Spoke after the oral aimed to end the action for childhood arrivals dhaka program. [chanting] hi, everyone. Family doctor and passionate healthcare provider. Recipient and im here today as a plaintiff. My family and i moved to the states when i was 9 years old. My parents worked long hours at the restaurant to help our family achieve the american dream. Their example i went on to become the first graduateted person to ucsf medical school. The also a graduate from university of harvard berkley and school of public health. Also here today ive since gone on to be named to thirty under 30 for cofounding prehealth dreamers, working to help undocumented dreamers in pursuit careers. Care ive made it a mission not only improve health as a doctor but support others in my share that mission in their journeys. Im here to share my story, the of everyone rallying here today and those who could not be here. Like two years ago when i met a 15yearold unaccompanied minor who walked atough our doors San Francisco general hospital. As i was treating his asthma, i reminded ofp but be my own familys hesitation and confusion in accessing the healthcare system. Its my familys experiences that have allowed me to walk on today andhat im on have allowed me to provide topassionate, effective care people like david. Today im one of almost 200 undocumented medical students and residents who, without daca, complete Residency Training and without daca, the health and wellbeing of all the families that we care for will also suffer. I hope today the Supreme Court will uphold daca because it is legal, because it is and it has been highly effective for undocumented immigrants and our entire country. Ending it would be cons questionable for all of us. Today i look around and see my friends, my community, and everyone is here to fight to be of the country we love and everybody deserves happiness, deserves safety in a place we call home. Im proud to be a plaintiff. To have been in the courtroom today to make sure that our voices were heard as aboutcisions were made our lives and to make sure this knows our home is here. Thank you. Attorney general for the state of california. I want to say, due to the have come, we all stand on their shoulders to try case that no one is above the law and everyone must the law. We learn from a very early age theresa right way and a wrong way to do things. Government tried to terminate the daca program the just as ourd parents would tell us or as a the field would tell you, if you do it the wrong way, penalized. This administration tried to and tryer what it did to correct what it did by moving justify its to uplawful action. Action. L as any parent or referee would nineyou and i hope the justices of the Supreme Court will tell you, you do it the to movey, you cant try the goalpost to say you did it the right way. Today we stand here very proud the arguments made on behalf 700,000 dacahan recipients but substantially many more dreamers and so many, many more immigrants who are waiting to come out of the shadows. Weare here to say that understand that this nation is based on the rule of law. Understand, as we learned it from childhood, that theres a way and theres a wrong way and were here to stand up way to do things and thats why we believe the recipients, dreamers of america and immigrants who live will some day, to prove that the nigeria nine justices of the Supreme Court did it the right way. Thank attorney general becerra and i want to thank all of the advocates but i to thank in particular the 700,000 dreamers in this country including the 42,000 from new york state. I think its critically important that there were two today scussed whether or not the termination of daca should be reviewed by is court and the answer clear. Clearly the courts have wide discretion with respect to question. This and two, on the merits, whether or not the reasons provided were adequate, were sufficient. Answer is no. They came and they made conclusiary remarks with respect termination and rescission of daca and we say if thisre going on rescind program, you it take into account that significant individuals have relied upon this program from health to Higher Education to businesses. I particularly want to single that theyoft for all have done in standing up and daca. Ing its critically important that, terminating daca would distress tot countless numbers of individuals are here and arrived here under the age of 16 to live and to go to school and to work and we cannott of that terminate and or rescind a countless numbers of individuals have relied upon based on the fact that theyiduals decided that wanted to end. Justiceink the words of importante critically and Justice Sonia sotomayor who indicated that it was president said he would protect Daca Recipients and he has do so and as a result of that statements coming out of the mouth of the president of these United States this court should understand this is a nation of immigrants and all of uphold the beliefs and values of our country and that immigrants are here to stay and we should protect the who camendividuals here for opportunity, for education and for freedom. From the great state of new york, its an honor and privilege to be here and represent the coalition, 17 the Attorney Generals Association who filed on behalf individuals. Good afternoon. My name is eliana hernandez. I