Border Security

"Federal law authorizes the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to construct barriers along the U.S. borders to deter illegal crossings. DHS is also required to construct reinforced fencing along at least 700 miles of the land border with Mexico (a border that stretches 1,933 miles). Congress has not provided a deadline for DHS to meet this 700-mile requirement, and as of the date of this report, fencing would need to be deployed along nearly 50 additional miles to satisfy the 700-mile requirement. Nor has Congress provided guidelines regarding the specific characteristics of fencing or other physical barriers (e.g., their height or material composition) deployed along the border, beyond specifying that required fencing must be reinforced."

"The United States and Canada are deeply interconnected by history, geography, and our people. We have the largest bilateral trading relationship in the world, with two-way trade in goods and services of over $700 billion in 2012, supporting millions of jobs in each country. The United States and Canada also share the longest common border in the world, touching three oceans. Our shared border is more than a simple geographical boundary; it is also the site of more than 100 ports of entry, doors from one country to the other, where the efficient movement of people and goods is crucial to the daily lives of our citizens, the health of our communities and to the competitiveness of our economies. The United States and Canada have a long tradition of working together to promote security and facilitate trade and travel across our borders, ensuring that they remain open to legitimate trade and travel and closed to terrorists, criminals, and illegal or unauthorized goods. This strong partnership continues. The 'Beyond the Border Declaration: A Shared Vision for Perimeter Security and Economic Competitiveness' and its accompanying 'Action Plan,' announced by President Obama and Prime Minister Harper in 2011, deepen and institutionalize this cooperation at and away from the shared border."

"In January and March 2017, the President issued a series of executive orders related to border security and immigration. The orders direct federal agencies to take a broad range of actions with potential resource implications. For example, Executive Order 13767 instructs DHS to construct a wall or other physical barriers along the U.S. southern border and to hire an additional 5,000 U.S. Border Patrol agents. Executive Order 13768 instructs federal agencies, including DHS and DOJ [Department of Justice], to ensure that U.S immigration law is enforced against all removable individuals and directs ICE to hire an additional 10,000 immigration officers. Executive Order 13780 directs agencies to develop a uniform baseline for screening and vetting standards and procedures; and established nationality-based entry restrictions with respect to visa travelers for a 90-day period, and refugees for 120 days. GAO [Government Accountability Office] was asked to review agencies' implementation of the executive orders and related spending. This report addresses (1) actions DHS, DOJ, and State have taken, or plan to take, to implement provisions of the executive orders; and (2) resources to implement provisions of the executive orders, particularly funds DHS, DOJ, and State have obligated, expended, or shifted. GAO reviewed agency planning, tracking, and guidance documents related to the orders, as well as budget requests, appropriations acts, and internal budget information. GAO also interviewed agency officials regarding actions and budgetary costs associated with implementing the orders."

"Border enforcement is a core element of the Department of Homeland Security's effort to control unauthorized migration, with the U.S. Border Patrol (USBP) within the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) as the lead agency along most of the border. Border enforcement has been an ongoing subject of congressional interest since the 1970s, when unauthorized immigration to the United States first registered as a serious national problem; and border security has received additional attention in the years since the terrorist attacks of 2001. [...] Enhanced border enforcement also may have contributed to a number of secondary costs and benefits. To the extent that border enforcement successfully deters unauthorized entries, such enforcement may reduce border-area violence and migrant deaths, protect fragile border ecosystems, and improve the quality of life in border communities. But to the extent that migrants are not deterred, the concentration of enforcement resources on the border may increase border area violence and migrant deaths, encourage unauthorized migrants to find new ways to enter and to remain in the United States for longer periods of time, damage border ecosystems, harm border-area businesses and the quality of life in border communities, and strain U.S. relations with Mexico and Canada."

"The United States confronts a wide array of threats at U.S. borders, ranging from terrorists who may have weapons of mass destruction, to transnational criminals smuggling drugs or counterfeit goods, to unauthorized migrants intending to live and work in the United States. Given this diversity of threats, how may Congress and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) set border security priorities and allocate scarce enforcement resources? In general, DHS's answer to this question is organized around risk management, a process that involves risk assessment and the allocation of resources based on a cost-benefit analysis. This report focuses on the first part of this process by identifying border threats and describing a framework for understanding risks at U.S. borders. DHS employs models to classify threats as relatively high- or low-risk for certain planning and budgeting exercises and to implement certain border security programs. Members of Congress may wish to use similar models to evaluate the costs and benefits of potential border security policies and to allocate border enforcement resources. This report discusses some of the issues involved in modeling border-related threats. Understanding border risks begins with identifying key threats. At their roots, border-related threats are closely linked to the flow of people (travelers) and goods (cargo) from one country to another. Any smuggled item or individual hidden among the legitimate flows potentially constitutes a threat to U.S. security or interests."

