Category Archives: DOJ, DC and inside the Beltway

Top Policy People, Mass Exodus at State Dept.

Posted on by

 Rex Tillerson was there at Foggy Bottom getting a lay of the landscape, when the resignations turned in last week became effective today as there was a walk out. And YES, the most corrupt official at the State Department remaining after John Kerry left is Patrick Kennedy, and he is gone too…YIPPEE.

 

It is real awesome that Victoria Nuland has left too.

CBS: State Department posts occupied by other career diplomats have also been left vacant. Victoria Nuland is one of the people leaving. Nuland was the Assistant Secretary of State responsible for Russia and Eurasia Policy at the State Department, and is known for her hardline view on Russia. Linda Etim, a political appointee handling USAID and African affairs, has also left the State Department.

The State Department’s entire senior management team just resigned

WaPo: Secretary of State Rex Tillerson’s job running the State Department just got considerably more difficult. The entire senior level of management officials resigned Wednesday, part of an ongoing mass exodus of senior foreign service officers who don’t want to stick around for the Trump era.

Tillerson was actually inside the State Department’s headquarters in Foggy Bottom on Wednesday, taking meetings and getting the lay of the land. I reported Wednesday morning that the Trump team was narrowing its search for his No. 2, and that it was looking to replace the State Department’s long-serving undersecretary for management, Patrick Kennedy. Kennedy, who has been in that job for nine years, was actively involved in the transition and was angling to keep that job under Tillerson, three State Department officials told me.

Then suddenly on Wednesday afternoon, Kennedy and three of his top officials resigned unexpectedly, four State Department officials confirmed. Assistant Secretary of State for Administration Joyce Anne Barr, Assistant Secretary of State for Consular Affairs Michele Bond and Ambassador Gentry O. Smith, director of the Office of Foreign Missions, followed him out the door. All are career foreign service officers who have served under both Republican and Democratic administrations.

Kennedy will retire from the foreign service at the end of the month, officials said. The other officials could be given assignments elsewhere in the foreign service.

In addition, Assistant Secretary of State for Diplomatic Security Gregory Starr retired Jan. 20, and the director of the Bureau of Overseas Building Operations, Lydia Muniz, departed the same day. That amounts to a near-complete housecleaning of all the senior officials that deal with managing the State Department, its overseas posts and its people.

“It’s the single biggest simultaneous departure of institutional memory that anyone can remember, and that’s incredibly difficult to replicate,” said David Wade, who served as State Department chief of staff under Secretary of State John Kerry. “Department expertise in security, management, administrative and consular positions in particular are very difficult to replicate and particularly difficult to find in the private sector.”

Several senior foreign service officers in the State Department’s regional bureaus have also left their posts or resigned since the election. But the emptying of leadership in the management bureaus is more disruptive because those offices need to be led by people who know the department and have experience running its complicated bureaucracies. There’s no easy way to replace that via the private sector, said Wade.

“Diplomatic security, consular affairs, there’s just not a corollary that exists outside the department, and you can least afford a learning curve in these areas where issues can quickly become matters of life and death,” he said. “The muscle memory is critical. These retirements are a big loss. They leave a void. These are very difficult people to replace.”

Whether Kennedy left on his own volition or was pushed out by the incoming Trump team is a matter of dispute inside the department. Just days before he resigned, Kennedy was taking on more responsibility inside the department and working closely with the transition. His departure was a surprise to other State Department officials who were working with him.

One senior State Department official who responded to my requests for comment said that all the officials had previously submitted their letters of resignation, as was required for all positions that are appointed by the president and that require confirmation by the Senate, known as PAS positions.

“No officer accepts a PAS position with the expectation that it is unlimited. And all officers understand that the President may choose to replace them at any time,” this official said. “These officers have served admirably and well. Their departure offers a moment to consider their accomplishments and thank them for their service. These are the patterns and rhythms of the career service.”

Ambassador Richard Boucher, who served as State Department spokesman for Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice, said that while there’s always a lot of turnover around the time a new administration takes office, traditionally senior officials work with the new team to see who should stay on in their roles and what other jobs might be available. But that’s not what happened this time.

The officials who manage the building and thousands of overseas diplomatic posts are charged with taking care of Americans overseas and protecting U.S. diplomats risking their lives abroad. The career foreign service officers are crucial to those functions as well as to implementing the new president’s agenda, whatever it may be, Boucher said.

