tv Decision to End Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals Program CSPAN October 3, 2017 11:09am-12:00pm EDT
is holding a hearing this morning on the deferred action for childhood arrivals program. also known as daca. it allows some people who came to the u.s. illegally as minors to stay in the country. this is live coverage. we join it in progress. >> those qualifications are well-known in the body. we have -- the dream act has been around for a long time. the age you got here. no criminal history. you are -- mr. graham: the parent. >> senator, live that to you. we're happy to help any way we can. senator leahy: thank you, mr. chairman. as frustrating as the chairman knows, two or three years ago we passed a major overhall -- overhaul of immigration. in this committee. bipartisan. passed the united states senate
two to one. republicans, democrats voting for it. the republican leadership said they couldn't bring it up in the house where it would have passed. it would have violated the sake rhett dennis hastert rule. because they had enormous -- this was before mr. hastert went to prison, they couldn't bring it up. i think everybody wishes now they had because it would have helped dreamers. i worry when we talk about daca, there is a lot of fear mongering that goes on. dreamers take nothing more to contribute to the only country they have known. every day on paper they are as american as the senators up here. so will we play by the rules, pull them selves up by the
the traps, or do we tell zeepo phobic attitude -- zen phobic attitude that faced my grandparents when they immigrated to vermont from italy or my great, great grandparents when they immigrated from ireland. now, let me ask. attorney general session suggested daca program put our nation at risk of crime, iolence, and even terrorism. libertarian cato institutes, confirmed less than 1% of dreerms have lost their daca status to safety concerns. mr. readler, did the attorney general of the united states accurately describe the justice department's view that it puts our nation at crimes of
violence? -- readler: he pry plare senator leahy: did he accurately describe that daca puts our nation at risk of crime and violence? i read the letter. answer the question. that's an easy yes or no answer. mr. readler: the attorney general speaks for the department of justice. senator leahy: he accurately described the justice deapts view that they believe daca puts our nation at risk of crime, violence, and even terrorism. mr. readler: the attorney general speaks for the department and that's the position of the department, yes. senator leahy: it's also the dreamers are less likely to be incarcerated than native born americans with the same age, education, and profiles. in light of the attorney general's statement, can you previde this committee with any examples of dreamers who have been involved with terrorist activities?
he spoke of that as being a real problem. you don't have to give me hundreds. give me one, one, one. mr. read dler: i am not aware of any examples. senator leahy: neither is the attorney general when he said that. i can guarantee you that. can you provide us with any statistics compiled by the d.o.j. or other government agencies to support the attorney general's claims about dreamers' proclivity for criminality? mr. readler: you have to ask other agencies what resources they have. the attorney general in his letter articulated the position of the united states and the attorney general, my understanding, will be appearing in front of the committee this month. senator leahy: i'm glad to hear that. it's taken longer than any attorney general since i have been here but i have only been here 42 years. republican, democratic administrations.
you have to key fend -- defen the policies in court. it's striking you say you have to ask somebody else. mr. readler: i would be happy to depeen the policies. senator leahy: you don't know the answer to the question. mr. readler: the attorney general's letters listed four or five reasons. senator leahy: he also spoke of the prolivity toward terrorism. e don't seem to find nifment president trump rescind the daca program said we have the highest duties to defend the american people. well, there are roughly 900 dreamers serving our military. the president of course had five deferments because his heel was
bothering him while he was out playing tennis. hasn't served in the military. these are the dreamers have. mr. mccament, is it in our interest to keep these dreamers in our armed forces? mr. mccament: with respect to the armed forces or other occupations, the action or deferred action does not provide them permanent status. senator leahy: are you planning to deport the thousand dreamers in our military? yes or no? mr. mccament: that would be a question for i.c.e. the enforcement -- senator leahy: you are the acting director. do you have plans to deport these thousand serving with our military at a time when we're facing threats around the world?
mr. mccament: we're not in charge of the removement operations. with respect to i.c.e. their priorities haven't changed. we can provide more information. senator leahy: i would submit uestions for the record. i'm glad to hear the attorney general is going to chat with us. in 2 1/2 weeks. >> i think it's the 19th. don't know for sure senator leahy: i'll drop by. >> you'll probably be here for the whole meeting. senator kennedy. senator kennedy: thank you, mr. chairman. dougherty, y -- thank you.