"The sheer variation across the Americas in terms of cross-border flows of persons, goods, and data has created a highly complex set of challenges for states and non-state actors in this hemisphere. Globalization has accelerated and increased these flows across the Western Hemisphere's borders, within both licit and illicit networks. Traditional territorial security concerns declined in the Americas following the end of the Cold War, and NAFTA [North America Free Trade Agreement] in North America and Mercosur in the Southern Cone have promoted free trade and accompanying economic development in border regions. At the same time, other concerns pertaining to security and the market have arisen, such as the shifting of routes for narcotics and human trafficking from the Andes, Central America, and the Caribbean in the 1980s into the United States and Mexico in the last decade. This dynamic has fostered substantial illicit networks and a dramatic escalation of violence in a number of borderlands in the hemisphere. Furthermore, issues of identity and ethnicity that were disregarded during much of the 19th and early 20th centuries now present challenges to states as national majorities, indigenous populations, and inhabitants of borderlands debate issues of citizenship, migration, and even the legitimacy of existing borders. This project has sought to understand how border policies affect, and are affected by, national and subnational actor preferences, including the interaction of border policies with international, domestic, and subnational politics. We were particularly interested in the unintended consequences and conflicts that arise as states attempt to formulate and implement policies addressing different imperatives in American borderlands. This project report underscores the extent to which we find important differences between the borders and borderlands in the Americas and those in other regions of the world. This has important implications for how we foster collaborative border policies going forward in the Western Hemisphere. The report first presents the project methodology and defines how borders and borderlands in the Americas were conceptualized by participants in the project. It then presents the project's key findings and identifies avenues for future research." Note: This document has been added to the Homeland Security Digital Library in agreement with the Project on Advanced Systems and Concepts for Countering WMD (PASCC) as part of the PASCC collection. Permission to download and/or retrieve this resource has been obtained through PASCC.

"Securing the southwest land border against illegal immigration, smuggling of drugs and other contraband, and terrorist activities is a key part of the Department of Homeland Security's (DHS) mission, and a top priority for the White House, Congress, and the American public. On January 25, 2017, President Trump signed an Executive Order on 'Border Security and Immigration Enforcement Improvements,' reflecting these concerns. In light of the effort and resources the Department has devoted to border security in recent decades, as well as the sustained public attention to the southwest border, Congress has directed the Department to provide more detailed reporting on southwest border security. The Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2017 directs the Department to publish 'metrics developed to measure the effectiveness of security between the ports of entry, including the methodology and data supporting the resulting measures.' While DHS employs a number of concrete metrics to track border security operations, it is difficult to precisely quantify illegal flows because illegal border crossers actively seek to evade detection, and some flows are undetected. As a result, any effort to quantify illegal flows or calculate an overall enforcement success rate must rely on one or more estimation techniques. Measurement is also difficult because of the diversity and complexity of the enforcement mission along the United States' 2,000-mile land border with Mexico."

"Maintaining the security of U.S. borders is a fundamental responsibility of the federal government. Various border security missions are assigned to the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Defense, and other federal agencies that work in cooperation with state, local, and tribal law enforcement agencies. The success of their efforts depends on the availability of reliable information on the nature of potential threats to border security. Given the extent of the land borders and the long coastlines of the United States and the number of individuals and vehicles crossing borders legitimately, the task of identifying law breakers within the overall threat environment is a major challenge. Law enforcement agencies obtain information from their usual sources--reports of crimes committed, tip-offs from informers, technical monitoring devices that now include unmanned aerial vehicles, and other sophisticated devices. In recent decades, and especially after 9/11, the potential for terrorists coming across the border as well as extensive narcotics trafficking have led policymakers to reach beyond law enforcement agencies to seek out information acquired by intelligence sources, including signals intelligence, imagery intelligence, and human agents."

