Supreme Court Appears Inclined To Let Trump End DACA Program | Velshi & Ruhle | MSNBC


>>>TODAY HUNDREDS OF YOUNG>>>TODAY HUNDREDS OF YOUNG DOCUMENTS RALLIED OUTSIDE THE DOCUMENTS RALLIED OUTSIDE THE SUPREME COURT AFTER THEY HEARD SUPREME COURT AFTER THEY HEARD ARLTS S ARLTS S ARGUMENTS ON THE TRUMP ARGUMENTS ON THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION’S ATTEMPT TO STOP ADMINISTRATION’S ATTEMPT TO STOP DACA. DACA. THE PROGRAM HAS PROTECTED THE THE PROGRAM HAS PROTECTED THE TEMPORARY STATUS OF CERTAIN TEMPORARY STATUS OF CERTAIN UNDOCUMENTED IMMIGRANTS WHO WERE UNDOCUMENTED IMMIGRANTS WHO WERE BROUGHT TO THE UNITED STATES AS BROUGHT TO THE UNITED STATES AS KIDS. KIDS. JOINING US NOW, PETE WILLIAMS. JOINING US NOW, PETE WILLIAMS.>>Reporter: AND THE QUESTION>>Reporter: AND THE QUESTION COMES DOWN TO THIS. COMES DOWN TO THIS. IF PRESIDENT OBAMA COULD IF PRESIDENT OBAMA COULD ESTABLISH IT BY EXECUTIVE ORDER, ESTABLISH IT BY EXECUTIVE ORDER, WHY CAN’T PRESIDENT TRUMP JUST WHY CAN’T PRESIDENT TRUMP JUST SHUT IT DOWN WITHOUT THE COURTS SHUT IT DOWN WITHOUT THE COURTS WEIGHING IN. WEIGHING IN. THAT IS REALLY THE QUESTION. THAT IS REALLY THE QUESTION. THE DACA DEFENDER SS WHO GOT A B THE DACA DEFENDER SS WHO GOT A B CHEER FROM THE HUNDREDS OF CHEER FROM THE HUNDREDS OF PEOPLE OUT IN FRONT COURT TODAY, PEOPLE OUT IN FRONT COURT TODAY, SO MANY THAT THEY ACTUALLY SO MANY THAT THEY ACTUALLY CLOSED DOWN THE STREET IN FRONT CLOSED DOWN THE STREET IN FRONT OF THE COURT BETWEEN THE SUPREME OF THE COURT BETWEEN THE SUPREME COURT AND THE CAPITOL BUILDING, COURT AND THE CAPITOL BUILDING, THEIR ARGUMENT IS THAT IF THEIR ARGUMENT IS THAT IF PRESIDENT TRUMP HAD ACTUALLY PRESIDENT TRUMP HAD ACTUALLY DONE WHAT THE LAW REQUIRES, DONE WHAT THE LAW REQUIRES, WHICH IS TO EXPLAIN WHY HE WAS WHICH IS TO EXPLAIN WHY HE WAS HITTING IT DOWN, HE WOULD BE HITTING IT DOWN, HE WOULD BE FORCED TO OWN THE DECISION AND FORCED TO OWN THE DECISION AND TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR IT. TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR IT. BUT THEY SAY THAT THE TRUMP BUT THEY SAY THAT THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION DIDN’T WANT TO DO ADMINISTRATION DIDN’T WANT TO DO THAT. THAT. IT SIMPLY SAID WE HAVE TO SHUT IT SIMPLY SAID WE HAVE TO SHUT IT DOWN BECAUSE IT IS ILLEGAL. IT DOWN BECAUSE IT IS ILLEGAL. SO THEIR ARGUMENT IS, NUMBER SO THEIR ARGUMENT IS, NUMBER ONE, IT IS NOT ILLEGAL AND ONE, IT IS NOT ILLEGAL AND NUMBER TWO, IF THE GOVERNMENT NUMBER TWO, IF THE GOVERNMENT ACTUALLY HAD TO OWN IT AND TAKE ACTUALLY HAD TO OWN IT AND TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR IT, WHO KNOWS RESPONSIBILITY FOR IT, WHO KNOWS HOW THIS WOULD COME OUT AND HOW THIS WOULD COME OUT AND BESIDES THE ARE LAW REQUIRES BESIDES THE ARE LAW REQUIRES THEM TO DO THAT. THEM TO DO THAT. BUT THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION BUT THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION ARGUED IS THIS AN EXERCISE OF ARGUED IS THIS AN EXERCISE OF DISCRETION JUST LIKE WHEN THE DISCRETION JUST LIKE WHEN THE NEW POLICE CHIEF COMES TO TOWN NEW POLICE CHIEF COMES TO TOWN AND SAYS I’M GOING TO ENFORCE AND SAYS I’M GOING TO ENFORCE THE DRUG LAWS MORE DISTRICTLY OR THE DRUG LAWS MORE DISTRICTLY OR I’M I’M STRICTLY STRICTLY STRICTLY. STRICTLY. THEY ARE DISCRETIONARY DECISIONS THEY ARE DISCRETIONARY DECISIONS THAT CAN’T BE REVIEWED BY THE THAT CAN’T BE REVIEWED BY THE COURTS. COURTS. SO THOSE ARE THE TWO ARGUMENTS SO THOSE ARE THE TWO ARGUMENTS THAT WE HEARD TODAY. THAT WE HEARD TODAY. AND I THINK IT IS FAIR TO SAY AND I THINK IT IS FAIR TO SAY THAT THE LIBERAL JUSTICES ARE THAT THE LIBERAL JUSTICES ARE INCLINED TO SAY THAT THE TRUMP INCLINED TO SAY THAT THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION ACTED WRONGLY ADMINISTRATION ACTED WRONGLY WHEN IT SHUT DOWN DACA AND THE WHEN IT SHUT DOWN DACA AND THE MORE CONSERVATIVE JUSTICES TOOK MORE CONSERVATIVE JUSTICES TOOK THE OPPOSITE SWRUVIEW. THE OPPOSITE SWRUVIEW. DID SEEM THAT THE BEAR MAJORITY DID SEEM THAT THE BEAR MAJORITY WAS WILLING TO AGREE WITH THE WAS WILLING TO AGREE WITH THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION. TRUMP ADMINISTRATION. THE ONLY QUESTION IN MY MIND, THE ONLY QUESTION IN MY MIND, CHIEF JUSTICE JOCHBHN ROBERTS MI CHIEF JUSTICE JOCHBHN ROBERTS MI HE JOIN THE LIBERALS AS HE DID HE JOIN THE LIBERALS AS HE DID LAST TERM OVER THE CENSUS FORM. LAST TERM OVER THE CENSUS FORM. HE DIDN’T GIVE A LOT OF REASONS HE DIDN’T GIVE A LOT OF REASONS TO THINK THAT HE WAS GOING TO TO THINK THAT HE WAS GOING TO JOIN WITH THE LIBERAL, SO IF I JOIN WITH THE LIBERAL, SO IF I HAD TO GUESS, I WOULD SAY THAT HAD TO GUESS, I WOULD SAY THAT THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION WOULD THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION WOULD WIN BUT I PUT A BIG ASTERISK BY WIN BUT I PUT A BIG ASTERISK BY THAT BECAUSE IT IS A LITTLE BIT THAT BECAUSE IT IS A LITTLE BIT DIFFICULT TO TELL WHERE THE DIFFICULT TO TELL WHERE THE CHIEF IS ON THIS. CHIEF IS ON THIS.>>AND IF THEY DID, DO WE HAVE>>AND IF THEY DID, DO WE HAVE ANY SENSE OF WHAT WOULD HAPPEN ANY SENSE OF WHAT WOULD HAPPEN TO THE 800,000 PEOPLE IN THE TO THE 800,000 PEOPLE IN THE PROGRAM CURRENTLY WHO REALLY THE PROGRAM CURRENTLY WHO REALLY THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION ENCOURAGED OBAMA ADMINISTRATION ENCOURAGED TO COME OUT FROM THE SHADOWS AND TO COME OUT FROM THE SHADOWS AND REGISTER? REGISTER? THEY ARE FAR MORE VULNERABLE THEY ARE FAR MORE VULNERABLE NOW. NOW.