tv Hillary Clinton Get- Out- The- Vote Rally CSPAN April 18, 2016 9:30pm-10:28pm EDT
altamirono who was released by i.c.e. following his conviction on charges of burglary and abduction. he was released on a $10,000 nd, permitted to remain free and elect to have deportation pr proceedings that would take years complete. then in 2014 he shot and killed 24-year-old grant ronnebeck while he was working at a convenience store where the man had come to buy cigarettes. i.c.e. has previously disclosed hat disclosed they were released due to court orders including the so-called cases in which the country would not take themming
back. released by i.c.e. choice. and the article points out that 20,358 i.c.e. released criminal jailens from its custody. these jailens had been convicted of crimes before they were released. total of 25, 2015, a a number of jailens had been freed by i.c.e. in a separate communication, they provided a list of countries that were uncooperative in deporting their citizens. china,stan, cape verdey, ghana, india, iran, iraq,
ory coast, liberia, libya, sudan , somalia, south nd zimbabwe, we have the power to force these countries to either take back their citizens that have come illegally in this country are and committed crimes n this country or vr consequences. this administration chooses to provide provide benefits to iran and afghanistan. for goodness sakes. make sure they are running
christians and jews out of the afghanistan, but shouldn't they take back their own people. last time i was told by one of the leaders in afghanistan that their budget was around $12 billion a year, they provided a billion and a half and all the rest came from the united states and won't take the people back, shut the government whack. his is ridiculous. also an important point was made n this article as of july, 15, only about 30% of the 3,358 freed by i.c.e. had been removed. 28,000 still have a pending case
oose of july, 2015, but some of them don't show up for their hearings. a large percentage do not and given notice to appear. a recent until gang unit led operation included and this is from a different article from article i.c.e. arrests those targeting gangs, talking about the efforts to capture gangs. so, let's see, of the arrests they were gang members and associates, and charged and 1 arrested. just more and more numbers, drugs, firearms, currency. but again, about 3% is all they
are removing of those committing crimes in the country. a year ago, there was an article, may 28, the nondeported. i.c.e. deporting jailens at a rapid pace and she documents the majority of those the policies require i.c.e. officers to let the offenders go and judges will allow them to be released but the companies are set by i.c.e. and attorneys have been set not o contest for release, which .rings us back to the bill once
my christian brother and christian sister are gone and we don't enforce our immigration laws as the oath taken by those in this administration required. ow, i want to finish up by mentioning again about my being on the border. texas has utilized and provided massive amounts of money to help us defend our border. the number one area through which people are coming in through the united states from arizona into texas and i had occasion to be on the boat with officers.d.p.s. they have got fantastic
equipment that allowed them -- they were able to utilize to spot people that were getting ready to cross the rio grande from the mexico side into the u.s. it appeared they were people that were going to be brought across. maybe they were drugs. we don't really know. after we had spotted these boats cruising down the river on the d.p.s. boat and there were a couple of boats much smaller and other assets that allowed them to focus where these people were so the federal border patrol would know, after we stayed silent for a while, we got radio message asked us to return back to the dock where on down the
so they could try to intercept these folks. fine. i know the department of public safety, if they see a raft coming across, they will stop them and will destroy the raft so ets the coy oathey and the d.p.s. would do that. they are waiting for you to leach the area and we can interdict and catch them red-handed. we spent massive amounts of money andest spotting these people before they came across the river, wther it was people coming across. we, otted them and i say the department of public safety people in texas and we got word that's exactly what they were
waiting for, they came across after you left the area and now we are processing them into the united states. we have the power to secure our border, but this administration has no will and that's why children, unaccompanied children y little 00% and tinely girls and girls like that, i'm unaccompanied. they did not cross that river. they did come that river. they were accompanied. thank god they were not sold into sex trafficking as so many have been. when we in the united states, as i have been told by african friends, some of which i have season in the last month, said
we are the hope of the world. and when we don't follow the law or enforce the laws, the world suffers and as christians in africa told me, we know where we go when we die but our only hope is if i america stays strong. we haven't done that. christians are being persecuted. jews are being per cuted again as if we are headed toward a new holocaust. t is time for american leaders who have taken an oath to the united states constitution and o this country to whom much is given, much will be required. there is going to be a day of