"The Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is charged with preventing the entry of terrorists, securing the borders, and carrying out immigration enforcement functions. U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), a component of DHS, has primary responsibility for securing the borders of the United States, preventing terrorists and their weapons from entering the United States, and enforcing hundreds of U.S. trade and immigration laws. Within CBP, the U.S. Border Patrol's mission is to detect and prevent the illegal entry of aliens across the nearly 7,000 miles of Mexican and Canadian international borders and 2,000 miles of coastal borders surrounding Florida and Puerto Rico. Although the military does not have primary responsibility to secure the borders, the Armed Forces generally provide support to law enforcement and immigration authorities along the southern border. Reported escalations in criminal activity and illegal immigration, however, have prompted some lawmakers to reevaluate the extent and type of military support that occurs in the border region. On May 25, 2010, President Obama announced that up to 1,200 National Guard troops would be sent to the border to support the Border Patrol. Addressing domestic laws and activities with the military, however, might run afoul of the Posse Comitatus Act (PCA), which prohibits use of the Armed Forces to perform the tasks of civilian law enforcement unless explicitly authorized. There are alternative legal authorities for deploying the National Guard, and the precise scope of permitted activities and funds may vary with the authority exercised."

"The southwest border has long been vulnerable to cross-border illegal activity. In fiscal year 2016, Border Patrol apprehended over 409,000 illegal entrants. Border Patrol has employed a variety of land-based surveillance technologies to assist in securing the border. GAO [Government Accountability Office] has reported regularly on CBP's [Customs and Border Protection] progress and challenges deploying surveillance technologies. GAO was asked to review CBP's use of surveillance technology. This report examines (1) the deployment status of surveillance technology programs and the extent to which CBP has developed plans for future technology deployments and (2) what data are available on the contributions of deployed technologies to CBP's border security efforts and the extent to which CBP has assessed technology performance."

"DHS seeks to identify and interdict travelers who are potential security threats to the United States, such as foreign fighters and potential terrorists, human traffickers, drug smugglers and otherwise inadmissible persons, at the earliest possible point in time. DHS also adjudicates petitions for certain visa categories and has certain responsibilities for strengthening the security of the visa process, including oversight of VSP [Visa Security Program] and VWP [Visa Waiver Program]. State manages the visa adjudication process for foreign nationals seeking admission to the United States. This statement addresses (1) CBP [Customs and Border Protection] programs aimed at preventing high-risk travelers from boarding U.S.-bound flights; (2) ICE's [Immigration and Customs Enforcement] management of VSP; and (3) DHS's oversight of VWP. This statement is based on prior products GAO [Government Accountability Office] issued from March 2011 through January 2017, along with selected updates conducted in April 2017 to obtain information from DHS on actions it has taken to address prior GAO recommendations. […] GAO previously made recommendations to improve evaluation of CBP's predeparture programs' performance and strengthen DHS's oversight of VSP and VWP. DHS agreed with GAO's recommendations related to CBP's predeparture programs and VWP. DHS did not agree with some of GAO's recommendations related to VSP. GAO has ongoing work related to, among other things, DHS's management and oversight of VSP and plans to report later this year on the results of this work."

This hearing is testimony from the July 9, 2014 hearing on "Challenges at the Border: Examining the Causes, Consequences, and Responses to the Rise in Apprehensions at the Southern Border" held before the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. From the opening statement of Thomas R. Carper: "Over the past decade, we have made significant progress in securing our borders. Since 2003, for example, we have spent $223 billion dollars to enforce our immigration laws, more than doubling the size of the Border Patrol along the way. We have also built 670 miles of fencing and have deployed force multipliers such as high-tech cameras, radars, and drones up and down the border. In 2006--just eight years ago--the Border Patrol apprehended more than a million people at the border. Last year, we stopped just over 420,000. […] Although overall migration is still at historic lows, we now face a large surge in undocumented immigration from Central America--including unprecedented numbers of unaccompanied children and families showing up at the border. […] Let me be clear: these children and families are not slipping past our borders undetected. They are being apprehended in large numbers by the Border Patrol almost as soon as they touch U.S. soil, often turning themselves in voluntarily. People from Central America, unlike Mexico, must be flown back to their countries. This is a costly process that can take months or even years. This process is even more complicated for unaccompanied children and families, because our laws appropriately require different treatment for these groups. Children must be handed over to the Department of Health and Human Services, and families must be detained in special facilities that include educational opportunities for the children." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Tom Coburn, W. Craig Fugate, R. Gil Kerlikowske, Thomas S. Winkowski, Mark H. Greenberg, Francisco Palmieri, and Juan P. Osuna.