>>Reporter: AND WE’RE LOOKING>>Reporter: AND WE’RE LOOKING AT THE SECOND GENERATION OF SOME AT THE SECOND GENERATION OF SOME OF THESE FOLKS. OF THESE FOLKS. MANY OF THE DACA RECIPIENTS COME MANY OF THE DACA RECIPIENTS COME WHO CAME HERE ARE NOW IMPEACHES WHO CAME HERE ARE NOW IMPEACHES AND THEIR CHILDREN ARE U.S. AND THEIR CHILDREN ARE U.S. CITIZENS BECAUSE THEY WERE BORN CITIZENS BECAUSE THEY WERE BORN HERE. HERE. SO THAT PRESENTS A WHOLE SO THAT PRESENTS A WHOLE DIFFERENT SET OF QUESTIONS. DIFFERENT SET OF QUESTIONS. TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION WHAT IF TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION WHAT IF THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION WON, THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION WON, FIRST OF ALL, I DON’T THINK THAT FIRST OF ALL, I DON’T THINK THAT WE’LL GET A RULING UNTIL MAYBE WE’LL GET A RULING UNTIL MAYBE THE SPRING. THE SPRING. SECONDLY, I THINK THE GOVERNMENT SECONDLY, I THINK THE GOVERNMENT WOULD DO AN ORDINARILY SHUTDOWN WOULD DO AN ORDINARILY SHUTDOWN AS IT WANTED TO DO IN 2017 WHEN AS IT WANTED TO DO IN 2017 WHEN IT TRIED TO SHUT THE PROGRAM IT TRIED TO SHUT THE PROGRAM DOWN WHICH IS TO SAY THAT YOU DOWN WHICH IS TO SAY THAT YOU HAVE TO REREGISTER FOR THIS HAVE TO REREGISTER FOR THIS EVERY TWO YEARS AND THEN THOSE EVERY TWO YEARS AND THEN THOSE PEOPLE WOULD BE SUBJECT TO PEOPLE WOULD BE SUBJECT TO DEPORTATION BUT NOT NECESSARILY DEPORTATION BUT NOT NECESSARILY DEPORTED. DEPORTED. EVEN IF THE GOVERNMENT WANTED TO EVEN IF THE GOVERNMENT WANTED TO DEPORT ALL OF THESE 800,000, IT DEPORT ALL OF THESE 800,000, IT JUST DOESN’T HAVE THE MANPOWER JUST DOESN’T HAVE THE MANPOWER TO DO IT. TO DO IT. THE EFFECT WOULD BE OF COURSE TO THE EFFECT WOULD BE OF COURSE TO MAKE THEM WONDER EVERY TIME MAKE THEM WONDER EVERY TIME THERE WAS A KNOCK AT THE DOOR. THERE WAS A KNOCK AT THE DOOR. AND THEN ANOTHER QUESTION IS IF AND THEN ANOTHER QUESTION IS IF THE SUPREME COURT REALLY DOES THE SUPREME COURT REALLY DOES STRIKE DACA DOWN OR AGREE THAT STRIKE DACA DOWN OR AGREE THAT IT IS ILLEGAL, WOULD THAT MAKE IT IS ILLEGAL, WOULD THAT MAKE CONGRESS MORE LIKELY TO DO CONGRESS MORE LIKELY TO DO SOMETHING AND YOUR GUESS THERE SOMETHING AND YOUR GUESS THERE IS AS GOOD AS MINE. IS AS GOOD AS MINE.>>ALL RIGHT, PETE, THANK YOU SO>>ALL RIGHT, PETE, THANK YOU SO MUCH. MUCH. I WANT TO SPEAK TO ONE OF THOSE I WANT TO SPEAK TO ONE OF THOSE PARENTS RIGHT NOW. PARENTS RIGHT NOW. SHE IS A DACA RECIPIENT AND A SHE IS A DACA RECIPIENT AND A PLAINTIFF IN THIS CASE BEING PLAINTIFF IN THIS CASE BEING HEARD AT THE SUPREME COURT HEARD AT THE SUPREME COURT TODAY. TODAY. YOU CAME HERE FROM ECUADOR AS A YOU CAME HERE FROM ECUADOR AS A TEEN AND NOW YOU HAVE TWO TEEN AND NOW YOU HAVE TWO CHILDREN WHO WERE BORN HERE IN CHILDREN WHO WERE BORN HERE IN THE UNITED STATES. THE UNITED STATES. FOR THOSE WHO DO NOT UNDERSTAND, FOR THOSE WHO DO NOT UNDERSTAND, WHAT DOES DACA MEAN TO YOU AND WHAT DOES DACA MEAN TO YOU AND YOUR FAMILY AND WHAT DOES IT YOUR FAMILY AND WHAT DOES IT MEAN IF IT ENDS? MEAN IF IT ENDS?