judgment on america if we don't rise to the occasion and use what we have been blessed with. with that. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: does the gentleman have a motion. the question is on the moigs to adjourn. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the house stands adjourned until
we believe the court is going to say that every time the state does not like what the federal , with the administration does or what the legislature does, the congress, you can't go in. what the president did was lawful with in the congress. allowing they allowed to take the actions being considered today. optimistic june we will
refer. people will sign up for drivers license and be able to protect their families. i got to the arguments this morning. i thought the arguments were very encouraging. nailed it when he pointed out it was a political dispute. allowed to proceed every time thestate disagrees with president they will be filing a lawsuit. this is something that should not even be before this court, number one. number two, they made it ability ofclear the the president to secure these actions as long-standing and based in touch you to hand
regulations. to deny that would be an extraordinary departure from law and history. i am optimistic the court will there were no standing protections to proceed, but it was entirely lawful. >> i am senator bob menendez. i believe that many of the exposed thestioned political theater going on here. the reality is about the standing question which timeated the great deal of of the justices. there is no question that for 50 years from eisenhower to the current president, the president has used executive actions on immigration time and time again. we see a set of circumstances that the argument that a
potential cost to the state of states wouldother open the floodgates in which any administration or for that matter and act of congress would then create a flood of lawsuits that would come to the united states. and i thinkbelieve, the justices will come to the conclusion, that texas and the other states do not have standing on a question that is clearly immigration law and is the discretion of the years of whether or not to deport someone. and the second thing, congress has failed to act if in fact it wanted to limit this discretion, it could do so. but it has not and for various decades now it has not. i hope the justices will come to the conclusion the questions
brought up in the first place, no standing. congress has decided. we cannot have a floodgate of lawsuits at the end of the day simply because her as a cost. if that is the case, it will become a pathway to give millions of people an opportunity to have some form of out inwhile we find congress what our national status should be. thank you. >> good morning. good afternoon. ok. >> ok. >> two steps back, ok. >> ok. >> come closer. >> i am ready. >> i will open it up and then pass it on.
>> good afternoon. my name is maria and i the executive director of the national immigration law center. this morning our communities, our families, we walked into the supreme court was so much hope. we are leaving confident. we know the law is on our side. the supreme court is on our side as many of the justices said and we are on the right side of history and the law. there are some difficult questions. but we are leaving confident that the federal government made its best argument. will prevail. we have a number of directly affected individuals here that were in the courtroom. this is probably one of the most diverse audiences in the supreme court. we had several dozen people whose futures are directly impacted by the supreme court justice's decision. they sat there patiently hearing
each of the arguments. we want to hear from them directly. someone will hear from who traveled with her mother from los angeles and traveled here because the mother is eligible. sophie, do you want to say a few words? >> hotel. my name is sophie. i am sick shares old and i am an american citizen. we are united by a mission. we want the same rights or all. allant protection for immigrants. we want immigration rights for all. >> hello. i am six years old. i am american citizen. we are united by a single
mission. .e want the same rights for all i asked the judges is to protect the children and all immigrants. reform for all. i have the right to protection. i have the right to state with my parents. i have the right to to live without fear. i have the right to be happy. give me the opportunity. lots of children have dreams like me. i have faith that you as parents and as citizens will make the best decision. thank you. welcome. thank you for being here. i would like to thank governor this. for starting i want to thank my fellow
attorney generals, some of whom are here today. tocifically, i would like think these men for being a part of this. this is an amazing opportunity and an amazing day for us. our efforts to stop the president's illegal immigration plans go back to a simple days. one person does not have unilateral authority to change the law or make a new law. today we argued the case strain -- strongly for the rule of law. if we allow a president, this one or a future resident, no matter the political persuasion are party to make changes to the law without congressional approval, we will and up with a perverted constitution. foroday was a strong day defending the rule of law and we are grateful for that opportunity. we are open to any questions to scott keller or me.