does the president believe we ? ould pass a daca mr. dougherty: the president would like congress to find a solution to daca. he would also like congress to look at other improvements that could be made for border security, interior security, and to allow the department to do what it can to protect the interests of the american worker. senator kennedy: can you tell me with spess physicality -- with specificity what the president would like to see in a daca fix bill? mr. dougherty: the core exopents of immigration reform of interest to the administration are controlling the border, maybe finding the secure fence act. expanding our ability to expeditiously remove foreign nationals from the united states when they don't have a convention against torture,
claim, or asylum claim. we would like to improve our vetting and security. we would like to reduce visa overstays. we're concerned about repatriation as i mentioned earlier. we'd like to protect u.s. workers. prevent fraud in the workplace. update nonimmigrant business visas. we would like to exam the establishment of a merit based system which prioritizes the skills of immigrants. senator kennedy: i'm looking for a little more meat on the bone. tell me, if you would, sir, what the trump administration would with respect to so-called dreamers? mr. dougherty: we're not in a position by design of advocating
for any particular legislative solution. the reason why we do that -- senator kennedy: i'm not asking you to choose among the bills. i'm asking you what the administration thinks with specificity we should do with respect to dreamers, because obviously the president has the authority to veto a bill. so let me ask you again. what specifically does the trump administration think we should do with respect to so-called reamers? mr. dougherty: let me answer this way. these individuals lack formal status in the united states. senator kennedy: should they be allowed to stay? mr. dougherty: they would probably be permitted under a rational bill these individuals would be able to become lawful -- senator kennedy: so the
president believes they should be allowed to stay? mr. dougherty: the secretary -- excuse me, the president, yes, would like to work with congress -- senator kennedy: under what conditions does the president believe they should be allowed to stay? the administration? mr. dougherty: don't have those etails, sir. senator kennedy: you don't have any suggestions? mr. dougherty: we're ready to give you technical assistance any time. senator kennedy: i appreciate that. we need all the assistance we can get. what i'm interested in trying to understand from you three gentlemen here, we have established that the administration supports allowing dreamers to stay. what i'm asking -- maybe i should include your two colleagues here. der what conditions, mr.
?ccament, under what conditions mr. mccament: with respect to those policy points, i would defer to the department. with respect to the operation -- senator kennedy: how about you? i can't see your name. read letter? under whatdowns? mr. readler: the department of justice typically doesn't take -- we're happy to consider legislative proposals submitted to the department. the attorney general said in his letter -- senator kennedy: we established the president agrees they should stay. but do you not have a position whatsoever on the conditions? >> by conditions you mean what do they need to satisfy in order to remain in the united states? you want to pay back taxes, do certain things like that, those are discretionier -- senator kennedy: the president sign whatever conditions? >> i assume he'll be interested
in seeing what you have. we'll be there to advise him as to what we think is good about your bill. senator kennedy: what if we get it wrong? you're not happy? mr. dougherty: i don't know what happens. senator kennedy: do i. i'm out of time. >> senator durbin. senator durbin: i hope the , let'snt mr. mr. readler at least if we can get a copy what you read today s. that possible? >> i announced the statement would be put in the record. senator durbin: i think we should get back on the regular order of things of the the second point i want to make to mr. dougherty, the -- we wept through comprehensive immigration reform, i bet you followed t. you may know we
spent six months, eight of us, democrats and republicans, working on a bill. then we took it to senator leahy's chairmanship of the judiciary committee and had 540 amendments that were offered. the most prolific person offering the amendment now is our current attorney general. we considered a lot of amendments over a long, long period of time. and we addressed virtually every issue that you mentioned in your long list as part of comprehensive immigration reform . let me just say, just speaking for myself, please do not put the burden on the dreamers to accept every aspect of comprehensive immigration reform to get a chance to become citizens of the united states. that's too much to ask. i'm for comprehensive immigration reform. they are, too. but in order to give them legal status to stay in this country, i hope the administration doesn't use your list. your list was the entirety of the comprehensive immigration reform bill. there are parts of it, border