This is from the April 8, 2014 hearing on "Authorizing Customs and Border Protection and Immigration and Customs Enforcement," held before the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Homeland Security. From the statement of Candice S. Miller: "The U.S. Customs and Border Protection and the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement are two of the largest Federal law enforcement agencies in the Government. Though is hard to believe, neither one of them has ever been formally authorized by the Congress into law, since the creation of Homeland Security over 12 years ago. So for more than a decade, these two agencies have existed apart from explicit statutory authority which other agencies of the Federal Government routinely receive. To that end, myself and the Ranking Member have introduced H.R. 3846 and also H.R. 4279, the United States Customs and Border Protection Authorization Act and the United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement Authorization Act, respectively. These bills represent the first attempt by the Congress since the Homeland Security Act was enacted to clearly delineate the current authorities and responsibilities of the these two vital agencies which fall within the Department of Homeland Security. As the committee of primary jurisdiction over CBP [U.S. Customs and Border Protection] and ICE [U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement], we are responsible not only for oversight of the agencies under their purview, of course, but also for the policy guidance to the Department as a whole to furnish the agencies with the proper authorities to carry out their mission." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Sheila Jackson Lee, Kevin K. Mcaleenan, Daniel H. Ragsdale, and Colleen M. Kelley.

This testimony is from the September 10, 2014, hearing on "One Flight Away: An Examination of the Threat Posed by ISIS Terrorists with Western Passports," held before the U.S. House Committee on Homeland Security. From the statement of John P. Wagner: "As this Committee knows, we live in a world of ever-evolving threats. From this perspective, CBP [U.S. Customs and Border Protection] is now focused on the literally thousands of foreign fighters, including U.S. citizens, who continue to gravitate toward Syria to engage in that protracted civil war. Many of these are fighting alongside violent extremist groups both in Syria and in neighboring Iraq, learning battlefield skills and terrorist tradecraft. Of the numerous insurgent groups active in Iraq, Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS) demonstrated focus on consolidating territory in the Middle East region to establish their own Islamic State is of particular concern. Since June 2014, ISIS (also known as the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL)) and its allies have gained control of Mosul, Iraq's second largest city, captured significant territory across central Iraq, and continue to engage with Iraqi security forces in that region. In early August, the threat to the Iraqi Kurdistan Region increased considerably with the advance of ISIL towards Kurdish areas. As foreign fighters supporting ISIL's regional aggression retain the ability to travel to their countries of origin and beyond, they have the potential to threaten the Homeland. In response to the potential threat posed by ISIL and other terrorist groups seeking to gain access to the Homeland, CBP, and more broadly the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), is continually refining our risk-based strategy and layered approach to security, extending our borders outward, and focusing our resources on the greatest risks to interdict threats before they reach the United States." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Candice Miller, Michael McCaul, John P. Wagner, Troy Miller, Jennifer A. Lasley, and Hillary Batjer Johnson.

This is the July 24, 2018 hearing titled "Boots at the Border: Examining the National Guard Deployment to the Southwest Border," held before the House Subcommittee on Border and Maritime Security. From the opening statement of Martha McSally: "Today, our focus is on personnel and the capabilities at the border. Staffing shortages at both the ports of entry and in Border Patrol are exacerbated by both the hiring process that takes far too long and retention challenges that have persisted for years with no signs of abatement. CBP [Customs and Border Protection] is critically understaffed and remains well below its Congressionally-mandated staffing levels by more than 1,000 CBP officers and 1,900 Border Patrol agents. Combined with the growing crisis along the Southwest Border, this shortage has put our Nation's security at risk." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Rodolfo Karisch, John F. Nichols, and Michael T. McGuire.