[indiscernible] >> we are here defending the constitution and so whether we have people out here or not is not relevant. any other questions? you know what, i am encouraged today. i feel like the justices are going to support the article in the constitution that requires the lobby faithful executed by the president of the united states and he does not have authority to make law. we had questions from almost all of the justices. thomas did not ask the questions i am aware of. ofwhat about the question [indiscernible] -- why not go after the -- you seem to be going about kind of -- why not
challenge the memo itself? >> did you heard the question? she wants to know why -- >> the justices asking you, why not challenge the november memo and the drivers licenses? beenis case has always about the separation of powers. it transforms unlawful conduct into lawful conduct. i think that should trouble every american the cousin it is congress's power. we have power from the congress to protect our liberties. i would like to read a quote. two blocks from here is a monument. a. taft. that is why we are here today.
you think the supreme court may have some bearing on -- her >> i do not have a crystal wall. know we made strong constitutional arguments today and we feel confident. any other questions? thank you very much. >> making. >> good morning. i am president and general an organization. we were granted argument time this morning and join to the solicitor general and defending president obama's use of his presidential prerogative which has been executed by many of his predecessors to set priorities enforcement.on his guidance issued in november 2014 was an exercise of that long-standing authority. the justices seemed concerned
with vigorous questioning about whether the state of texas had the right to be in court to challenge that right of enforcement discretion. the questions also reflected confusion about what exactly the state of texas is challenging since it had in its briefing repeated that the president has the authority through the secretary of homeland security to determine how to arrange and enforcement resources to determine that certain folks will be low priority and not to be removed even though that is a protection that can be revoked at any moment. wentnutes of argument fairly quickly. because of the many issues revolvingall of them around why the state of texas had decided long ago to provide subsidized divers license and word determined to oppose those who would receive driver's license under the deferred action guidance.
other revolved around whether the president has authority, given that it has historically been exercised by 70 others and -- theyctly texas was seemed to assign some magical importance to language used in the guidance. i'm available to answer any questions. >> while was your sense of the comments?ice's >> at is always hard to determine where a justice will fall but he was very interested in the questioning, much of it surrounding the standing of the state of texas and work authorization. relates to the injury the state set forth and whether there is any basis to challenge it since statutes gives the attorney general, now the secretary of homeland security, the right. any questions?
represent ther to three jane doe's. very hard-working mothers raising families. including a united states citizen in south texas who the opportunity provided by the guidance to step forward and to seek discretionary relief that well the tech them from the daily threat that they will be removed from the families, detained, and deported. that is all the guidance would provide and we are hopeful that come june the president will be able to implement that guidance and provide that relief. thank you. it is possible the justices could move before june, simply the outside -- the end of june as the outside of when the expectation well come. they averred all the cases this term. there is no way to expedite their thinking. little over two months to put it all together in
an opinion. who knows how many. but once a decision comes, we hope the opportunity will present itself to immediately implement the guidance. >> first and foremost, the standing issue. will we know firsthand >> if they decide there is no standard and that is the basis of the decision then their case is over. the district judge has nothing else to do but dismissed for the lack of standing. it is our hope that they will struggle with the questions before standing and conclude that texas does not have a kind of concrete interest that is traceable to the guidance and is regressive old by their claim to strike down the guideline. no, not necessarily. it is a matter about however long the justices take to make their decisions into writing because we expect their supreme court to justify their decisions in writing and release it. >> what are the real world impacts where clients?