“You don’t run foreign policy by making statements, you run it with thousands of people working to implement programs every day,” Boucher said. “To undercut that is to undercut the institution.”

By itself, the sudden departure of the State Department’s entire senior management team is disruptive enough. But in the context of a president who railed against the U.S. foreign policy establishment during his campaign and secretary of state with no government experience, the vacancies are much more concerning.

Tillerson’s job No. 1 must be to find qualified and experienced career officials to manage the State Department’s vital offices. His second job should be to reach out to and reassure a State Department workforce that is panicked about what the Trump administration means for them.

Trump Review to Re-launch CIA Black Sites?

Posted on by

A Black Site is one thing, Interrogations another, but applications of enhanced interrogation methods, yet a third…

The Washington Post reports they are in possession of an early draft copy of an executive order to review the black site(s) program for captured terrorists. Under Barack Obama, terrorists were rarely if ever sought for detention and interrogated but rather, Obama ordered escalated use of drone strikes.

Trump Review CIA Black Sites (full document here)

***

Reuters/WaPo: U.S. President Donald Trump is expected to order a review that could lead to bringing back a CIA program for holding terrorism suspects in secret overseas “black site” prisons where interrogation techniques often condemned as torture were used, two U.S. officials said on Wednesday.

The black sites were used to detain suspects captured in President George W. Bush’s “war on terrorism” after the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks and were formally closed by former President Barack Obama.

Any return to the Bush administration’s initial anti-terrorism tactics – including secret prisons and interrogation methods considered torture under international law – would likely alienate key U.S. allies in the fight against militant groups like al Qaeda and Islamic State.

Aides to Obama said during his tenure that his prohibition against torture and efforts to close the Guantanamo prison in Cuba helped increase counterterrorism cooperation from U.S. allies in the Arab world.

The now-defunct program’s practices dubbed enhanced interrogation techniques, which included simulated drowning known as waterboarding, were criticized around the world and denounced by Obama and other senior U.S. officials as torture.

 

The officials said Trump is expected to sign an executive order in the next few days. It would call for a high-level review into “whether to reinitiate a program of interrogation of high-value alien terrorists to be operated outside the United States” and whether the CIA should run the facilities,” according to a copy of the draft published by the Washington Post.

The document ignited a bipartisan outcry in Congress. Many people in U.S. intelligence agencies and within the military are opposed to reopening the harsh interrogation program, according to multiple serving officers.

“The President can sign whatever executive orders he likes. But the law is the law. We are not bringing back torture in the United States of America,” Senator John McCain, a Republican who underwent torture as a prisoner of war in Vietnam, said in a statement.

Trump administration spokesman Sean Spicer said the draft was not a White House document. The draft published by the Washington Post appeared to have sections missing, suggesting that it may not have been a full version ready for Trump to sign.

The CIA black sites were located in Poland, Lithuania, Romania, Thailand and Afghanistan.

In 2006, Bush ended the use of harsh interrogation techniques and closed all the black sites except for one in Kabul.

Asked whether he wants waterboarding as president, Trump answered in an interview with ABC News:

“I will rely on (CIA director Mike) Pompeo and (Defense Secretary James) Mattis and my group. And if they don’t want to do it, that’s fine. If they do want to do it, then I will work toward that end,” Trump said.

“I want to do everything within the bounds of what we’re allowed to do if it’s legal. If they don’t want to do it, that’s fine. Do I feel it works? Absolutely I feel it works.”

Mattis and Pompeo had not been aware such plans were in the works, according to a congressional source.

KEEP GUANTANAMO OPEN

Trump’s draft order would authorize a review of interrogation techniques that U.S. officials could use on terrorism suspects, keep open the detention center at the U.S. naval base in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba and send new prisoners there.

Trump’s draft also revokes directives by Obama to grant the International Committee of the Red Cross access to all detainees in U.S. custody and restrict interrogation methods to those in a U.S. Army field manual.

Trump vowed during the 2016 election campaign to resume waterboarding and a “hell of a lot worse” because even if torture does not work, “they deserve it anyway.”

He has also said that he wanted to keep Guantanamo open and “load it up with some bad dudes.”

Of the 41 prisoners left at Guantanamo, 10 face charges in war-crimes proceedings known as military commissions, including Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, accused mastermind of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, and his alleged co-conspirators. Bush established the military commissions, which Obama later changed.