security. let's talk about t find some reasonable way. it's too much to ask from where i'm sitting and hope you take that message back. the second issue is one that really strikes at the heart of the anxiety, stress of dreamers today. most of these young people were raised in the united states quietly admonished by their parents their entire lives to never breathe a word publicly about the status of their family for fear of deportation. do your best. obey the law. don't get in the situation where somebody's going to call on you and question you. you can jeopardize your sefment can you jeopardize your whole family. then came daca. we said to these young people and their families for the first time, do just the opposite. declare yourself to the government of the united states of america. tell them who you are, where you are, where you're living, submit yourself to a background check. and we said, this information taken by your government will not be used against you or your family. is that still the standard that
is being used? that the information that has been filed by daca recipients will not be used against them or their families? >> that information comes into mr. mccament's agency and i would like him to answer the question. mr. mccament: since 2012, information sharing policy has not changed. we specifically said immigration information provided to uscis for the purposes of the daca request, as you know, will not be provided to c.b.p. or i.c.e. or immigration enforcement proceedings. and getting referrals would be made in keeping with the notice-to-a pier in guidance or n.t.a. guidance. senator durbin: will that continue under this administration? mr. mccament: to this point, the information policy does remain the same. senator durbin: the last point i want to make is this. each of you have said repeatedly, various forms, an
orderly efficient wind down. painful to say those words because there is nothing orderly or efficient about exposing hundreds of thousands of young people to deportation and telling them they can no longer work. that isn't efficient by government standards, not efishtent by human standards. i want to get to spefpblgts yesterday i was in chicago. they are counseling young people about filing this week, by this thursday, in order -- if their renewal comes up between now and march 5, 2018. they were given four weeks from the president's announcement to come up with a filing fee and get the filing done on time. i see a statement made this morning by homeland security -- acting homeland secretary elaine duke, in which she is given special consideration to those who live in puerto rico and virgin islands because of the obvious disasters they have gone through. may i implore you, implore you to do the same thing at d.h.s. that our internal revenue
service is doing by giving that same case by case consideration to those who live in texas and louisiana and florida. who have gone through hurricanes. if it's good enough for tax collectors to have a heart, isn't it good enough for the folks at d.h.s. to have a heart? we have 100,000 daca recipients in texas. 30,000 in florida. i don't know how many fit into this special category. but for goodness sakes, give them a break. if they are facing hurricanes and problems with it, don't hold them to this thursday deadline. give them at least a case by case consideration. would you take that message back? >> we will. senator durbin: thank you. >> senator. based upon what i know i'm going to hear in the second panel from one of our people, i expressed a lot of concern about criminals getting approved for daca. in one case a daca recipient was
granted an e.a.d. despite being under investigation by h.s.i. for child exploitation. e.a.d. and o get an hired by a sirm camp in california. you heard me express that in my opening statement. readler etter -- mr. and mccament, there are examples of daca crimes. i think you left the impression you don't have any examples. >> i appreciate the chairman raising that example for the committee. there may be other examples as well. i think the attorney general general's letter also spoke more broadly to immigration issues generally. beyond daca recipients and concerns about crime more generally related to immigration. there is information about that issue as well. senator grassley: would you
stand corrected, mr. mccament, there are examples? mr. mccament: senator, we do have examples of approximately 2,000 or so terminations for criminal data. senator grassley: senator tillis. senator tillis: thank you, mr. chair. mr. dougherty i want to go back to the line of questions that senator kennedy had. i know you can't get inside the president's head, but that's one of the benefits of social media and tweets. i want to go back and take a look at a litany of communications. i know on september 5, the president appropriately did a resist of the daca -- rescission of the daca executive action under the obama administration. i think that it was failed and it was legally flawed. it was likely to be overturned. and the president took appropriate action. i happen to support treatment for daca population here. i want to get to that if i have
time. on the day of the rescission at 9:01 a.m., the president said congress now has six months to legalize daca. congress now has six months to legalize daca. something the obama administration was unable to do. if they can't, i will revisit the issue. it sounds like he's got passion around getting daca right. he goes on to say congress, get ready to do your job, daca. that was on the fifth as well. then he moves on to say on the 14th, the wall which is already under construction in the form of new renovation of old and existing fences and walls will continue to be built. sounds like he wants border security. does anybody really want to throw out good, educated, accomplished young people who have jobs, some serving in the military, really. in other words, i think he wants the daca fixed. one of the concerns i had with your response -- i agree with the laundry list.