am 31 years old. Am a plaintiff,im a mom and i am a daca recipient. I am honored to stand here in front of you continuing our fight to defend daca. Am from the suburbs of long island, new york, which has been 17 years. He last this is our home. That forevergram changed my life in many different aspects, allowing me the opportunity to come out of shadows, finish college and become a homeowner. Parent, defending daca is responsibility. My children are the reason why i walked 230 miles from new york city to washington, d. C. No physical pain can be compared the emotional pain i will feel if we are ever separated. Stay withn deserve to their mother in the place they call home. Hope that the justices can see our humanity, our worth and our that we make to this country as the good americans we are. I hope that they rule on the right side of history. Believe that we will win. Afterght is not over today. Today we are fighting for daca and tomorrow we are going to be citizenship for all. That walkedarchers with me the 230 miles, i love you, i admire you have inspired me in so many ways to continue fighting not only for recipients but for the 11 whoion undocumented people live in this country. [speaking spanish] home is here take a fewo questions. Were going to try to take some questions and then were going and let others speak but i know there are others that want to speak, as well. Take some quick questions and go from there. Any questions . Which secretary put daca in place . Napolitano. Im janet nap pal tano, of homeland security. I authored the memo that created the daca program and im theileged to serve as president of the university of california, the First University to sue to sustain daca. Im here with former Assembly Speaker and former board chair the university, john perez. We have 1700plus daca students in our student body. Theyre undergraduates, law students. Medical so the interest in this case as knowledge is immense. I need you to look at the cameras. If we send usnt, we have to do is jump through rhetorical hoops, whats the point . Thanthink its more rhetorical hoops. They have to really do an analysis of the benefits that which areces beenantial and have evidenced by and in all the amicus briefs that have been filed so i think and would hope a real they actually did analysis of daca, they would recognize that this is a valid exercise of the executives authority. 500,000resent undocumented immigrant youth as part of united we dream. I am undocumented, unafraid and here to stay. Cleard here being really that the lives of more than 700,000 undocumented people are optimistic that justices willurt of justice bute whether or not they do that, one thing is clear. Undocumented organizing and young people across the country will continue to fight. We will continue to win. We will continue to establish law because at this moment it is undocumented young people that are standing to that wehe democracy also cherish. We are excited that united we are partners across the country have been here, 3,000 people, outside the courtroom. And we believe we will win. I will pass it over to who defended the case. Program announced and administered by secretary napolitano. Made perfect sense to designate individuals who came whohis country as children had been vetted, have committed no crimes. The government doesnt have the authority or the power or the resources to move with respect to deportation proceedings to might soeople that it these individuals are the last persons in the world that we want to evict from this country. This policy made perfect sense to everyone. Most people realize that. This administration does not take responsibility for terminating it and gave the attorney general sessions that it was unlawful and therefore had to be terminated. Was an excuse that makes no sense. The daca policy was lawful and constitutional and so the reason why the attorney general and the administration said that they were terminating it because it was unlawful is that they did ownership ofake the decisions. They did not want to be or accountable to the people of this country and to all of the individuals involved in this program that were going to enforce the law against them. Done that, they would have had to explain to program hasthis meant and why it was being terminated and they would have to take the blame and responsibility and accountability and the reason they did not want to do that, takedid not want to responsibility for the decision and so they said they had no no discretion. D thats what we were arguing about in there. They had reasons to explain, to justify their decision, they would have done it. Didnt. And they cant. And they wont. We were asked during the court what difference does it make . It will be sent back and theyll make the same decision, theyll the reasons. I dont think so. I dont think they want to take responsibility for this decision. Want to explain it to the american people. They dont want to own this do it. N and they wont if we are successful and i believe we will be, the court say that decision was not justifiable, it was not consistent with the rule of law. You cant justify it that way. And it cant be sustained that way. Back, if you want to do it, and do it right. They wont do it. Court doesnt do what you think, if the court does sustain the decision and doesnt to say that daca was