The draft order said that, “No person in the custody of the United States shall at any time be subjected to torture, or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, as proscribed by U.S. law.” It does not mention international laws to which the United States is a signatory that prohibit torture.

Congress passed the National Defense Authorization Act in 2015, which reaffirmed a prohibition on torture and required U.S. interrogators to adhere to techniques in the Army field manual.

However, the Justice Department under Trump could issue an interpretation of U.S. law that allows for the use of harsh interrogation techniques as occurred in the so-called “torture memos” drafted under the Bush administration in 2002 and subsequently withdrawn.

Despite the killing of al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden during Obama’s presidency, the dramatic spread of groups like Islamic State has exacerbated the threat from violent Islamist organizations.

In a statement accompanying the draft order, the administration criticizes Obama’s policies, saying, “The United States has refrained from exercising certain authorities critical to its defense.” But it acknowledges that the National Defense Authorization Act “provides a significant statutory barrier to the resumption of the CIA interrogation program”.

“WORRISOME”

Human rights groups decried any attempt to bring back the black sites.

“This is an extremely disturbing and outrageous attempt to open the door again to systematic torture and secret detention. This is the Trump administration making good on its most worrisome comments during the campaign,” said Naureen Shah, Amnesty International USA’s director of national security and human rights.

Critics say a return to harsh interrogations would enflame tensions in Muslim countries and be counterproductive.

In the draft document, references to the “global war on terrorism” were edited and replaced with the phrase “fight against radical Islamism,” reflecting language Trump often uses.

A former senior U.S. intelligence official, who requested anonymity, said many CIA officers would oppose reinstatement of “black site” interrogations, in part because they were forced to obtain lawyers after the withdrawal of the Justice Department memos that legalized the harsh techniques.

“People felt they were hung out to dry,” the former official said. “There is a lack of trust there.”

Moreover, he said, it would be extremely difficult to persuade other governments to allow the CIA to establish secret prisons on their soil.

“Where are you going to do this?” he asked. “How many countries are going to jump back into the U.S. lap?

Trump’s order, if enacted, could put new CIA Director Pompeo in a tight spot given that his workforce, according to multiple serving officers, largely opposes reinstating the “black sites” program. It could also complicate the confirmation of Trump’s nominee for the job of director of national intelligence, former U.S. senator Dan Coats.

As a conservative Republican congressman from Kansas, Pompeo defended the CIA’s use of harsh interrogation techniques, arguing that they produced useful intelligence.

During his confirmation hearing for CIA director, he pledged he would “absolutely not” reinstate those methods. Yet in written responses to questions from Senate Intelligence Committee members, he appeared to leave the door open to restoring them.

“If experts believed the current law was an impediment to gathering vital intelligence to protect the country, I would want to understand such impediments and whether any recommendations were appropriate for changing current law,” Pompeo wrote.

(Writing by Yara Bayoumy; Additional reporting by Warren Strobel, Matt Spetalnick and Patricia Zengerle; Editing by Alistair Bell and Jonathan Oatis)

 

Cruz and Poe Introduce Legislation for States to Reject Refugees

Posted on by

There is some additional help coming from the Trump administration as President Trump is likely to issue and sign executive order on immigration that will impact visa holders from Iraq, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen. These are worn torn countries where hostilities continue with terror organizations. An issue that still remains however that Trump has not addressed is the asylum seekers.

S. 2363 (114th): State Refugee Security Act of 2015

A bill to amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to permit the Governor of a State to reject the resettlement of a refugee in that State unless there is adequate assurance that the alien does not present a security risk and for other purposes. The 2 page text is here.

New bill from Cruz, Poe would let states reject refugees

WT: Republicans in the House and Senate have introduced legislation that would give governors the power to reject federal efforts to resettle refugees in their states.

The bill from Sen. Ted Cruz and Rep. Ted Poe, both of Texas, is a reaction to years of growing GOP frustration with the Obama administration’s aggressive effort to take in refugees and resettle them across the country. Republicans continue to have doubts that refugees can be vetted to ensure they aren’t Islamic State terrorists.

The State Refugee Security Act would require the federal government to notify states at least 21 days before they seek to settle a refugee. Under the bill, if a state governor certifies that the federal government hasn’t offered enough assurances that the refugee does not pose a security risk, the state can block the resettlement effort.

Poe said the Obama administration’s “open door policy” has forced states to take on refugees without these guarantees, and said states need a way to opt out.