is as senator durbin reads it reads like a laundry list for comprehensive immigration reform. if congress has proven an extraordinary ability to do everything, it's to fail on comprehensive immigration reform. so it would be very helpful to get from the administration what the priority is. and i for one think it should be a respectful, compassionate, sustainable treatment for the daca population. and it must include some border security so that we're not here again 10 or 15 years dealing with the same situation. i know all you have is the list of priorities, which i agree with. which is the entirety of immigration issues in this country. but we really do need the white house leadership on exactly what the six month timeline that the president has placed on congress to do our jobs looks like. i, for one, hopes it's an articulate, examination gnat firm response to provide certainty to the daca population
and a reasonable, sustainable, fiscally sound border security strategy. that seems to me to be a good step in the right direction after 30 years of failure on immigration reform in this country. i think that would be a good success for the president. it won't get to all the issues that i think this administration wants to deal with or i want to deal with, but we really need that discipline message that seems to be consistent with what the president communicated on september 5 and september 14. incidentally he also went on to say there was no deal made with pelosi and he made very clear then on the daca issue that border security needs to be a key part what this congress sends to him. we need clarity from the administration and i hope that you'll take that back. i do want to echo what senator durbin said.
these daca -- the daca population that are in distressed areas whether texas, florida, or puerto rico or any other place, there needs to be reasonable response to them because it's congress' inaction, current action of this administration that's putting them in i think an untenable position. i think it should be on us to make this as smooth as possible as we go about doing our job. finally, i want to just mention that there are a number of amples of -- where we have some 2,000 or so people that are doing a disservice who are a part of the daca population but are doing a disservice to the vast majority of this population who are working hard, in school, wanting to serve the military, and gainfully employed. we should be very clear that those who have significant misdemeanors or felonies that there is not going to be any
treatment. whatever program we come up with. because they disobeyed our laws after we have given them an opportunity to be here. for the vast majority of the daca population, we need to stop talking about it and solve it. and i think that there are great proposals in here that we can get together and provide a solution. it's on us to do t i urge my colleagues to not make this be something that goes on and on and on and we get to it on december 8 and we have a budget deal and we use that sort of a gimmick. i any it's a disservice to this population to have them unwind all the politics of capitol hill when we know what the problem is, we know what the reasonable solution is and provide t i'm sorry i don't have time for you o answer my questions. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. thank you, senator durbin, for your long time leadership in
this area and senator tillis for working to try to work with us on a solution. i was thinking about the issue that was just raised on criminality and i have the staff 800,000-plus daca kids are in school or working. do you have any reason to dispute that statistic? any of you? senator klobuchar: no. the issue was raised about crime. for me right now the only crime i'm thinking about is the shooting yesterday. would if surprise you, we don't have the stats on daca kids at the concert, or who were first responders, but i have certainly seen on tv they are giving the immigrant population in nevada, hispanic immigrants, there were first responders who were immigrants. would that surprise you at all? and the person that perpetrated this carnage was not an immigrant. he was caucasian, is that right? i just want to put this in perspective. my question is, i was
disappointed to learn that a justice department attorney stated that the department of homeland security did not plan to extend the october 5 deadline in a hearing in federal court last week. is it true that the administration's not considering the deadline, how come you picked a one-month deadline? i guess i'll ask our homeland security friends here. mr. dougherty, mr. mccament. could one of you answer? >> we picked one month. the decision was made by the acting assistant secretary. that was considered adequate to get the job done of taking in any application that is we did not already have. and that a was the decision made then. senator klobuchar: why only one month? we have been talking about these emergencies in texas and florida. why that date? >> the principal concern raised by the attorney general that we were sitting on top of a program that -- on top of a policy that was unlawful is one that we
needed to terminate and we needed to do it quickly. we're not authorized to exercise against the advice of the attorney general on something that may be unconstitutional. i'm not trying to put a funny -- phony line in the sand there. what i'm trying to say when we were advised it was unlawful, we wanted to figure out, can we draw it down? if we can, what would it look like? we were concerned about the abruptness that might happen if a court was to terminate the program through a preliminary injunction. and that's why we stepped it down the way we did. at the time we did it, we had the capacity from -- senator klobuchar: right now there is no plans to extend it? >> extend the deadline? we have one extension for folks that are on puerto rico right now. on a case by case basis we'll consider those. but systemically, no. senator klobuchar: switching,