illegal. It can say all kinds of be the what will andct of that in 2020 probably in june of 2020, an election year. What would be the impact . Thing is, thats one of the reasons they wont do this. Had to make this decision in 2020 in an election year, they valid to explain why making this harsh, cruel, mean decision. These individuals have become the community, theyve had jobs, theyve supported themselves, theyve had tens of thousands of children. Theyve become a part of the community. Have jobs, theyve served in the armed forces. Theyre going to rip them out of that when they came here as children and threaten them to be sent to countries they dont may notw where they even understand the language. Theyre not going to do that take if they have to thats what our government is all about. Youre going to make decisions, to take accountability and responsibility for those decisions. Youre afraid to do that and dont do it, thats what will happen. Decision. Make that how do you explain the work permit . Under what authority to give 800,000 work permits out . The congress of the United States has passed a statute that person is in a deferred action category, that given and theres federal regulations and federal statutes that person may be given authorization if they apply for it, if they meet all of the standards and it someonerfect sense that that the administration has decided is not anything to be position toin a support himself or herself or a be part of the community rather than dependent upon the government. Decision is made, there are statutes and regulations that authorize the application for permission to work and those are laws which evenovernment hasnt challenged. Which statute provides the work permit laws . You. ll get that to well get you the citation of the statute. Believe me, no one challenged that in there. The United States and the government doesnt dispute that. [speaking spanish] any other questions . Thank you. Lets head to the rally. [chatter] the argument that we heard in the courtroom today were about of the importance of the clearlynt speaking and honestly so that people can hold it accountable for the decisions it makes, particularly when it affects thousands of people like maria. By the issues that bring us here today go deeper than that. They are issues about the human consequences of this program and what it means for maria and other daca beneficiaries, and they are about the principles this country has stood for over time, principles that encourage honest, hardworking people to make their home here and lets have made this country a beacon of freedom. And i think there are no confidence that were really interesting and a little bit surprising about the argument. The first was the principle that emerged. I think some people came to the courthouse thinking that the case was about in euro technique a technicality. But the argument made clear that it is much more than that. When so many people come forward and rely on this type of program, and then the government takes it away, they are owed an explanation as to why. I think that is part of the fundamental fairness we all expect in this country. I think people came understanding that this mattered for the hundreds of thousands of individuals who are daca registrants, but they come away appreciating that it also matters deeply to the millions of businesses that are depending on this as well. Thoughts nal [indiscernible] what is a justification for the administration, not congress, to offer 800,000 people work permits . I dont know if there are 800,000 work permits. I would simply say, microsoft exploits 66 of these d. R. E. A. M. E. R. S. They are doing great work one of them came at the age of four years, the other came at the age of four months. They are protecting the Cyber Security of this nation, creating the software on which the entire United States military is going to depend, and i can assure you, there is a lawful work permit for each and every one of them. Reporter [indiscernible] i am not here today to be an expert on not program. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you, maria. Thank you. [chatter] announcer cspans washington journal, live every day with news and policy issues that impact you. Coming up wednesday morning, we are getting your reaction ahead of the first public house impeachment inquiry. Join the discussion all morning with your phone calls, Facebook CommentsText Messages and tweets,. Be sure to watch live at 7 00 eastern wednesday morning. Coming up on cspan, President Trump speaks to the Economic Club of new york. After that, 20 to the democratic president ial candidate, colorado senator Michael Bennet newaigning in t hampshire. And later, ahead of tomorrows hearings, the house debate on the feature inquiry from october 31 dust on the impeachment inquiry from october 31. President trump spoke at the Economic Club of new york. The president discussed a wide range of Economic Issues including employment, job creation, interest rates, and china. Economic club of new york president Barbara Van Allen introduced the president. Good afternoon, welcome everyone. I Barbara Van Allen, president am of the Economic Club of new york. Im honored to preside at todays event. Currently in our 112th year the Economic Club of new york is the nations leading Nonpartisan Forum for discussions on economic, social, and