"The 2012-2016 Strategic Plan supports national-level strategies, such as the President's Strategy to Combat Transnational Organized Crime and the National Drug Control Strategy; departmental strategies, in particular the Quadrennial Homeland Security Review; and CBP-wide [U.S. Customs and Border Protection] planning and integration efforts. The Strategic Plan uses a risk-based approach to securing the border; focusing enhanced capabilities against the highest threats and rapidly responding along the border. It involves a set of objectives, strategies, and programs that use 'Information, Integration and Rapid Response' to develop and deploy new and better tactics, techniques, and procedures to achieve the Border Patrol's strategic objectives. It means being more effective and efficient by using tools and methods like change-detection techniques to mitigate risks. It also means continued integration within CBP and working with Federal, state, local, tribal, and international partners. The Strategic Plan has two interrelated and interdependent goals. In the first goal, the Border Patrol will work with its Federal, state, local, tribal, and international partners to secure the border using 'Information, Integration and Rapid Response' in a risk-based manner. 'Information' provides situational awareness and intelligence developed by blending things such as reconnaissance, sign-cutting and tracking, and technology to understand the threats faced along the Nation's borders. 'Integration' denotes CBP corporate planning and execution of border-security operations while leveraging partnerships with other Federal, state, local, tribal, and international organizations. 'Rapid Response' means the Border Patrol and its partners can respond quickly and appropriately to changing threats. The second goal of the Strategic Plan represents an investment in people and organizational capabilities. This means improving the skills and abilities of personnel, optimizing organizational structures and processes, and becoming a more mature and sophisticated law enforcement organization."

"Between fiscal years (FY) 2010 and 2014, ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) will prioritize its efforts on the first three homeland security missions identified in the 2010 Quadrennial Homeland Security Report: (1) preventing terrorism and enhancing security; (2) securing and managing our borders; and (3) enforcing and administering our immigration laws. These priorities, along with ICE's goals, objectives and strategies, are set forth below in broad terms, leaving room for adjustment during the next five fiscal years. These goals will guide enforcement initiatives, budget requests, budget execution, resource allocation and policy decisions."

"Criminal activity along the Southwest Border (SWB) poses a significant national security threat for the United States. The almost 2,000-mile border that separates the United States and Mexico includes major population centers, transportation hubs, and large tracts of uninhabited desert. Criminal organizations have used that vast area to engage in cross-border drug trafficking, human smuggling, weapons trafficking, money laundering, and other associated illegal activities. The U.S.-Mexico border is the primary entry point into the United States for all major illicit drugs, with the exception of controlled prescription drugs and certain new synthetic drugs. Mexican Transnational Criminal Organizations (TCOs) operating primarily on the Mexican side of the U.S.-Mexico border supply the majority of the heroin, methamphetamine, cocaine, and foreign-produced marijuana available in U.S. illicit drug markets. These drugs are also smuggled into the United States across other land, sea, and air frontiers, but not on the same scale as the substances transported across the SWB."

"To preserve and uphold U.S. economic security and prosperity, and secure our border, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) must facilitate lawful trade and travel, reduce security risks and vulnerabilities, and promote cross-border resiliency and collaborative partnerships. In 2017, DHS conducted an assessment of Northern Border security and concluded that while the Northern Border remains an area of limited threat in comparison to the U.S. Southern Border, safeguarding and securing the Northern Border presents unique challenges. The most common threat to U.S. public safety along the Northern Border continues to be the bi-directional flow of illicit drugs. The Strategy articulates three main goals with key objectives identified under each goal: GOAL 1: Enhance Border Security Operations; GOAL 2: Facilitate and Safeguard Lawful Trade and Travel; GOAL 3: Promote Cross-border Resilience ."

"The U.S.-Canada border is the longest common border in the world, and it joins two nations that enjoy one of the world's strongest relationships. With communities and businesses that reach both sides of the border, the economies and security of the United States and Canada are inextricably linked. DHS is focused on securing the U.S. northern border while expediting the flow of lawful travel, trade, and immigration. Cross-border communities contain significant populations that commute across the border every day and whose water or electrical power comes from the other country. Recognizing the cross-border nature of infrastructure and commerce is critical to DHS's ability to effectively manage the northern border. This 2012 'DHS Northern Border Strategy (NBS)' takes a Department-wide look at the northern border, considering all of DHS's authorities, responsibilities, and capabilities in developing a cross-cutting all-missions approach. The Department's three goals for the Northern Border are: 1. Deter and Prevent Terrorism, Smuggling, Trafficking, and Illegal Immigration; 2. Safeguard and Encourage the Efficient Flow of Lawful Trade and Travel; 3. Ensure Community Safety and Resiliency Before, During, and After Terrorist Attacks and Natural Disasters. To achieve these Goals, DHS will utilize five key means and methods: A. Partnerships; B. Information, Intelligence, Interdictions, and Investigations; C. Technology; D. Infrastructure; E. Personnel."