>> as i mentioned, the real world impact would to be free from the daily fear that they may not come home one day, that their children, including u.s. citizen children will have their parent or parents put into and into by ice removal and they will be separated and have to make a very tough choice, do you leave your u.s. citizen children here, the country of their birth and citizenship, or do you take them with you to a country that is less familiar? it is that daily fear that ways in the minds of not just the chain dose and others eligible this releases them from the daily fear. thank you. >> i am steve king of iowa. i serve on the house judiciary
committee where i have since 2003. i also serve on the constitutional subcommittee. i have brought a number of the amendments on the house floor regarding the board memos and also an amendment that passed the house to defund the administration defense of this case that was just argued before the supreme court. i think these points are very simple. the white house is argued they have prosecutorial discussions. when you read through their documents, it is her a clear that even from the beginning they created groups or classes of people that would give why get amnesty by the president and the president went to chicago and said that he had changed the law. this separation of powers argument before this court, you have the confession of the president that he is gone outside the bounds of his article and change the law.
-- changed the law. the white house is granted, broad, sweeping amnesty to people under daca and the memos and they cannot make the argument legitimately that this is an individual basis only, so they have already crossed the line on two big issues. they are not exercising prosecutorial discretion and the president cannot change the law. i have concluded and will take any questions. hearing none. thank you. >> i would not agree. the federal statute declares that when an officer who is
charged with enforcing the make , they shelled law submit to review -- they shall submitted for review. that is what the law requires. how does congress have to write a law to get the president to actually make sure this is executed? we have argued this sense barack obama became president. i talk about this with my conservative friends. we will be able to have law enforcement regarding immigration. assault --agree just egregious assault to the letter of the law. the president carries zero guilt
about violating the law. his calculation is purely political. the question is, can he get away with it? if he can, he wants to legalize the use of people that will vote for him. this is about millions of undocumented democrats in the mind of barack obama and many people on the left and that is what this case is about for them. for me, it is about the rule of law and conserving our constitution. i am not that optimistic when it comes to the law. today,are on the bench we need more of a 5-4 decision. this is an example of what we will get if we let the president named the next justice of the supreme court. sotomayor, another
focusing on the policy and not be legal issue. it is important for us to hold the line until next november and can choose president who they want. if i were on the judiciary committee or even in the united , i would vote no on the confirmation hearing on because the them constitution is a living and breathing document. this constitution will no longer be, if not. america will pull out.
[indiscernible] >> i don't want to be critical of the argument put forward before the court. i am grateful that they are here. taken action against everything on one of them. i have tried to defunded every single one of them. taxpayers are funding these programs. the minority in the senate can block those actions.
if we had a vote in the senate, the president would have had to confess that the american people are right and he is wrong or veto a bill. , this is not hard to understand. you can have justices in the supreme court that have difficulty reading and understanding and interpreting the constitution, and how they if policyecide discussions are part of a constitutional argument. that just saddens my heart thinking we could have another justice that is arguing policy rather than the constitution when it comes to constitutional law. that is not their job. [indiscernible] >> how to use predict the supreme court these days?
when i came to this town, i could. i understood the justices, the constitution, the case laws. i had a pretty good handle on being able to predict the decision of the supreme court. now in this court it is almost impossible to protect because you cannot -- predict week you cannot go back to the constitution as your guide. >> thank you all so much. we appreciate it. >> got to go. timescer: a new york article characterize the scene inside the courtroom today. the supreme court on monday seemed sharply divided during an extended argument over a challenge to president obama's plan that would shield many of undocumented immigrants from deportation, now allowing them to work in the country legally.
