforcing immigration laws written by Ted Kennedy.
How can you possibly mis-handle an open border?
Maybe because it’s not an open border you loon.
Only an mostly open border. Good catch!
"He said the Department of Homeland Security cut off his access to his Customs and Border Protection Twitter account."
In the old days they'd have changed the locks on the executive washroom.
Not letting enough people get across the border?
I’m looking forward to impeachment hearings for Mayorkas this summer.
DHS is a typical Democrat nest of incompetence, with typical Democrat intentions to do anything except serve the public.
DHS is not really known for leaning towards Dems, chief.
Troops on the ground are mainly conservatives, political appointees and upper echelon are pretty much liberal.
Other than explicit politicals that is not the DHS’s reputation.
Democrats did to DHS what Iowahawk tells us they do:
1. Identify a respected institution.
2. kill it.
3. gut it.
4. wear its carcass as a skin suit, while demanding respect.
No one has to pretend to honor DHS as if it were still pro-American.
No evidence of that tale of Dem scheming provided.
I demanded no respect for DHS.
I don’t think it’s very good and would prefer we got rid of it myself and went back to the status quo before 9-11. It’s too disparate and agglomeration to have a clear mission.
You just hear border is in there and weave a whole fan fiction bit of nonsense from just that.
What? Got a cite for that Sarcastro? Because the data available for political donations by federal unions and employees shows that the DHS leans very Democrat.
In 2016, 75% of employee and 90% of union donations went to Democrats.
In 2020, 70% of employee and 90% of union donations went to Democrats.
Data comes from OpenSecrets.org, so you can check it yourself. Chief.
I mean I said known for; it’s reputation is pretty right.
And union stats are going to be incomplete and sample biased.
The reputation could be undeserved, but yiu haven’t shown that.
"Known for" by whom, based on what?
"It's reputation" amongst whom, based on what?
I have no idea what "union stats" you think are going to be "incomplete or sample biased", since what OpenSecrets reports is basically FEC filings - there is no "sample" involved. Unless you are accusing the DHS employees and unions of fraudulently contributing to campaigns under false identities?
While you may think I haven't shown "the reputation" to be undeserved, I've done far more to show that you are wrong than you have done to show that you are correct.
By Feds based on Feds I talk to, and just hearing things and meeting people from in DC.
Oh, boy! "Feds" have told you rumors and gossip - that certainly is more telling than multiple years and tens of thousands of FEC filings of political donations showing that DHS employees support Democrats two or three to one over Republicans.
Or maybe DHS is just like every other civilian agency in the Federal government, and leans Democrat.
I've no idea if he is good at his job, or not.
But I don't care at all that other administrators and bureaucrats are threatening to leave, if he doesn't. What about rank and file officers?
First step, I can’t tell if this guy is a political or no.
A quick search finds news articles discussing his being sworn in after being confirmed by the Senate. So he's not Civil Service...
SES
SES are still mostly civil servants.
So, he's political...but since the politicos want him out, he must be doing something that annoys them.
That right there is a good reason to support him
Unless he is being fired to frustrate Congressional investigations.
Reverse barometer is tempting, but simplistic.
he resigned
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/biden-immigration-official-resigns-being-ordered-quit-fired
Classic management technique. Take away their real job, and set them at a table in the basement to count paperclips until they resign.
I dunno. If you believe "employment at will" is a good thing, he got as good as any employee deserves.
He looked around the table and realized he was the sucker.
Why would any Democrat need to be accountable? They've just successfully stolen an election, this time, in Nevada. All they have to do is "find" enough provisional and mail in ballots after the election is over to swing the result. Now that they know it works, they'll continue doing it.
C’mon that’s partisanship talking. This is Clark County after all. If you can’t trust casino bosses who can you trust?
Weirdly, they forgot to do this for governor. It's strange how Democrats keep stealing elections by altering ballots / creating fake ballots, but can't remember that there's more than one office being decided on those ballots.
The theory is a bit more sophisticated than that. The line is that the work needed scales with the number of offices you enter on the ballot, (This actually is true for some approaches to vote fraud.) so they concentrate on just one or two key races.
The thing to look for is a lot of ballots that aren't filled out except for one or two races.
Now, I'm not saying this actually happened in Nevada. I think what actually happened is that the Republicans blew it, thinking that all they needed was Biden screwing up, that they didn't have to go out and give people a reason to vote for them by promising to do popular stuff, and being specific about it.
But the actual theories aren't as crude as you're making them out to be.
Why would the work scale if it’s all computer magic?
How much of a discount do you get for buying straw men in bulk?
Yes. In all seriousness, I think the biggest issue is that the Democrats are very good at getting people to apply for mail in ballots and going door to door to collect them. It's harder to get people to go to the polls on election day (or any other day).
I also think Republicans (myself included) just how sick and deranged such a large portion of the population is that they would vote solely based on abortion. "Yes, the Democrats are letting our borders get invaded, inflation is out of control, I'm worried about the economy, but I just can't stand the idea that I can't kill my baby if I need to!"
