As we continue addressing the consequences of those failed policies, we must ensure that our Northern border does not become the next weak link in our security posture. This hearing will provide an opportunity to hear directly from experts on the frontlines and identify the resources, technology, and authorities needed to support our law enforcement officers and agents and keep Americans safe.
Use Homeland Security Committee oversight to examine Northern border security challenges and identify the resources, technology, and authorities needed to support law enforcement officers and agents.
Occurrences
Evidence
legacy_unverified · Source version not recorded · locator unknown
The House Homeland Security Committee listed a June 30, 2026 joint hearing by the Border Security and Enforcement and Counterterrorism and Intelligence subcommittees titled “Northern Exposure: Assessing the Evolving Threat Landscape at America’s Northern Border,” with witnesses from U.S. Border Patrol/CBP, CBP Office of Field Operations, ICE Homeland Security Investigations, and GAO.
legacy_unverified · Source version not recorded · locator unknown
The committee said Subcommittee Chairman Michael Guest delivered an opening statement at a hearing on Northern border security challenges, including geography, terrain, and personnel, technology, and infrastructure gaps. Guest said the hearing would examine progress, identify remaining gaps, and determine what authorities, resources, and oversight are needed; he also said Congress must ensure law enforcement has the personnel, infrastructure, and technology needed to protect the Northern border.
Assessments
Guest promised to use Homeland Security Committee oversight to examine Northern border security challenges and identify needed resources, technology, and authorities. During his current federal House term, his Homeland Security Border Security and Enforcement Subcommittee held a June 30, 2026 Northern border oversight hearing with relevant law enforcement and GAO witnesses, and Guest personally framed the hearing around identifying gaps in personnel, infrastructure, technology, authorities, resources, and oversight. That directly satisfies the oversight commitment, even though it was an oversight action rather than enactment of a new policy.