much of the argument was technical but these justices occasionally caused to acknowledge realities outside of the courtroom. we will bring you the audio of the oral argument friday 8:00 eastern. our road to the white house coverage continues tonight. first, with hillary clinton at a rally in new york city, then donald trump talks to supporters at a rally in buffalo, new york. later, the constitution party announces its candidate for president and vice president. ♪ announcer: the campaign 2016 bus continues its travel to visit winners of this year's student camp competition. we visited a high school in sparks, nevada for her third prize documentary on the wild horse population in the united states titled "wild horse
management." we then headed to california to meet with student camp winners in that state including san diego, recognizing students tristan cooper and jackie power for their winning document, and in california, congresswoman judy chu joined classmates to honor second prize winners for their winning documentary on social security called "a sense of security." official thanks to our cable partners for helping to coordinate these community events. remember, every weekday on c-span, the sure to watch one of the top 21 winning entries at before washington journal. announcer: a day ahead of the new york presidential primaries, hillary clinton spoke to supporters at a campaign rally where she was joined by new york senator justin gillibrand, gabby
giffords and planted president cecil richards. this is about 55 minutes. ♪ [applause] >> ladies and gentlemen, please welcome to the stage, former congresswoman gabby giffords, president of the planned parenthood action fund, cecil richards, u.s. senator justin gillibrand, mary rosario, number 32 and hillary clinton. [applause]
i am here to talk to you about hillary clinton. [applause] hillary is half. >> yes she is. >> hillary is courageous. >> yes she is. >> she will fight to make our families safer. [applause] will the white house, she stand up to the gun lobby. [applause] >> that is why i am voting for hillary. [applause] >> hillary, hillary, hillary, hillary, hillary.
cecil richards: it is such an honor to be here with gabrielle giffords and other elected representatives. you'll be hearing from her in a minute. i am here on behalf of the planned parenthood action fund. [applause] richards: tomorrow in new york we are making history, writing the future. [applause] cecil richards: i feel like as women we have fought too hard, come too far to turn back cap. we have seen a difference what it means to have a president in the white house that stanza for our rights and there's more to
be done. it is time to recognize that ,omen, as half of this country we are half the wage earners, healthy college students and we are sick and tired of getting left with more than half the load. [applause] cecil richards: women in america are still underpaid, anglo women $.79 on the dollar, african-american women $.60 on the dollar, latina women, $.55 on the dollar. it is unacceptable. we are supporting families, taking care of our parents, building small businesses. we do not need equal pay tomorrow, we needed today. [applause] cecil richards: women cannot wait. this congress and state legislatures across the country, instead of protecting and advancing the rights of women for reproductive health care for safe and legal abortions, they are persecuting women and
doctors. candidates are talking about whether to punish women, while women are already been punished in america. in my home state of texas have to drive hundreds of miles to get to a doctor. women like dana farris fisher who had her press karen's -- breast cancer detected a planned parenthood another program has been ended by the texas texas legislature. that is right. senator ted cruz is pledging to end planned parenthood. yes and outlaw abortion. he said women are the victims and he wants to protect us. don't you just feel safer already? mom, the late governor ann richards would say -- [applause] a woman ofrds: voting for ted cruz is like a chicken voting for colonel sanders.
how about instead, let's elected president that trust women to make our own decisions about her own bodies. we are sick and tired of being treated like we cannot think for ourselves, because it is not the business of any bureaucrat or politician or judge to make decisions about whether or when we have children. that is my right and that is your right. [applause] cecil richards: women cannot wait. women cannot wait. today we have the greatest representation of women in leadership. women are one third of the supreme court, 1/5 of the u.s. senate and i'm here to say, that is not good enough for me. [applause] cecil richards: we cannot have equity if we do not have equal representation. women cannot wait. it is time we had paid family leave like every other nation in this world. so that we can raise our children and we can take care of our parents. women cannot wait. it is time for an immigration
policy that respects families and keeps them together. women cannot wait. [applause] cecil richard: nearly 100 years ago, women finally got the right to vote in america and now we are poised to make history once again. we are not going to wait any longer to put a woman in the white house. [applause] cecil richards: and not just any woman, this woman. this one. [applause] this one.ards: hillary, hillary, hillary, hillary, hillary, hillary, hillary, hillary,. she is the most qualified, the most committee, the toughest.