"A number of factors have significantly influenced the content of this strategic plan. CBP [Customs and Border Protection] is the Nation's frontline border agency with the dual mission of securing the Nation's borders while facilitating legitimate trade and travel. This requires protecting the Nation against cross-border violations that threaten national security, the economy, and public safety. CBP must remain vigilant in addressing these challenges and threats. CBP faces the challenge of countering criminal and terrorist exploitation of international passenger and commercial cargo transportation systems at 327 official air, land, and sea ports of entry (POEs). CBP must also prevent the illegal flow of people and contraband across approximately 7,000 miles of land border and, in partnership with the U.S. Coast Guard, approximately 95,000 miles of shoreline."

"The U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) Vision and Strategy 2020 firmly establishes CBP's role as the national leader in safeguarding our borders and promoting economic prosperity. The strategy provides the foundation for a transformative course that will enhance CBP's foresight and agility to meet the increasingly global and complex challenges we face. While we continue to combat the threats of terrorism and transnational crime, safeguarding our economy by enabling lawful trade and travel remains an integral facet of our leadership role in national security. This balance between law enforcement and enhancing economic competitiveness requires a comprehensive understanding of all border threats and potential consequences; the establishment of a network of intelligence and law enforcement capabilities; and complete appreciation of our commercial partners' needs and operating protocols. CBP's innovative approaches to intelligence and targeting must anticipate and counter criminal networks that engage in diverse conspiracies that include terrorism, the importation of counterfeit or unsafe goods, drug smuggling, human smuggling and trafficking, as well as the outbound transfer of prohibited weapons and illicit bulk currency. CBP must continue its leadership role in integrating risk-informed, intelligence-based, agile and adoptable operations to advance public safety, national security, and economic prosperity. The border is a nexus to a continuum of activities that threaten the national interests of both security and prosperity. In response, CBP will lead collaborative efforts that apply multi-directional pressure on those seeking to do us harm; outside the U.S. borders, at the border, and into interior regions of the country."

From the thesis abstract: "Transnational criminal networks will continue to evolve. The United States Border Patrol's (USBP) intelligence-driven planning, resourcing, and operations need to be responsive to the constant evolution in adversary tactics, techniques, and procedures. To successfully standardize and institutionalize intelligence processes, a comprehensive evaluation was conducted on the current USBP intelligence architecture and intelligence processes. The research compared and contrasted the current Border Patrol intelligence mission with best practices, lessons learned, shared missions, and constraints within the Intelligence Community. The research focused on the synthesis of an intelligence-driven, law enforcement culture, one that will increase situational awareness and understanding of the homeland security ecosystem through efficient planning, collections, exploitation, processing, analysis, production, and dissemination of intelligence-related information to all components of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). This study examines literature from the DHS strategic documents, Department of Defense intelligence doctrine, Government Accountability Office reports, internal USBP intelligence documents, and subject-matter expert perspectives. This research leads USBP to consider instituting an effective organizational architecture that supports the evolutionary development of its intelligence-driven, border security operations and intelligence-driven, decision-making process. The thesis concludes that the synergy between law enforcement culture and intelligence-driven operations is difficult to achieve, yet once established, it is very powerful, irreplaceable, highly effective, and self-sustainable. Evidence demonstrates that in order to institute a culture of an intelligence-driven border security agency, a more robust approach needs to be standardized to sustain the flexibility and adaptability the USBP requires to address future threats in the twenty-first century."

From the thesis abstract: "The terrorist attack in 2001 left the United States with a sense of vulnerability and generated both demand and need to protect the nation. Fortifying the border has created diminishing returns. In addition, it has created negative side effects and unintended consequences that undermine the very nature and reason for installing border fences. Immigrants have been forced into the hands of criminal organizations and are more vulnerable now than in the past. Building a wall has deterred some illicit activity, but it does not deter the motivational factors. By hardening the borderline, the U.S. has issued a challenge, practically daring anyone to attempt entry though immigration has been reduced, drug trafficking organizations (DTOs) have picked up the gauntlet thrown by the United States and are finding ingenious methods to overcome and bypass the tightening border controls. Determined and motivated people will continue to find a way, even if it takes multiple times to find loopholes and weakness in the border. Border policy has resulted in unintended consequences, specifically, attracting DTOs, stimulating innovation, creating sophisticated networks within the black market arena, and rendering the fence obsolete. The cost effectiveness of current border security practices have reached the culminating point. Policymakers need to find alternative solutions, because current methods are unsustainable."