[chanting] [chanting] [chanting] hi, everyone. My name is nu. Im a Family Doctor and passionate healthcare provider. Im a daca recipient and im 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 their example i went on to become the first undocumented person to graduate from ucsf medical school. I am also a graduate from the university of harvard berkley and school of public health. I am here today ive also since gone on to be named to 30 under 30 for cofounding prehealth dreamers, working to help undocumented dreamers in pursuit of healthcare careers. Ive made it a mission not only to improve health as a doctor but also to support others in my community who share that mission in their journeys. Im here to share my story, the the stories of everyone rallying here today and those who could not be here. Like two years ago when i met david, a 15yearold unaccompanied minor who walked through our doors at San Francisco general hospital. As i was treating his asthma, i couldnt help but be reminded of my own familys hesitation and confusion in accessing the healthcare system. Its my familys experiences that have allowed me to walk on the path that im on today and have allowed me to provide compassionate, effective care to people like david. Today im one of almost 200 undocumented medical students and residents who, without daca, we cant 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, eventually, daca because it is legal, because it is constitutional and it has been highly effective for undocumented immigrants and our entire country. Ending it would be consequential for all of us. Today, i look around and see my friends, my community, and everyone is here to fight to be a part of the country we love and everybody deserves happiness, deserves safety in a place we call home. Im proud to be a plaintiff. Im 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 this country knows our home is here. Thank you. Attorney general for the state of california. We, along with a number of other individual plaintiffs, like states like new york. I want to say, due to the dreamers who have come, we all stand on their shoulders to try to make the case that no one is above the law and everyone must respect the law. We learn from a very early age theres a right way and theres a wrong way to do things. The federal government tried to terminate the daca program the wrong way and just as our parents would tell us or as a referee on the field would tell you, if you do it the wrong way, you get penalized. This administration tried to then alter what it did and try to correct what it did by moving the goalpost to justify its unlawful action. As any parent or referee would tell you and i hope the nine justices of the Supreme Court will tell you, you do it the wrong way, you cant try to move the goalpost to say you did it the right way. Today, we stand here very proud of the arguments made on behalf of the more than 700,000 Daca Recipients but substantially many more dreamers and so many, many more immigrants who are waiting to come out of the shadows. We are here to say that we understand that this nation is based on the rule of law. We understand, as we learned it from childhood, that theres a right way and theres a wrong way and were here to stand up for the right way to do things and thats why we believe the Daca Recipients, dreamers of america and immigrants who live in the shadows, will some day get to prove that the nine justices of the Supreme Court did it the right way. Let me turn the microphone over to my dear friend from new york. I want to thank attorney general becerra and i want to thank all of the advocates but i want 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 issues discussed today whether or not the termination of daca should be reviewed by the court and the answer is clear. Clearly the courts have wide discretion with respect to reviewing this question. And two, on the merits, whether or not the reasons provided were adequate, were sufficient. The answer is no. They came and they made conclusory remarks with respect to the termination and rescission of daca and we say if you are going on rescind this program, you should take into account that significant individuals have relied upon this program from Health Institutions to Higher Education to businesses. I particularly want to single out microsoft for all that they have done in standing up and defending daca. Its critically important that, again, by terminating daca would provide great distress to countless numbers of individuals who are here and arrived here under the age of 16 to live and to go to school and to work and as a result of that we cannot terminate and or rescind a program where countless numbers of individuals have relied upon based on the fact that individuals decided that they wanted to end. And i think the words of Justice Breyer were critically important and Justice Sonia sotomayor who indicated that it was President Trump who said he would protect Daca Recipients and he has failed to do so and as a result of those 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 us should uphold the beliefs and values of our country and that is that immigrants are here to stay and we should protect the 700,000 individuals who came here for opportunity, for education and for freedom. So from the great state of new york, its an honor and privilege to be here and represent the coalition, 17 members of the Attorney Generals Association who filed on behalf of these individuals. Good afternoon. My name is eliana hernandez. I am 31 years old. I 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. I am from the suburbs of long island, new york, which has been home for the last 17 years. This is our home. Daca is 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, defending daca is my duty, my 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 to the emotional pain i will feel if we are ever separated. My children deserve to stay with their mother in the place they call home. I hope that the justices can see our humanity, our worth and our contributions that we make to this country as the good americans we are. Therefore, i hope that they rule on the right side of history. I believe that we will win. Our fight is not over after today. Today we are fighting for daca and tomorrow we are going to be fighting for citizenship for all. To all the marchers that walked with me the 230 miles, i love you, i admire you have inspired me in so many ways to continue fighting not only for Daca Recipients but for the 11 million undocumented people who live in this country. [speaking spanish] home is here we try to take a few questions. Were going to try to take some questions and then were going to go ahead and let others speak but i know there are others that want to speak, as well. But well try to take some quick questions and go from there. Any questions . Which secretary put daca in place . Secretary napolitano. Im janet napolitano, secretary of homeland security. I authored the memo that created the daca program and im privileged to serve as the president of the university of california, the First University to sue to sustain daca. Im here with former Assembly Speaker and current board chair of the university, john perez. We have 1700plus daca students in our student body. Theyre undergraduates, law students, medical students. So the interest in this case as you might imagine is immense. I need you to look at the cameras. Whats the point, if we send us back and all we have to do is jump through rhetorical hoops, whats the point . I think its more than rhetorical hoops. They have to really do an analysis of the benefits that daca produces which are substantial and have been evidenced by and in all the amicus briefs that have been filed. So i think and would hope that if they actually did a real analysis of daca, they would recognize that this is a valid exercise of the executives authority. I represent 500,000 undocumented immigrant youth as part of united we dream. I am undocumented, unafraid and here to stay. I stand here being really clear that the lives of more than 700,000 undocumented people are at stake and im optimistic that the Supreme Court justices will file on the side of justice but 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 the rule of law because at this moment it is undocumented young people that are standing to defend the democracy that we also cherish. We are excited that united we dream 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. Daca was a Program Announced and administered by secretary napolitano. It made perfect sense to designate individuals who came to this country as children who 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 all the people that it might so 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 want to take responsibility for terminating it and gave the excuse by the attorney general sessions that it was unlawful and therefore had to be terminated. That 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 not want to take ownership of the decisions. They did not want to be responsible or accountable to the people of this country and to all of the individuals involved in this program that they were going to enforce the law against them. If they had done that, they would have had to explain to people what this program has 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, they did not want to take responsibility for the decision and so they said they had no choice, they had no discretion. Thats what we were arguing about in there. If they had reasons to explain, to justify their decision, they would have done it. They 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 explain the reasons. I dont think so. I dont think they want to take responsibility for this decision. They dont want to explain it to the american people. They dont want to own this decision and they wont do it. If we are successful and i believe we will be, the court will 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. Now go back, if you want to do it, and do it right. They wont do it. If the court doesnt do what you think, if the court does sustain the decision and doesnt even have to say that daca was illegal. It can say all kinds of things what will be the impact of that in 2020 and probably in june of 2020, an election year. What would be the impact . The thing is, thats one of the reasons they wont do this. If they had to make this decision in 2020 in an election year, they would have to explain why they were making this harsh, cruel, mean decision. These individuals have become part of the community, theyve had jobs, theyve supported themselves, theyve had tens of thousands of children. Theyve become a part of the community. They 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 even know where they may not even understand the language. Theyre not going to do that because if they have to take thats what our government is all about. Youre going to make decisions, you have to take accountability and responsibility for those decisions. If youre afraid to do that and dont do it, thats what will happen. They wont make that decision. 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 says that if a person is in a deferred action category, that person may be 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 makes perfect sense that someone that the administration has decided is not anything to be deported is in a position to support himself or herself or a family and be part of the community rather than dependent upon the government. So once the decision is made, there are statutes and regulations that authorize the application for permission to work and those are laws which the government hasnt even challenged. Which statute provides the work permit laws . Well get that to you. Well get you the citation of the statute. Believe me, no one challenged that in there. It is a law of the United States and the government doesnt dispute that. [speaking spanish] any other questions . Thank you. Good to see you again. Thanks for being out here. The arguments that we heard in the courtroom today were about the importance of the government speaking plainly and honestly added a straightforward way so the people can old it accountable for the decisions it makes, especially when it affects thousands of people like maria. 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 to maria and other daca beneficiaries and about the basic principles this country has stood for overtime. Principles and encourage hardworking people to make their homes here. There were two things that were really interesting. Was the principal that emerged. Some people came to the courthouse this morning thinking this case was about a narrow technicality. The argument made clear it is about much more than that. What so many people come forward and rely on this type of program as if the government takes it away, they are owed it explanation as to why. That is part of the fundamental fairness we all expect. I think people came understanding this matters for the hundreds of thousands of individuals that are daca registered. They come away appreciating it matters deeply to the millions of businesses that are depending on this, as well. I know know if there had been 800,000 work permits. They are doing important work. Some of these individuals came years, others4 came at the age of 4 months. Thatare creating software the entire United States military will depend on and i can assure you there is a lawful work permit for each and every one of them. I am not here today to be an expert on that program. Thank you very much. Next week, the House Intelligence Committee and adam schiff continue public impeachment meetings. Watch live testimony from jennifer williams, aide to Vice President mike pence and director of european affairs. 2 30, the former u. S. Special envoy at ukraine and National Security council. On wednesday at 9 00 a. M. , testimony continues with you ambassador to the european union. At 2 30, secretary of defense and underas Affairs Secretary of state for political affairs. On thursday at 9 00 a. M. Eastern, the committee will hear testimony from fiona hill. Watch the first two public hearings in their entirety on our website, cspan. Org. Of also find transcripts witness testimony and procedures for the hearings. Also it point of interest features that identifies key moments at the hearing identified by a star on the timeline. Live wherever you are with the free cspan radio app. This week, President Trump met with turkish president erdogan in the oval office. The president spoke about his decision to withdraw troops from syria, combating isis and trade with turkey. He responded to the first public impeachment inquiry hearings. Pres. Trump ok, thank you very mu