Dan Stein of Fed for American Immigration Reform discusses how immigration will be handled in the Supreme Court following the death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
This is an unofficial transcript meant for reference. Accuracy is not guaranteed.
Thank you so much.
I appreciate that
we want to take a moment to
consider some of the issues that
ultimately are decided by this
Countrys highest court.
Immigration is one of them
its a key issue for the Trump
administration as well.
Dan Stein is the President for
american immigration reform.
We are happy to have them on
tonight.
To what extent is our
immigration policy crafted at
the Supreme Court level,
major issues that define our
constitutional norms, our
separation of powers, which are
in important definitely the side
Supreme Court Justice Ginsburg
was part of the faction that
sought to erode the traditional
deference the courts have
traditionally given to the
president in matters dealing
with border security, border
control and procedural process
for aliens at the border.
This is kind of a philosophical
dividing issue where you see the
liberal justices, which Ginsberg
has been a part of eroding
certain doctrinal principles
that prevented Americans from
suing on behalf of aliens
outside the country
which dramatically increase the
volume in the amount of
litigation that was used, for
example, in challenging many of
the things that President Trump
try to do during his
administration.
Its a significant thing if
Donald Trump is able to make
this appointment, go quickly,
come on what would chuck and
Nancy doing the same situation
right
Mcconnell has got to put
somebody up there quickly. So
does the president, because this
is his stance to put his mark on
the court and restore this idea.
Congress makes the immigration
laws and the president and
forces them under this broad
delegation of authority,
otherwise the system spins out
of control
thats a very smart
point.
The presumption, as he has all of
the members behind him,
Republicans arent, quite as good
at discipline as Democrats are.
Do you think, is someone who
watches Congress a lot? Do you
think he can corral his senators
into supporting the nominee?
Assuming there is one?
A lot of it will depend on
how much he consults with
LISA Murkowski and Susan Collins
before hand gets their buy in
on a female candidate.
Hes got a pretty good list, hes
put together right now, and it
depends how well hes able to
sell the idea. This is
politically in their interest.
What Mitt Romney does is an open
question. Nobody is expecting
hes going to take the side of
not wanting to politicize the
process.
This is an opportunity for Trump
to raise the immigration issue
within the context of a
Supreme Court nomination.
If he were to sit on his hands
the president through the
election and lose it might be
the last opportunity. The
Republicans have to put somebody
who is really good on the
immigration issue on the
Supreme Court for twenty years,
it seems like the
president. The White House is
going to come under some
pressure to move ahead, thats.
What im inferring from what you
said.
The question is really.
Politics is about seizing the
opportunity,
the idea that we are supposed to
be afraid of potentially
normalizing violence. Whatever
that means our institutions
have to be able to function
efficiently in our country,
the Supreme Court as a part of
the efficiencies in those
institutions. It represents the
bulwark and protection of our
democratic liberties.
If we cant nominate a
Supreme Court justice
efficiently and smoothly and get
that person appointed quickly,
the institutions themselves are
in jeopardy,
maybe thats what the agenda of
the far left is. But an awful lot
of people are hoping. The
president understands that
theres a lot more at stake
right now,
theres, no such thing as a
Supreme Court justice seat, that
is liberal or conservative.
There are just good justices who
interpret the law of the way
Congress intended, and we need a
justice on the Supreme Court to
interpret the law properly
consistent with what a judge is
supposed to do not reengineer
the constitution, rewrite it or
give us a different constitution
from what we all supported.
Originally,
you make a very
wise point.
If the institution cant function under stress its a
function under stress its a.
Transcript generated on 2020-09-19.