“Until the federal government can conduct thorough security screenings and confirm that there are no security risks, Congress should empower states to be able to protect their citizens by refusing to participate in this program,” he said.

Cruz said the first obligation of the president is to keep Americans safe, and said the bill would be a step in that direction.

“I am encouraged that, unlike the previous administration, one of President Trump‘s top priorities is to defeat radical Islamic terrorism,” he said. “To augment the efforts of the new administration, this legislation I have introduced will reinforce the authority of the states and governors to keep their citizens safe.”

****

The Trump White House also has not addressed the issue of criminal deportation of foreign nationals. Each foreign inmate is known to cost the taxpayer an estimated $21,000 per year. Enforcement and removal operations of those illegal foreign nationals now falls to the newly confirmed DHS Secretary Kelly.

FY 2015 ICE Immigration Removals

In addition to its criminal investigative responsibilities, ICE shares responsibility for enforcing the nation’s civil immigration laws with U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS). ICE’s role in the immigration enforcement system is focused on two primary missions: (1) the identification and apprehension of criminal aliens and other removable individuals located in the United States; and (2) the detention and removal of those individuals apprehended in the interior of the U.S., as well as those apprehended by CBP officers and agents patrolling our nation’s borders.

In executing these responsibilities, ICE has prioritized its limited resources on the identification and removal of criminal aliens and those apprehended at the border while attempting to unlawfully enter the United States. This report provides an overview of ICE Fiscal Year (FY) 2015 civil immigration enforcement and removal operations. See FY 2015 ICE Immigration Removals Statistics

Expectations of a quick solution and immediate movement to address the immigration matter are misplaced as this will be a long slog of an operation and will take the coordination of several agencies including the U.S. State Department which is presently operating without a Secretary until Rex Tillerson is confirmed and sworn in. The fallout will include a diplomatic challenge which is many cases does need to occur, however other nations such as China and Russia will step in to intrude on the process including those at the United Nations level, falling into the lap of the newly confirmed U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, Nikki Haley.

Reviving the Holman Rule is Not Enough, Government Employees

Posted on by

But it is a start to bring back this rule…

The Holman Rule

The Holman rule (Rule XXI clause 2), which had its inception in
the 44th Congress, underwent various modifications between 1876 and
1911. At times it was dropped completely. The full text is here.

TWS: The Washington Post reports that House Republicans have revived an obscure rule that could prove to be the most significant civil service reform in decades:

House Republicans this week reinstated an arcane procedural rule that enables lawmakers to reach deep into the budget and slash the pay of an individual federal worker — down to $1 — a move that threatens to upend the 130-year-old civil service.

The Holman Rule, named after an Indiana congressman who devised it in 1876, empowers any member of Congress to propose amending an appropriations bill to single out a government employee or cut a specific program.

The use of the rule would not be simple; a majority of the House and the Senate would still have to approve any such amendment. At the same time, opponents and supporters agree that the work of 2.1 million civil servants, designed to be insulated from politics, is now vulnerable to the whims of elected officials.

It’s interesting that the Post frames this move in a way that’s sympathetic to federal workers, as if being “vulnerable to the whims of elected officials” is unduly threatening. Most Americans in the workplace are, in fact, vulnerable to the whims of their employers, and it takes a lot less than a literal act of Congress to have their pay cut or lose their job for poor performance.

And there can be no question that federal workers have far too many civil service protections. After the IRS held a press conference admitting that they had improperly targeted conservative groups, Lois Lerner, the IRS official deemed most responsible, didn’t face any meaningful consequences. Instead it was revealed that she recently received $129,000 in bonuses and retired with an annual pension that could possibly exceed $100,000.

Even after Lerner left, John Koskinen, the new interim head of the IRS, ignored congressional subpoenas as the IRS destroyed evidence relating to the investigation of Lerner and engaged in egregious stonewalling. It’s pretty clear that the IRS was in no way fearful of suffering any consequences for persecuting thousands of ordinary Americans and flouting Congress.

And last year, the New York Times reported that “at most three” Department of Veterans Affairs employees lost their jobs after it was revealed that widespread incompetence at the VA was killing sick veterans. There are several other examples of intolerable behavior by federal workers going largely unpunished, and tolerating malfeasance has broad policy implications for Republicans specifically and good governance generally:

Democrats have long understood personnel is policy. For decades, the administrative state has continued to extend its reach. So long as the people enforcing our laws and regulations are union liberals with broad immunity, the rule of law will depend on those individuals’ views and choices.

