Lawmaker had a run-in with INS officials in ’03

Republicans are pointing to a 2003 altercation between Rep. Bob Filner (D-Calif.) and a government official as proof that the lawmaker’s August run-in with an airline worker is a pattern of behavior that the ethics committee should examine.  

A Feb. 22, 2003, Justice Department incident report alleges that Filner accompanied a constituent along with two local reporters to an immigration detention facility in the town of El Centro, Calif., in his district and demanded to see and talk to a detainee from Pakistan. Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) officers told him that only the detainee’s wife, whom Filner had accompanied there, could see the detainee. Filner quickly grew belligerent, asking “‘When was the last time I read the Constitution[?]’ and then told me if I did not let him see his constituent, he would have me arrested,” according to the first-hand report filed by Supervisory Detention Enforcement Officer Juan Ramirez.

{mosads}Ramirez said he would need to discuss the possibility of Filner seeing the detainee with his supervisor before any visit could take place. He called his supervisor and told him that they may need to call the police “if things worsened,” the report said. Shortly thereafter, Filner’s chief of staff showed up at the facility’s entry inspection point, and, according to the account, ended up running through the security point.

Filner allegedly then started becoming verbally aggressive.

 “At that time, he looked over toward [INS Officer] Ruben Garcia’s direction and said, ‘are you going to stop me big man’ and turned to another officer and asked, ‘are you going to shoot me, are you going to arrest me?’”

Filner was told that the comments were unnecessary, but he allegedly persisted. After about 10 minutes, the officer said he witnessed Filner “forcing his way into the control area.” Seven INS and security officers then converged on Filner to try to convince him to go back to the foyer.

According to the report, Filner refused, saying: “I am a Congressman and I can do whatever I want, I want to see my constituent and I am not moving from here until I do so,” and later telling one officer to “shut up.”

 “As I made my way to the supervisor’s office, Congressman Filner tried to follow me, but was stopped by security Supervisor Tapia, Security Officer Aguirre and Raya [another officer],” Ramirez said in the report. “Congressman Filner tried to push his way through the officers and even tried to go under them, but did not succeed.”

Ramirez then called the El Centro police department, who showed up, but decided to leave because Filner was just standing there, not doing anything at the time.

More senior officers then got involved and eventually allowed Filner to speak to the detainee as long as he followed instructions. Afterward, when Filner saw Ramirez again, the legislator immediately apologized for his actions.

 “He addressed me in front of everyone and said he accepted responsibility for his actions and admitted handling the situation incorrectly. He sent his apologies to everyone who was involved for placing us in a difficult situation. He added that everyone performed his or her duties in a very professional manner.” 

The House ethics committee announced Wednesday that it had voted to establish an investigative subcommittee to review the misdemeanor assault and battery charge against Filner for his alleged assault of a United Airlines employee at Dulles airport on Aug. 19.           

The Veterans Affairs Committee chairman, who was on his way to Iraq at the time of the incident, has said he was tired the day of the airport incident and originally called the charges “ridiculous.” On Wednesday, after the ethics panel announced that it would review the allegations, Filner said he was frustrated by an airline delay, but now regrets “that things turned out the way they did.”

“I respect the ethics committee’s decision to wait until this matter is resolved in Virginia before proceeding,” he said in the statement.

Filner’s spokeswoman, Amy Pond, did not return a request for comment for this story by press time.

 Fearful of instigating open ethics warfare rather than the fierce ethics battles that no doubt are taking place out of public view, Republican and Democrats are treading around ethics issues carefully and seldom speak publicly about them.

Republicans privately argue that more than just showing a pattern of behavior, the 2003 incident report begs the question of why the INS officials treated Filner with kid gloves and didn’t have him arrested.

“It obviously demonstrates a pattern of behavior, but the bigger question is why wasn’t he arrested or served with a complaint?” one GOP leadership aide asked. “Any regular Joe would have been read his rights on the spot for that kind of conduct.”

Meredith McGehee of the Campaign Legal Center, a government watchdog, agreed that the 2003 incident should play a role in Filner’s ethics case. She said the ethics committee has an obligation to consider other similar incidents when weighing whether to take action against Filner.

 “If it was an isolated incident, it would be like any first-time offender, and he would probably be given a pass,” she said, adding that the 2003 report makes it more difficult for the ethics panel to dismiss.

McGehee also said that members of Congress should understand that the ethics committee operates differently than a court of law.

 “They are charged with investigating anything that reflects poorly on the public’s perception of Congress as an institution.”

Jan Baran, a veteran Washington ethics attorney, said the 2003 incident actually could be viewed as a legitimate reason for becoming aggressive because Filner was helping a constituent.

Unlike the airport incident, in which Filner simply wanted to get his luggage,  Baran said, the 2003 tussle with the INS was not personal in nature and instead was motivated by a desire to help his constituent.

 “Some would say this hurts him because its shows that he is aggressive beyond the pale,” Baran added. “Others would say he was appropriately aggressive in this case.”

Either way, Baran said the ethics committee should include the 2003 incident in the scope of its investigation.
Public Citizen’s Craig Holman is worried that the Filner ethics investigation is the beginning of a return to the open ethics warfare that marked the tenure of Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.).

 “I do worry that the ethics process could be abused by these partisan squabbles,” he said.

Ken Gross, another longtime ethics lawyer, said a prior instance of similar bad behavior adds fuel to the fire of any case, although he considered Filner’s airport assault charges “a marginal incident.”