Don't forget the kind of scheme revealed by Orange County (Florida) commissioner Cynthia Harris, where ballot harvesters "help" make sure people fill out their ballots the way that Democrats want them to -- steaming open the ballot security envelopes if necessary.
But, but wouldn't that be illegal?
(sarc)
Yes. The thing to remember is that liberals are evil, amoral people who will stop at nothing to implement their perverted ideology. In their despicable minds, the ends justify the means.
But the actual theories aren’t as crude as you’re making them out to be.
As I read, “the actual theories,” the room fills with a pungent aroma of burning insulation.
The thing to look for is a lot of ballots that aren’t filled out except for one or two races.
What kind of person wouldn’t vote for the folks they know about, and blank the others? Why would you do anything else?
"What kind of person wouldn’t vote for the folks they know about, and blank the others?"
Virtually everybody?
The real issue here is that it's always heavily blue cities that are very slow, which means, even if there is nothing untoward going on, it looks bad.
The laws should be changed. Every county must submit by midnight that night or the votes are all disqualified. So if blue counties screw around, their voters are disenfranchised. Too bad, too sad.
I've never heard anyone doing that, ever. I've heard of people leaving a race or two blank, but not the entire ballot.
In any case, I think what made the difference here was student loan "relief" aka free shit army, and abortion.
Ironically, the election demonstrated just why the founders were right to limit voting to white men who own land.
He resigned this morning.
Of all the political news during the past week, this (with DeSantis, of course) is what the Conspirators find noteworthy?
It must have been a great election for America.
Carry on, clingers.
...it is a function of the lack of policing and subsequent lack of actions by the criminal justice system.
Cue Law and Order intro.
From your linked article:
"It was designed to test the assumption that the presence (or potential presence) of police officers in marked cars reduced the likelihood of a crime being committed."
Not quite the same thing that most people think of as "policing". You know like arresting those who actually commit crimes.
Yes, but firing the people who are actually responsible would be an admission that core Democratic policies have backfired.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/06/05/va-scandal-sloan-gibson-phoenix/10033543/
Why are the bootlickers the most ignorant ones?
https://www.stripes.com/news/va-abandons-law-aimed-at-firing-employees-1.415136
"The VA has struggled to fire or reprimand a series of executives charged with misconduct since the scandal. Its announcement Friday left lawmakers frustrated and scrambling for new reform legislation on employee firings."
Perhaps I’m being obtuse. But how does the fact that 50 years ago, a study concluded that police departments weren’t effectively investigating crime and should change their approach support your intuitively dubious premise that “much of the crime in a city is [not] a function of policing”?
No. Given the enormous number of people who are crossing the border illegally, the way that this guy's agency practically welcomes those illegal border crossers to the country, and the comments up-thread about Magnus's prior management failures, I think there is plenty of blame to be shared by all of Magnus, Mayorkas, and Biden.
Fail. It does nothing of the sort and is hopelessly out of date.
Guess you figured no one would read it.
“The VA has struggled to fire or reprimand a series of executives charged with misconduct since the scandal. Its announcement Friday left lawmakers frustrated and scrambling for new reform legislation on employee firings.”
wtf can't you read
What's so funny is how something you have never heard of until now you come in here and act like an expert.
"Former Phoenix VA director's firing overturned by federal appeals court"
https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/arizona-investigations/2017/05/10/despite-criminal-conviction-former-phoenix-va-director-sharon-helman-hearing/315044001/
lol unreal u ppl r so stupid
Oh come on.
Whatever bad look during this guy would cause, that ship has already sailed.
This is about personalities not optics at this point.
I know you are programmed to look for partisan attack avenues in everything but you are really stretching.
or at least 'relatively conservative'
Sometimes it helps to read past the headline.
https://www.rand.org/pubs/papers/P6352.html
Read the link you provided. It deals with how police investigate crimes, not policing and subsequent prosecution. Also, it dates from 1973-1979 which makes it hopelessly outdated.
FYI
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11415575/Sheriff-California-county-STOP-daytime-patrols-catastrophic-staffing-shortage.html
As usual, you have nothing productive, accurate, or even coherent to say.
Struggled to fire people who literally killed 40 vets.
Eat a bag of dicks pedant.
Helman's firing was ultimately upheld not because people died or because she defrauded the government, but because she didn't disclose money she got from third parties. Because apparently that's the most important thing to the federal class.
No she had it spot on.
No one can disagree with you in your world, there are just those bribed to vote that way.
Exact same thinking as you are an irresistible god of sex, and every woman who resists you is a lesbian.
I know you are programmed to lie and irrationally defend the gender-confused troll, but there's a big difference between people finding me attractive and people being bought off with promises of unconstitutional loan forgiveness, irresponsible releases from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, and helicopter money that will further exacerbate inflation.
Sure, it's still higher than before. But the Democrats count on people having short memories, it's central to most of their political strategies, and you can't say they've found that assumption false.
In both cases you have decided on the motives of those who disagree with you such that you are the attractive, noble, and smart one.
Sarcastr0, that's exactly what you do to Brett regularly, (mis)attribute his motives, I can only presume because yours are noble and smart.