Cameron County Judge Eddie Treviño Jr. was one of four witnesses who testified before the U.S. House Homeland Security Committee on Tuesday afternoon to help members of Congress ascertain whether a border wall is really the answer to border security.

In his testimony, Treviño called the wall an outdated approach.

“This will not work. Developing a one-size-fits-all approach, which is the border wall, utilizes a 14th century solution to address a 21st century problem,” Treviño said. “It makes no sense, especially as it is the most expensive of all possible alternatives.”

It would only accomplish a “false sense of security,” and would do nothing to alleviate criminal activity, Treviño added.

President Donald Trump in January signed an executive order directing the construction of a border wall with Mexico.

At the hearing, Filemon Vela, D-Brownsville, asked Secretary of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security John F. Kelly whether someone at U.S. Customs and Border Protection specifically requested a 2,000-mile long border wall. He also voiced his disagreement that the wall was the best solution to achieve a stronger border security.

“Wouldn’t you agree that the threat of terrorists entering the country is a threat that exists at international airports, at our seaports and at our border? If we obsess with only the Southern border, aren’t we missing the point?” Vela said to Kelly.

The Southern region is the largest opening and is “a gaping wound in (U.S.) defenses,” Kelly responded.

“It’s a layered defense that starts with border protection. I don’t criticize (immigrants) at all for wanting to come to the U.S. There is no one single solution,” Kelly said.

Treviño had a small list of suggestions for Congress to consider, including a virtual wall using cameras, improving road infrastructure and removing foliage that smugglers use for cover.