To address the systemic problem, the GOP has to reclaim Congress’s oversight power and push for sweeping civil service reforms. Without them, no significant conservative policy overhaul will ever be implemented, and Americans will be increasingly subject to a complex web of unaccountable and unconstitutional administrative fiefdoms.

For ordinary Americans, the only thing controversial here that federal workers are essentially impossible to punish or fire, even though the average federal compensation is $123,160, or 76 percent more than the private-sector average of Joe Taxpayer at $69,901. Reviving the Holman Rule was a smart move by House Republicans, and we should hope they start using it, because there are lots of federal workers who aren’t worth paying a dollar, let alone 123,160 of them.

****

Ethics questions for two sets of government employees:

Members of Congress

The ethical conduct of the elected members of Congress is prescribed by either the House Ethics Manual or the Senate Ethics Manual, as created and revised by the House and Senate committees on ethics.

Executive Branch Employees

For the first 200 years of U.S. government, each agency maintained its own code of ethical conduct. But in 1989, the President’s Commission on Federal Ethics Law Reform recommended that individual agency standards of conduct be replaced with a single regulation applicable to all employees of the executive branch.

In response, President George H.W. Bush signed Executive Order 12674 on April 12, 1989, setting out the following fourteen basic principles of ethical conduct for executive branch personnel:

  1. Public service is a public trust, requiring employees to place loyalty to the Constitution, the laws and ethical principles above private gain.\
  2. Employees shall not hold financial interests that conflict with the conscientious performance of duty.
  3. Employees shall not engage in financial transactions using nonpublic Government information or allow the improper use of such information to further any private interest.
  4. An employee shall not, except as permitted … solicit or accept any gift or other item of monetary value from any person or entity seeking official action from, doing business with, or conducting activities regulated by the employee’s agency, or whose interests may be substantially affected by the performance or nonperformance of the employee’s duties.
  5. Employees shall put forth honest effort in the performance of their duties.
  6. Employees shall not knowingly make unauthorized commitments or promises of any kind purporting to bind the Government.
  7. Employees shall not use public office for private gain.
  8. Employees shall act impartially and not give preferential treatment to any private organization or individual.
  9. Employees shall protect and conserve Federal property and shall not use it for other than authorized activities.
  10. Employees shall not engage in outside employment or activities, including seeking or negotiating for employment, that conflict with official Government duties and responsibilities.
  11. Employees shall disclose waste, fraud, abuse, and corruption to appropriate authorities.
  12. Employees shall satisfy in good faith their obligations as citizens, including all just financial obligations, especially those—such as Federal, State, or local taxes—that are imposed by law.
  13. Employees shall adhere to all laws and regulations that provide equal opportunity for all Americans regardless of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, or handicap.
  14. Employees shall endeavor to avoid any actions creating the appearance that they are violating the law or the ethical standards set forth in this part. Whether particular circumstances create an appearance that the law or these standards have been violated shall be determined from the perspective of a reasonable person with knowledge of the relevant facts.

The federal regulation enforcing these 14 rules of conduct (as amended) is now codified and fully explained in the Code of Federal Regulations at 5 C.F.R. Part 2635. Part 2635.

Over the years since 1989, some agencies have created supplemental regulations that modify or supplement the 14 rules of conduct to better apply to the specific duties and responsibilities of their employees.

Established by the Ethics in Government Act of 1978, the U.S. Office of Government Ethics provides overall leadership and oversight of the executive branch ethics program designed to prevent and resolve conflicts of interest.

The Overarching Rules of Ethical Conduct

In addition to the above 14 rules of conduct for executive branch employees, Congress, on June 27, 1980, unanimously passed a law establishing the following
general Code of Ethics for Government Service. Signed by President Jimmy Carter on July 3, 1980, Public Law 96-303 requires that, “Any person in Government service should:”

  • Put loyalty to the highest moral principles and to country above loyalty to persons, party, or Government department.
  • Uphold the Constitution, laws, and regulations of the United States and of all governments therein and never be a party to their evasion.
  • Give a full day’s labor for a full day’s pay; giving earnest effort and best thought to the performance of duties.
  • Seek to find and employ more efficient and economical ways of getting tasks accomplished.
  • Never discriminate unfairly by the dispensing of special favors or privileges to anyone, whether for remuneration or not; and never accept, for himself or herself or for family members, favors or benefits under circumstances which might be construed by reasonable persons as influencing the performance of governmental duties.
  • Make no private promises of any kind binding upon the duties of office, since a Government employee has no private word which can be binding on public duty.
  • Engage in no business with the Government, either directly or indirectly, which is inconsistent with the conscientious performance of governmental duties.
  • Never use any information gained confidentially in the performance of governmental duties as a means of making private profit.
  • Expose corruption wherever discovered.