impact on universities. i have heard from the university of minnesota and other educational institutions in my state about the administration's decision to rescind daca. in particular the march 5 deadline falls in the middle of the spring semester for many colleges. with nearly half of the dreamers currently in school. this deadline anti-resulting potential loss of work authorization could force many of them to drop out mid semester. has there been any consideration of allowing current students if this is not resolved to complete their education at least through the current year? >> i apologize. we haven't addressed that yet. senator klobuchar: has dodge dong or d.h.s. engaged with universities and institutions of higher education regarding the elimination of daca? if not, could you do so? that's where we're hearing a lot of this because so many of the kids are in college trying to get degrees to work in the job
openings we have in many key areas. has there been any coordination with the schools? >> senator, we have on the day that we announced the wind down, we did have a call of different groups, including congress, congressional staff, that included some of the academic community. with respect to broad outreach to a university, i don't believe them. -- i don't believe we have them. we also have 154,000 that would be eligible would be expiring between september and october. my apologies, september and march. and as of today we received about 106,000 or so. but we'll certainly take back that point. enator klobuchar: thank you. >> thank you. let me ask one practical
question and then another one. the practical question is that at least from i have seen in press reporting there seem to be very wide variations in enforcement. senator whitehouse: including in areas like schools, churches, courthouses, so forth. do i not get the impression from what i'm reading about enforcement in a various areas that the policies of this administration have much sway out in the field. i know that president trump campaigned very strongly with the organizations that represent field agents. so they may feel empowered to go off on their own on rogue missions that are inconsistent
with the kind of grand discipline that we expect of law enforcement agencies. so if you could give me your assessment of to what extent command discipline actually exists in this area, and policies are actually being followed down to the assessment level, i would appreciate your assessment of that. if you want to do it in shorthand on a percentage basis, feel free to do that. start with you, mr. reads letter -- mr. readler. mr. readler: i would defer to the department. >> senator, i'm unaware of any rogue activity on the part of immigrations and customs enforcement which does the interior enforcement for the united states. senator whitehouse: you think you have 00 compliance? >> i'm not aware niff rogue activity on the part of i.c.e. i.c.e. is beholden with
following the administration's directives, as well as those of the secretary of the department of homeland security. and prioritizing those things that are established in the documents that we produce, including the document that came out from then secretary kelly in the springtime. mr. or whitehouse: mccament. mr. mccament: i'm like wise unaware with respect to i.c.e. senator whitehouse: one of the hings we're seeing is that the follow on effects of this toision are very frightening people. they are very frightening to children in particular who, as a general proposition, we don't expect to be expert analysts of the constitution or the contours of government policy. they just get a signal and what
we're seeing is reports, particularly from schools and schoolteachers, about children who are actively upset in class having to deal with tears and fear. that it casts a pall on classroom performance among a lot of these kids, and it's not a teacher's capacity to say here are the fine points of the new immigration policy and how it is or isn't going to affect you and your family. programs like lunch programs or signing up for health tests or visits with the nurse. anything that involves that child signaling themselves have gone down. participation among groups that deal with say illness spreengs
have gone down in this community. -- illinoisness prevention have gone down in this community. there is a pervade -- illness prevention have gone down in this community. there has been a pervasive interest in this community about what happened. i would hope as you make the decisions make, you take to some degree into account those human consequences that are playing out in the lives of these people . this may seem like political fun backames in this room, but in rhode island there are classrooms with kids who are really frightened. and a frightened kid is not something anybody should take any satisfaction, in my view. guess my time is out. chairman grassley: next senator, i have to ask d.o.j. because this statement by the attorney general has come up indicating
that maybe he said daca caused terrorism. and i want to ask you if this would be a quote from his record king clear that he doesn't sign this to daca. he said, quote, failure to enforce the laws in the past has put our nation at risk of crime, violence, and even terrorism. end of quote. >> that's correct. chairman grassley. that's why i was referencing the fact the letter referred to imgration issues broadly. chairman grassley: senator franken. senator franken: i want to thank the witness force being here and be clear from the outset that what we're talking about when we're talking about ending daca. we're talking about completely upending the lives of over 800,000 young people.
