tv Attorneys and Advocates Speak to Reporters After DACA Oral Argument CSPAN November 13, 2019 12:41am-1:10am EST
[cheering] [inaudible conversations] hello, everyone. i'm a family doctor and provider. i am a recipient here today as a plaintiff. my family and i moved to the united states when i was 9-years-old. my parents worked long hours at the restaurant to help our family achieve the american dream. following the examples i went on to become the first undocumented
person to graduate the medical school. i'm also a graduate of the university of california berkeley and school of public health. i am here today -- five gone on to be named the forbes 30 under 30 that works to support undocumented immigrant students to support others in my community that share the same mission and their journey and i am here today to share my story into the story of everyone rallying here today and that those who cannoty be here. two years ago when i met david a
15-year-old unaccompanied minor that walked through our doors at the hospital did i couldn't help but be reminded of the hesitation and confusion accessing the health care system. it's my family's experiences that have allowed me to provide compassionate effective care to people like david. today i'm one of almost 200 undocumented medical students and residents who without daca can't complete residency training and the health and well-being of all of the families that we care for will also suffer. i hope today the supreme court will uphold eventually daca because it is legal for constitutional and has been highly effective for
undocumented immigrants and the entire country. ending it simply would be consequential for all of us. diand today, i look around and i see my friends, my community and everyone is here to be a part of the country that we love. and everybody deserves happiness and safety in a place we call home and i'm proud to be a plaintiff and i am thankful to have been in the courtroom today to make sure that our voices were heard as the decisions were made about our lives and to make sure the country knows our home is here. thank you. >> we along with a number of other individual plaintiffs and states like new york and the attorney general i first want to
say it we stand on the shoulders to try to make the case that no one is above the law and everyone must respectct the law. from a very early age there is a right way and a wrong way to do things. the federal government tried to terminate the program in the wrong way.th just as our parents would tell us or a referee on the field would tell you if you did it the wrong way, you get penalized. this administration tried to then alter what i what they didd corrected by moving the goalposts that justified its unlawful actions and as any parent would tell you or any referee would tell you and i hope the nine justices of the supremsupreme court were to tel, you do it the wrong way youtr
can't try to move the goalpost igoalpostsjust try to say you de right way. today we stand here ar very prod of the arguments that were made on behalf of the more than 700,000 recipients of substantially many more were waiting to come out of the shadows. we understand this nation is based on the roof law. we understand because we learned that from childhood that there is a right way and a wrong way and we are here to stand up for the right way to do things and that is why we believe the daca recipients and dreamers of america and immigrants that live in the shadow will someday get approved a big update on the right way. but we now turn the microphone to my dear friend from new york the attorney general. >> thank you. >> i want to thank the attorney general and i want to thank all
of the advocates i want to thank in particular the 700 dreamers in the country, and including the 42,000 from new york state. i think it is critically important there are two issues that were discussed today. whether or not determination should be reviewed by the court and the answer is clear they have wide discretion with respect to reviewing this question and on the merit whether or not the reason that were provided more adequate or suspicious the answer is no they came and made remarks both the secretary to the decision and what we say if in fact if you are going to rescind the program, you should take into account the fact that significant numbers of individuals were filed over three dred relied on the program, the higher education of the businesses and i want to single out microsoft and all that they havee done standing up
and defending daca. it's critically important that againai by terminating daca woud provide great distress to the countless numbers of individuals that are here and arrived here under the age of 16 to live and go to school and go to work and as a result of that, we cannot terminate and rescind a program where a countless number of individuals have relied upon. as a result of the statements coming out of the mouth of the president of the united states, this court should understand this as a nation of immigrants
and all of u us should uphold te belief in the values of the country and that is that immigrants are here to stay and we should protect the 700,000 individuals who came here for the opportunity, for education and for freedom. so in the great state of new york it is an honor and a privilege to be here and represent a coalition of the 17 members of the attorney general's association ofatil fid on the health of these individuals. >> good afternoon. i e am 31-years-old and i am a plaintiff, i am a mother and a daca recipients. i am honored to stand here today in front of you continuing the fight to defend daca. i'm from the suburbs of new york which has been home for the last 70 years. this is our home. it's a program that forever changed my life in many different aspects.