The U.S. is out of TPP, NAFTA is under Discussion, Gas Protests

Posted on by

Getting the United States out of the Transpacific Partnership Pact was merely symbolic. The United States was a member of the pact but the treaty never advanced in legislative action. NAFTA is a matter of discussion and meetings still to come.

Trump signs order withdrawing from TPP, reinstate ‘Mexico City policy’ on abortion

President Donald Trump on Monday will start to unravel the behemoth trade deal he inherited from his predecessor, as he signed an executive action to withdraw from the negotiating process of the Trans-Pacific Partnership.

That executive action sends signals to Democrats and leaders in foreign capitals around the world that Trump’s rhetoric on trade during the campaign is turning into action. Trump vowed during the campaign to withdraw the US from the Pacific trade deal, commonly known as TPP, which he argued was harmful to American workers and manufacturing.
The TPP was negotiated under former President Barack Obama, but never ratified by Congress, so withdrawing from it will not have an immediate, real effect on US economic policies, although it does signal a new and very different US outlook on trade under Trump.
The other executive actions signed Monday included reinstating the Mexico City abortion rules and instituting a hiring freeze for federal agencies. More here from CNN.
****

Washington (AFP) – US President Donald Trump pledged Sunday to begin renegotiating the North American Free Trade Agreement in upcoming talks with the leaders of Mexico and Canada.

“We’re meeting with the prime minister of Canada and we will be meeting with the president of Mexico, who I know, and we’re going to start some negotiations having to do with NAFTA,” Trump said while addressing White House staff on his second full day in office.

Trump will receive his Mexican counterpart Enrique Pena Nieto on January 31. No date has been given for a meeting with Canada’s Justin Trudeau, but it is expected “soon,” according to a readout from a call between the two leaders on Saturday.

Trump praised the Mexican leader, saying: “The president has been really very amazing and I think we are going to have a very good result for Mexico, for the United States, for everybody involved. It’s very important.”

*** There is another major issue that has surfaced.

 

Mexico gas protests create havoc at US border crossing

TIJUANA, Mexico –  Protesters took control of vehicle lanes at one of the busiest crossings on the U.S. border Sunday to oppose Mexican gasoline price hikes, waving through motorists into Mexico after Mexican authorities abandoned their posts.

Motorists headed to Mexico zipped by about 50 demonstrators at the Otay Mesa port of entry connecting San Diego and Tijuana, many of them honking to show support. The demonstrators waved signs to protest gas hikes and air other grievances against the government of Mexican President Enrique Pena Nieto.

Other protests closed southbound traffic for hours at the San Diego-Tijuana San Ysidro port of entry, the busiest crossing along the 2,000-mile border, and halted southbound traffic at one of two crossings in Nogales, Arizona. U.S. Customs and Border Protection and California Highway Patrol officers closed southbound Interstate 5 to block access to the San Ysidro crossing, diverting traffic several miles east to the Otay Mesa port of entry.

Inspections were normal for all travelers entering the U.S. from Mexico. CBP officials didn’t immediately respond to a request seeking more information about the impact of the protests.

The demonstrations, which are unrelated to the election of U.S. President Donald Trump, have disrupted Mexican border crossings for weeks. Earlier this month, police in the Mexican state of Sonora fought a pitched three-hour battle to free a border rail crossing at Nogales that had been blocked by people protesting the 20 percent nationwide hike in gasoline prices that took effect on New Year’s Day.

Only a small percentage of motorists entering Mexico from the U.S. are stopped for inspection under normal circumstances, but Sunday’s demonstration gave them an open invitation. Guns and cash from drug sales in the U.S. are often introduced to Mexico by car.

Protesters said Mexican customs officials retreated within minutes after they arrived at the Otay Mesa crossing. About two hours later, a Mexican soldier stood by, but there were few other signs of government presence.

“We’re exercising our right to free speech,” said Brenda Cortez, a 22-year-old college student from Tijuana. “It’s to make sure we are noticed.”