we need someone who doesn't just vote the right way, we need a president they get the beverage signal day and not just during campaign season and fights for equal rights, for equal pay, for equal representation, whose record is more than a soundbite, who has been on the front lines of women her entire life. [applause] richards: i am proud to stand with her and planned parenthood action fund is proud to endorse or, a friend, a hillary a leader, clinton, first lady, u.s. senator, secretary of state and soon, our president of the united states of america. [applause] cecil richards: and now, in woman who stands and fights for us every single day, a senator from new york who is organizing millions of women to get off the sidelines, my friend, my
colleague, senator kiersten gillibrand. [applause] gillibrand: my wonderful friend and colleague, gabby giffords, thank you. i am honored to be here with a room full of amazing speakers and all of these women standing behind me. it has been an amazing opportunity to be in this campaign for hillary clinton. it is largely because i have been so lucky to have mentors and role models in my life who also happen to be strong and brilliant women. [applause] gillibrand: my grandmother taught me that women's voices matters and my mother taught me to own my own ambition and never give up, but my greatest mentor, the strongest and best mentor has been hillary bottom clinton. clinton.y rodham [applause]
senator gillibrand: i was a said,lawyer when she women rights are human rights and human rights by women's rights. it was a life-changing moment for me and i knew at that moment i had to follow hillary and get off the sidelines, and before long, hillary was speaking to a group of women and she looked out into a room like this and she said, decisions are being made every day in washington and if you are not part of the decisions and you do not like what they decide, you have no one to blame yourself. me, that inspired inspired me to get involved in public life and she has been inspiring people ever since. it is not surprising looking at who hillary clinton is. look at her mother, a mother who left home and had to start working by the time she was 14 realized, a woman who
she only had opportunities in this life because of the kindness of strangers. she taught her daughter to never give up. she taught her daughter the value of hard work, taught her dad how important it is for all of us to help one another, so given that, it is not surprising that when she graduated from law school where to go, not a big fancy firm, she goes to the children defense fund. [applause] senator gillibrand: there she fought for children with disabilities and as first lady of the united states, she fought again for all americans to have access to high-quality, affordable health care. now as a senator of new york, she did not stop fighting, who did she fight for them? she fought for all of us, the 9/11 first responders who raised up those towers -- raced up those towers when everyone was coming down. as secretary of state, she traveled the globe, once again
fighting for equal rights and human rights for every person, and now that hillary is running for president, our first woman president of the united states, we know she will fight for us again. she is going to fight for equal pay for equal work. she will fight for health care for all, affordable day care, universal pre-k, raising the minimum wage. she will make sure that women who work hard every day can get off of the sticky floor and earn a living wage in this country. [applause] gillibrand: our job, everyone of us, we have to make sure on this election date we are heard. we have to vote. we have to make sure everyone we know and love votes. we have to make sure because hillary has always had our back. hillary has always fought for us, and we need to fight for her. [applause] senator gillibrand: it is not my honor and privilege to bring up
mary rosario. she knows something about what it is like to work hard every day and she knows what it is like to never give up. mary. [applause] mary rosario: thank you. hello, everyone. my name is mary rosario and i am a mom, a grandma and a proud you --fdisu. yes withso proud to be here all of the strong women that are here today. i come from a family of strong women. i was born in the bronx and was mostly race in puerto rico by my mother. getncredible woman who i much informed from. i am so proud to introduce hillary clinton who we are
working to make the first woman president of the united states. [applause] mary: it is about time we had a woman president. [applause] mary: i am supporting hillary because she has always stood with working women like you and me. i have a good union job working in madison square garden because i am part of a unit, i have good benefits and make enough to help out my two kids, six grandkids and my mom. [applause] mary: 11 years ago, i never would have imagined that i would be here at an event like this today. at the time, 11 years