>>YES, SO DACA IS A PROGRAM>>YES, SO DACA IS A PROGRAM THAT CHANGED MY LIFE IN MANY THAT CHANGED MY LIFE IN MANY DIFFERENT ASPECTS. DIFFERENT ASPECTS. I WAS ABLE TO COME OUT OF THE I WAS ABLE TO COME OUT OF THE SHADOW, OBTAIN A HIGHER SHADOW, OBTAIN A HIGHER EDUCATION, PURCHASE A HOME. EDUCATION, PURCHASE A HOME. BUT MOST IMPORTANTLY, BE A ONLY BUT MOST IMPORTANTLY, BE A ONLY TO STAY WITH MY CHILDREN. TO STAY WITH MY CHILDREN. BECAUSE DACA SHELTERED US FROM BECAUSE DACA SHELTERED US FROM THE DEPORTATION PROCEEDINGS. THE DEPORTATION PROCEEDINGS. SO BEING ABLE TO BE WITH MY KID, SO BEING ABLE TO BE WITH MY KID, BE THERE FOR THEM, MAKE SURE BE THERE FOR THEM, MAKE SURE THAT THEY HAVE THEIR MOTHER BY THAT THEY HAVE THEIR MOTHER BY THEIR SIDE. THEIR SIDE. AND THAT IS WHY TODAY I WENT AND THAT IS WHY TODAY I WENT INSIDE THE SUPREME COURT INSIDE THE SUPREME COURT THINKING ABOUT MY FAMILY AND THINKING ABOUT MY FAMILY AND THINKING ABOUT ALL THE FAMILIES THINKING ABOUT ALL THE FAMILIES WHO WILL BE IMPATIENTED BY THISC WHO WILL BE IMPATIENTED BY THISC DECISION. DECISION.>>IF THEY WOULD END THE>>IF THEY WOULD END THE PROGRAM, WHAT WOULD HAPPEN TO PROGRAM, WHAT WOULD HAPPEN TO YOU? YOU? YOU HAVE TWO KIDS BORN HERE. YOU HAVE TWO KIDS BORN HERE.>>I HOPE THAT AT THE END OF THE>>I HOPE THAT AT THE END OF THE DAY THE JUSTICES RULE ON THE DAY THE JUSTICES RULE ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF HISTORY. RIGHT SIDE OF HISTORY. IF THE PROGRAM WAS TO END, I IF THE PROGRAM WAS TO END, I THINK THAT IT WILL HAVE THINK THAT IT WILL HAVE DEVASTATING CONSEQUENCES FOR DEVASTATING CONSEQUENCES FOR MANY FAMILIES LIKE MINE. MANY FAMILIES LIKE MINE. AND THAT WOULD IMPLICATE US NOT AND THAT WOULD IMPLICATE US NOT BEING ABLE TO WORK, NOT BEING BEING ABLE TO WORK, NOT BEING ABLE TO CONTRIBUTE TO THE ABLE TO CONTRIBUTE TO THE ECONOMY AND ALSO FAMILY ECONOMY AND ALSO FAMILY SEPARATION. SEPARATION. AND THAT IS WHY WE ARE FIGHTING AND THAT IS WHY WE ARE FIGHTING REALLY HARD FOR ALL IMMIGRANTS REALLY HARD FOR ALL IMMIGRANTS SO THAT IS NOT THE CASE. SO THAT IS NOT THE CASE.>>HOW DO YOU RESPOND TO>>HOW DO YOU RESPOND TO PRESIDENT TRUMP SAYING ON PRESIDENT TRUMP SAYING ON TWITTER THIS MORNING THAT MANY TWITTER THIS MORNING THAT MANY OF THE PEOPLE IN DACA ARE NO OF THE PEOPLE IN DACA ARE NO LONGER VERY YOUNG, THEY ARE FAR LONGER VERY YOUNG, THEY ARE FAR FROM ANGELS, SOME ARE VERY TOUGH FROM ANGELS, SOME ARE VERY TOUGH HARDENED CRIMINALS? HARDENED CRIMINALS?>>YEAH, WELL, TRUMP WILL>>YEAH, WELL, TRUMP WILL CONTINUE TO ATTACK THE IMMIGRANT CONTINUE TO ATTACK THE IMMIGRANT COMMUNITY REGARDLESS. COMMUNITY REGARDLESS. BUT THE WAY THAT WE RESPOND, WE BUT THE WAY THAT WE RESPOND, WE WILL FIGHT FOR THE COMMUNITY, WILL FIGHT FOR THE COMMUNITY, CONTINUING TO GET THE EDUCATION, CONTINUING TO GET THE EDUCATION, CONTRIBUTING TO THE ECONOMY, CONTRIBUTING TO THE ECONOMY, WORKING AND MAKING SURE THAT WE

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *