As we await sessions, lets bring in elevation parters in Roger Mcnamee this morning, sar sar sarah fagen and elan muy lets set the table for what we expect sessions to say the white house wants to end this program and it looks like there will be a sixmonth delay before it actually phased out. The big question that sessions will have to answer is exactly what will the end of the Program Look Like . Is it a shutdown of daca for all the people would are currently receiving those protections and benefits or is there some sort of phaseout that could allow people some perhaps grace period before they see those benefits run out and before they can face deportation. Quickly here, sarah, we expect the ag in a moment, people turning their attention to what were expecting to be a six month period for congress to react. With now a number of new obstacles in their way what might their calendar look like the calendar is getting more crowded and certainly with other issues before them this is not a good legislative move by trump in my view he should be doing everything to focus on tax reform. He should not be punting things to congress that get in the way of tax reform. And while this is something that needs to be dealt with, its an important issue. Timing wise, this is ill thought through. Elan, isnt part of the issue that theres this deadline because of the attorneys general that want to file suit i know there is all this focus on the humanitarian issues and we have the responses from the ceos in Silicon Valley but ultimately this could go down in court if he does nothing, right it seems like daca could be doomed regardless. You know, youre exactly right. Here is the ag. Good morning. Im here today to announce that the program known as daca that was created under the Obama Administration is being resinlded. It essentially provided a legal status for recipients for a renewable two year term, work authorization, and other benefits including participation in the Social Security program to 800,000 mostly adult illegal aliens the policy was implemented unilaterally to great controversy and legal concern after congress rejected legislative proposals to extend similar benefits to on numerous occasions to this same group of illegal aliens. In other words, the executive branch through daca deliberately sought to achieve what the legislative branch specifically refused to authorize on multiple occasions. Such an open ended circumvention of Immigration Laws was an unconstitutional exercise of authority by the executive branch this contributed to a surge of miners at the southern border that yielded terrible humanitarian consequences. It also denied jobs to hundreds of thousands of americans by allowing those same illegal aliens to take those jobs. We inherited from our founders and have advanced an unsurpassed legal heritage which is a foundation of our freedom, our safety, and our prosperity as attorney general, it is my duty to ensure that laws of the United States are enforced and that the Constitutional Order is upheld no greater good for the Overall Health and wellbeing of our republic than preserving and strengthening the impartial rule of law societies where the rule of law is treasured are societies that tend to flourish and succeed societies where the rule of law is subject to political and personal biases become societies afflicted by corruption, poverty, and human suffering to have a lawful system of immigration that serves the National Interests we cannot admit everyone who would like to come here. Its just that simple. There is an open that would be an open borders policy and American People have rightly rejected that. Therefore, the nation must set and enforce a limit on how many immigrants we admit each year and that means all cannot be accepted this does not mean theyre bad people or that our nation disrespects or demeans them in any way. It means we are properly enforcing our laws as congress has passed them. It is with these principles and duties in mind and in light of imminent litigation that we reviewed the Obama Administrations daca policy our collective wisdom is that the policy is vulnerable to the same legal and constitutional challenges that the courts recognize with respect to the daca program which was enjoined on a nationwide basis in a decision that was affirmed by the fifth Circuit Court of appeals the fifth circuit specifically concluded that daca had not been implemented in a fashion that allowed sufficient discretion and that daca was foreclosed by congress careful plan in other words, the Immigration Law that Congress Passed foreclosed this possibility of daca in other words, it was inconsistent with the constitutions separation of powers that decision was affirmed by the Supreme Court on an equally on divided basis. If we were to keep the Obama Administrations executive amnesty policy, the likeliest outcome is that it would, too, be enjoined justice as was daca the department of justice advised the president and department of home land security that the department of Homeland Security should begin an orderly lawful wind down including the cancellation of the memo that authorized this program. Acting secretary duke has chosen appropriately to initiate a wind down process this will enable the department of Homeland Security to conduct an orderly change and fulfill the desire of this administration to create a time period for congress to act should it so choose. We firmly believe this is the responsible path simply put, if we are to further our goal of strengthening the Constitutional Order and the rule of law in america, the department of justice cannot defend this overreach. George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley in testimony before the House Judiciary Committee was clear about the enormous constitutional infirm tis raised by this action he said, in ordering this blanket exception, president obama was nullifying part of a law that he simply disagreed with if a president can claim sweeping discretion to suspend key federal laws, the entire legislative process becomes little more than a pretense. The circumvention of the legislative process not only undermines the authority of this branch, but destabilizes the system as a whole. So this is not a little matter ending the previous administrations disrespect for the legislative process is an important first step all immigration policies should serve the interest of the people of the United States, lawful immigrant and native bornalike congress should carefully and thoughtfully pursue the types rev forms that are right for the American People. Our nation is kpricompromised of good and decent people who want the government leaders to fulfill promises and advance an immigration policy that serves the national interest. Were people of compassion and we are people of law but there is nothing compassionate about the failure to enforce Immigration Laws. Enforcing the law saves lives. Protects communities and taxpayers and prevents human suffering. Failure to enforce the laws in the past has put our nation at risk of crime, violence, and terrorism. The compassionate thing to do is end the lawlessness, enforce our laws and if congress chooses to make changes to those laws, to do so through the process set forth by our founders. In a way that advances the interests of the American People that is what the president has promised to do and he has delivered to the American People. Under President Trumps leadership, this administration has made great progress in the last few months toward establishing a lawful and constitutional immigration system this makes us safer and more secure it will further economically the lives of millions who are struggling and it will enable our country to more effectively teach new immigrants about our system of government and to assimilate them to the cultural understandings that support the substantial progress in reducing illegal immigration and our borders seen in recent months is due to the leadership of President Trump and his inspired immigration officers but the problem is not yet solved and without more action, we could see illegality rise again rather than be eliminated. As a candidate and now in office President Trump offered specific ideas and legislative solutions that will protect american workers, increase wages and salaries, defend the National Security and ensure the Public Safety and increase the general wellbeing of the American People he has worked closely with many members of congress including in the introduction of the rays act which would produce enormous benefits for our country and this is how our democratic process works. There are many powerful Interest Groups in the country and every one of them has a constitutional right to advocate their views and represent whom ever they choose but the department of justice does not represent any narrow interest or any subset of the American People. We represent all of the American People and protect the integrity of our constitution, that is our charge we at the department of justice are proud and honored to work to advance this vision for america and to do our best each day to ensure the safety and security of the American People thank you very much. Thank you. Attorney general Jeff Sessions announcing the end of the daca program, deferred action for childhood arrivals. It was as expected it will be a six month wind down period he gives Congress Time to act if they so choose to change Immigration Laws to allow for childhood arrivals to actually stay lets go back to our panel here. Let me get to elan seems to me what this does is ends the threat of legislation from those attorneys general and now puts the ball in the court of congress. Thats right. So the reason why this is all coming to a head today is because attorneys general led by the state of texas had threatened to sue President Trump and the administration if he did not make a move by today. However, the attorneys general of Washington State and new york have also said that they will sue if President Trump does make a move so we dont see the legal action as ending just yet in terms of exactly how daca will be phased out, its important to note that according to the department of Homeland Security, those who are currently receiving benefits under that program, they will continue to be protected until their permits expire the permits typically last about two years. So they will be able to enjoy the benefits for the remainder of the two years anyone who is already submitted a request for renewal, those requests for renewal will be considered but for those people who have not submitted a request or not submitted a request for renewal for protection under this program for those people, the benefits of daca will be ending. And just to clarify for people, i think a lot of people are focused that it is probably a lot of children. But actually a lot of the individuals could be 35, 36, 37 years old at this program. When this program was started, you could be as old as 31 to apply for an exemption and so now as we see the years pass, you have thats why we have so Many Companies saying we have a lot of employees that are part of daca thats right. The requirements for daca were that you were under the age of 16 when you arrived in this country. So by the time that you actually applied for these protections or the benefits, you may well be past the age of 16 you may be an adult. Roger mcnamee, turning to the likely reaction from Silicon Valley, the news is as expected. But the language that attorney general used certainly struck me as not particularly trying to strike a bipartisan tone he talked about the term illegal alien and said we cannot admit everyone who would like to come here of course, this program is about people who are already here. What struck you about the tone of the attorney general . How do you expect ceos who have already come out on the other side of this to respond now . You know, i think that it is ironic that the attorney general of the administration has done more to undermine the rule of law than i think any president ial administration before it would be out there citing the rule of laws, the argument for doing this. This thing was going through the courts they didnt need to do anything. And i look at this and view it as either this is hostage taking in an attempt to trade this for funding for the wall or Something Else or its just mean spirited because you look at this from the perspective of, again, these are people who are american in all but the last legal requirement. They grew up here. They work here they went to school here they paid taxes. And, you know, whether its Apple Computer or microsoft, google, doesnt matter, all of them have dreamers as employees. And, you know, if you know dreamers, these are people who are the hardest working, most loyal people you could possibly have the notion that we want to chase them away is just so terrible for the economy on the face of it but what it really does is it undoes a promise its yet another thing that Trump Administration is doing that i think roger that makes america weaker we dont followthrough on our promises what is tech going to do about it its one thing to write a letter i dont know. I dont know the answer. For the next two years these companies are going to do everything in their power to protect the employees and i think to argue for the logical answer here which is there are 800,000 people here who are overwhelmingly either in school or employed and paying taxes and would are real contributors to society theyre not taking jobs away from americans our entire economy is based on having lots of different kinds of people in it. And, you know, there are some jobs that immigrants are literally the only people how are we going to repair houston without the undocumented people who make up maybe half of the labor force and construction in houston . I think the tech ceos are going to fight for this because its the right thing to do and secondly, you know, again, if were trying to have a stock market, we need to have a real rule of law. We need to actually have contracts observed roger, but one of the things that Jeff Sessions did say is he talked about the huge surge of children that did come to the border under president obama when it became clear that it was easier for children to stay. Its what lead to president obama being labelled deporter in chief by fusion because he didnt do so many how do you reconcile . Can you put aside the words that jeff session used. I know a lot of people are going to find offensive. But the idea of rule of law this is done by executive order because it couldnt get through congress how do you reconcile that . I think that the real issue here lets remember, the reason people are showing up on the border is because of violence taking place in central america. You know, they werent there because they thought they were going to be able to somehow qualify for daca there were many reasons they came to the border let us be fair. There was a lot of violence going on in central america. There still is. And that was coincidental that was not related i think its super important when you look at these things to recognize that daca is a separate case. And trying to conflate these things are convenient. I agree with that but these things are not the same thing dreamers are a separate set of people theyre part of our economy. And as americans, what do we stand for . If we do not stand for our word and roger, hold on. We want to tell people what ibm tweeted out. They believe dreamers made a positive contribution to our company and economy and we support Bipartisan Legislation in congress to allow them to remain in the United States. Sarah, thats where attorney general sessions is trying to get them to go, trying to get congress to actually do something about it what are the chances of that thats right. Well, they are really backed up as you know, michelle. And there are many pressing issues relative to the economy this being one of them it seems unlikely this congress is going to be able to sol of this in six months based on the track record that we see but there were two issues that we heard from the attorney general. One is the legal argument. And what he said legally is probably true. That the president acted unilaterally and its not constitutional and Congress Needs to act but then there is the whole well see what the courts say. Most constitutional scholars think that but correct the president sen tigis entitle executive order. Politically speaking, this issue you raised from ibm this is first of many major u. S. Corporations that put out a Statement Like this. And politically, it is going to be another