allowing me the opportunity to come out of the shadows, finish college and become a homeowner as a parent, it is the duty and responsibility. my children are the reason why i work 230 miles to the sea. no physical pain can be compared to the emotional pain i feel if we are ever separated. my children deserve to stay with their mother in the place they call home. i hope the justices can see the humanity and work and contributions that we make to the country as big as americans we are. therefore i hope that they will on the right side of history. i believe that we will win. our fight is not over afterr
today. today we are fighting for daca and tomorrow for citizenship for all. all of those that work with me, i love you and i admire you.ir you can biography in so many ways to continue fighting not only for the recipients but for the 11 million undocumented people that live in this country. [speaking spanish]
[cheering] we will try to take a few questions and then we will go aheadre and let others speak. there are others that want to speak as well so we will try to take a question and then go t fm there. any questions? >> janet napolitano as the secretary of homeland security, i offered them a note that created the program and now i am privileged to serve as the president of the university of california the first university for the sustained daca. i'm here with the speaker and current board chair of the
university. we are here and we have 1700 plus students that are undergraduates, law students, medical students for the interest in the case as you might imagine is immense. [inaudible] [inaudible] is the point, if we send it back and we jump through some rhetorical points,s but is the point? >> it's more the rhetorical hoops. they have to do an analysis for the benefit that is producedro which are substantial and has been evidenced by all of the amicus briefs i represent
500,000 undocumented immigrants as part of the dream. f i'm undocumented, i'm afraid n here to stay. the supreme court justices will file on the side of justice but whether or not they do that they are organizing and young people across the country will continue to fight. we will continue to win and establish the rulest of law because at this moment if the young people standing to defend the democracy that wee also cherish. we are excited that all across the country we have been here outside of the courtroom we believe that we will win. i will pass this over to the
defender of the case. >> dacaa was a program announced and administered by the secretary napolitano. it made perfect sense to designate individuals who came to the country as children who had been vetted, committed no crimes. the government doesn't have the authority or the power or the resources to move with respect to the deportation proceedings than all the people that it might. so, these individuals are the last persons inre the world we want to evict. if they made perfect sense to everyone. most people realize that. this administration doesn't want to take responsibility for terminating it indicates the
excuse by the attorney general sessions that it was unlawful and therefore had to bed terminated. that was an excuse that makes no sense. it was constitutional and for the reason you why the attorney general and administration said they were terminating it because it was unlawful because they didn't want to take ownership of the positions and they didn't tt want to be responsible or accountable to the people of this country and two of the individuals involved in the program we have to take the blame and response ability and accountability, and the reason that they did not want to do that, they didn't want to take responsibly for the positions they said that they have no choice. they have no discretion. that is what we were arguing
about in there. they have their reasons and they have to justify the decision, they would have done it but they didn't. they can't and they won't. we were asked what difference does it make. they will be sent back and explain the reasons. i don't think so. they don't want to explain it to the american people. they don't want to own this position and they will not do it. if we are successful, and i believe we will be, the court will sayia the decision wasn't justifiable, it wasn't consistent in the rule of law. you can't justify it that way and it can't be sustained that way. go back if you want to do it and do it right. they won't do it. [cheering] it doesn't even have to say that it was. i can say all kinds of things. what would be the impact of th
that?on >> that's one of the reasons they won't do that. if they have to make the decision in 2020 in an election year, they would have to explain why they were making this harsh, cruel, mean decision. peace individualsav have becomea part of the community. they have tens of thousands of children. they've become a part of the community. they have jobs. they servedg in th the armed f. you are going to rip them out of that when they came here as children and threaten them to be sent to countries they don't even know where they may not understand the language. they are not going to do that because if they have to take that is what our government is all about. if you are going to make decisions you have to take accountability for those decisions if you are afraid to do that and you don't do it that is what will happen. they will not make that
decision. >> [inaudible] the congress of the united states passed a statute a that says if a person is in a deferred action category, that person may be given -- as federal regulations and statutes, the person may be given authorization if they apply for it and meet all of the standards and it makes perfect that someone the administration decided they are not going to be deported is in a better position to support himself or herself oo be a part of the community rather than be dependent upon the government. once the decision is made there are statutes and regulations that authorize the application for permission to work and those are the walls whic laws which te government hasn't even challenged.
thanks for being out here and for all of your help. in the arguments we heard in the courtroom today it's about the importance of the governmentt speaking plainly and honestly in a straightforward way so people could hold it accountable for the decisions it makes. particularly when it affects people like maria. the issues that bring us here today and the three of us
forward are issues of the human consequencethat thehuman conseqe program and what it means for the other beneficiaries and they are about the basic principle that this country has stood for overtime, principles that encourage honest hard working people to make their homes here and that has made the country a beacon for freedom. there are two things that were interesting and surprising about the argument. the first was the point of principle that emerged. some people came to the courthouse this morning thinking that it was about a narrowat technicality but the argument made clear it's about much more than that. when so many people come forward and rely on this type of program and then the government takes it away.