people who came here as children, worked hard, played hard by the rules, all for a chance to take part in the american dream. and people who will contribute mightily to our country. we talk about our fiscal health and the fiscal future and our country. we always demoan the demographics that we have. when we get in those debates it's always like if we just had more young people. this is a thousand young people who are working and are studying. those who we're talking about. -- we're talking about people like marlon. this remarkable young woman was
an intern in my office in minnesota last summer. her mother, a sing the parent, -- single parent, brought her here from mexico as an infant because she wanted a bert life for her daughter. in marlon and her mother put the work to make the dream a reality. while her mother worked multiple jobs to provide for the family, marlon hit the books, also work. she has the second person in her family to finish high school. graduating with hopors. daca allowed her to apply to colleges. she sees the opportunity tea spite the risk of exposing herself and her family. and that's what senator durbin was talking about. she won an academic scholarship. the southwest minnesota state university. worked two jobs to cover all her costs because she's ineligible for federal aid.
marlon was a standout in my -- as n intern in my office. . marlon's working nights at arget. i fuked with marmon after attorney general -- i talked with marlon after attorney general sessions talk about the daca program and she told me how vulnerable she felt. but i promised her that we will not give up the fight. i want to emphasize what we -- what's already been said. turning our backs on dreamers is a disgrace. i'm not blaming any of you guys. i'm just saying where we're right now. it's a disgrace our national values and moral principles, ening the daca program without providing a legislative replacement. risk pulling the rug from
underneath the investments dreamers have made in their few tears and country. paying taxes, buying homes. serving in the military for goodness sake. you risk pushing people back into the shadows. tearing apart families. and devastating our communities. turning our backs on dreamers he would be unconscionable and un-american. but i'm hopeful we can work together to protect the futures of people like marlon who works so hard to build one. i am a strong supporter of the bipartisan dream act. which would allow young people like marlon to earn legal status, eventually citizenship. i just want to urge all my colleagues to vote for it. mr. mccament, when dreerms first applied for daca they
voluntarily gave a lot of their information, their permanent information. everything from fingerprints and retinal scans to home address and phone numbers. senator durbin was asking about this. in my view and his view, if the government were to use the information that they voluntarily turned over, i think it would represent a shocking betrayal of the trust they put in us. so far the administration has said that generally uscis won't proactively turn dreamers' information over to i.c.e. except -- i'll get to this in -- i just want it ask a question. will you commit to me that uscis will never proactively disclose information object otained through daca applications to law enforcement agencies?
will you commit to clearly identifying the circumstances under which uscis would respond to an i.c.e. request for that information? >> thank you, senator, for that question on both fronts. mr. mccament: with respect to setting out clearly the guidelines from which information would be disclosed, since the beginning of the daca information, daca policy, we have noted that information would not be turned over to i.c.e. or for immigration enforcement proceedings but could be if it fit the guidelines and we will always make sure that is clear and placed. with respect to the policy as far as a change to the policy, senator, it has not changed since 2012. but the information that we have always provided noted it could be subject to change. we would continue with that. senator franken: will you --
senator grassley: senator hirono. senator hirono: thank you, mr. chairman. we have acknowledged the presence of members of the congressional hispanic caucus at this hearing and members of the asia pacific caucus. they are in the audience. i'd like to ask both mr. dougherty and mr. mccament. do you have a concern that dreamers provided information to the government that could, that could be used to target them for deportation f. not now, than six months from now without congressional action to protect the dreamers? i would like a yes or no answer. if you have a concern that they provided this information to the overnment. >> senator, do i not have a concern because we set out from the start of 2012 the ways in which information would be
shared and not shared. mr. mccament: that was provided to us. be we always tried toe make that point clear from the beginning. senator hirono: didn't you say that could change? it's a policy decision. mr. mccament: that's correct. from the beginning we noted it could be subject to chaping. it has not changed to date. senator hirono: yes. that's the concern we have. mr. dougherty: the department job is to protect public safety and national security. the department understands that an individual is a threat to national security, the department is going to do everything in its power that it should in a law enforcement organization to neutralize that particular concern. if we know that somebody is a public safety threat. it would be incumbent upon us to -- senator her roany clo -- senator hirono: if someone is a threat to public safety, there
are way that is information can be used. the bottom line from what i get, right now you do not have a concern that the dreamers provided this information to the government. right now do you not have a concern this information is going to be used to find the dreamers upon expiration of six months when they no longer have the protections of being dreamer recipients. daca recipients. >> senator, we don't have plans to target any dreamers based on any information we received. or daca recipients. senator hirono: are you saying 800,000 people from daca have no fear. if that is so you should put that out there. there is a lot of fear in the community, not just among the dreamers, but their families and friends. they have nothing to fear from deportation, why do you not put that out? mr. dougherty: ma'am, i don't have an answer to that particular question. to kind of get back to my prior
point. if somebody is an enforcement priority for us, regardless of the status, whether they are daca or no, we're going to have -- senator hirono: you have made that plain. 00,000 dream remembers not a risk to public, health, safety, or national security. i would say that since you both acknowledge that that policy could not use this information for deportation purposes could change, one, they don't have anything to fear today from deportation and the use of this information, but two, this policy or position could change very quickly. for both of you again. is the supreme court -- the attorney general says daca is illegal and unconstitutional. so is it illegal and unconstitutional, why even allow daca extensions? >> senator, we have had a practical problem on our hands. we had a very large number of applications that had been
received at the department where individuals had put their money towards that. mr. dougherty: it also included their payment with that. so unraveling that, and sending everyone back their application and money was an administrative -- it was a difficult thing for to us do. plus we're aware that this body can go about creating a solution to this problem. so that was part of our wind down as well. we had an administrative interest. then we had the practical interest of maybe congress can address this. we also know -- senator hirono: i hate to keep interrupting. i don't think you are answering my questions directly. if daca as the attorney general says not only illegal but unconstitutional, what is the legal basis for your administrative interest, except to acknowledge that perhaps you have discretion?
>> senator our concern would be it could be enjoined in court. that would be an abrupt end of the policy. senator hirono: because there are some substantive due process issues that arrive from what the administration is attempting to do in closing down daca with only six months' notice. thank you, mr. chairman. chairman grassley: i think we're ready to go to the second panel. before we do that, i understand everyone's concern about the fuhr of daca recipients. so am i. that's why we're having this hearing to find out a solution. but it's important to remember that we're in this situation because the previous administration used an approach and create false promises. i hope all of our government witnesses could say yes to that. mr. readler. mr. readler: the attorney general in his letter noted the legal concerns he had. mr. dougherty: ready to work with you on new legislation.
mr. mccament: we also look forward to providing technical assists. -- assistance. chairman grassley: thank you very much for your testimony. you may go. while we're setting up for the other panel, i want to save time by reading their introductions. we have outside expert, beneficiary and victim, i hope that they can provide some insight into what american people expect from us. i want to thank the second panel for their courage in testifying today. especially mr. bill hartzell whose 93-year-old grandmother was brutally raped and murdered by an unauthorized immigrant. his story also difficult to hear represent many victims who have lost loved ones due to poor immigration. and he is also a constituent of mine. i look forward to testimony today and to the dialogue of this hearing will inevitably
then we have ms. vaughan, the -- director of policy studies. she's been with the certainty since 1992 developing an expertise in immigration policy and operations. she's recently concluded a department of justice funded project where she studied the use of immigration law enforcement in transnational gang suppression efforts. in addition to her work with the certainty she instructs senior law enforcement officers in seminars -- >> this hearing continues live. can you follow it online at c-span.org. here on c-span we're going next to the u.s. house. they are gaveling in taking up a bill this afternoon that would outlaw abortion after 20 weeks of pregnancy. debate this afternoon. late they are week the house taking up the 2018 republican