visited a community that is outside of greeley in northeast colorado that had been hit by a river that they never imagined it would rule were through their community. i visited to trailer parks that have been completely destroyed. i cannot tell you the percentage of people living there that were undocumented, that it was probably over 80%. i asked in a conversation. working in agriculture. working in construction. cleaning in our hotels. their only asset was the trailer home they owned, because they could not finance it, so they paid cash for it. and now everything is gone, and the federal government cannot assist them, because they are undocumented. they are part of the fabric of our economy in northeast colorado, and that is their community, northeast colorado. it seems to me we have gone on for far too long having people

live in some kind of second- class status in the united states, and it is long past time for us to make sure there is a pathway to citizenship. the last point i want to make is, you will hear lots of excuses if you hang around this town, excuses for why someone should not vote for something. in this case, you might hear people say, even though there were republican senators from arizona, who care more about border security than anyone in the senate, that there is not enough border security in this bill. or excuse after excuse. what i want to leave you with is, this bill, if it passes, will reaffirm to ideas that make america a special place. one is that we subscribe to the rule of law. the other is, unlike any other country in the world, we truly are a nation of immigrants. when you hear people making excuses about the bill, i hope you will push them into it, because i know how hard these guys negotiated for so long, for

, at seven or eight months work product that is the best i have seen since i have been in the senate. so do not let people put you off with their excuses, and do not let this bill fail in the house. if we do, it may be the last time in this generation that we are going to have a chance to get this right. thank you in advance for everything you are going to do, and thanks for having me here today. [applause] >> my first thanks to bob menendez. he is one of these key players. he does not engage in every aspect of the conversation. when he speaks up, you listen. i have sat there and listen to all of you for a long time, bob would say. i have got something that is very important. the pathway to citizenship was critically important to bob menendez. thank you for your leadership in this effort.

thank you for continued leadership in the senate. chuck schumer is my roommate for 22 years. go figure. as chairman of the immigration subcommittee, he was really the leader in helping us put this together. but he could not have done it, i am sure he would acknowledge, without the partnership of john mccain. and mccain stepped up, because he did, we are here today. thank you, john. you have been at the front of this issue for many, many years. michael bennet took on many issues, but the one on agriculture was the one that was so challenging. he and senator dianne feinstein worked overtime to make that work well. thank you, michael, for everything you have done. [applause] let me say very briefly -- if you are a student of history, ad i am, always learning, but student of history, and you look at the great social movements in the history of america, whether

we are talking about the emergence of african americans, or women, or the disabled, take a look at those movements, and you will find one recurring theme, the involvement of young people. young people who become a critical part of the energy behind these changes in america, in our law, in our culture, in our politics, with their idealism, their energy, and their courage. it is something i learned a long time ago. i did not know when i introduced the dream act 12 years ago where it would be today. and i introduced it in chicago. i used to go to some meetings. after the meetings, in the dark, by my car, would be standing one or two young people, sometimes with tears in their eyes. they would look over their shoulders in both directions and would say, senator, i am one of those dreamers. they were frightened. they had been raised to be frightened, worrying that the

speeding ticket or the wrong decision here, there, or the other place would lead to their deportation, and the deportation of their family. some of you know exactly what i am talking about. but time passed, and things changed. the dreamers came out of the darkness and came out of the shadows, and said, america, this is who we are. these are our lives. these are our dreams. this is our vision of the future of this country, and our vision of our own future. and with that emergence of these young people, and this comprehensive immigration movement, things changed dramatically. i can recall the gavel in the united states senate when the bill last, filled with dreamers in caps and gowns, trying to make clear what they were aspiring to -- education, achievement. they have become such a critical element in this whole debate.

sometimes, they get under the skin of senators and congressmen, when they are a little too pushy in their offices. john, do you remember that? he is to come to my office, saying, do something. this comprehensive immigration reform bill has the strongest dream act ever written in the last 12 years. this will give to literally millions of dreamers a chance, a chance to be part of america's future, as citizens of the united states of america. we used to come together and would have, for eight months, debates among ourselves over the hot issues. the time came for the dream act, and i remember it well. i said, here is my proposal for the dream act. my seven senate colleagues said, we will take it. it was the shortest meeting we ever had. we are all committed. and we have to understand this. there are some people that just want to pass the dream act. lease, pass the dream act.

we will get to the dream act in the next generation. at the dreamers tell me it is not just about the dreamers. it is about their families. it is to make sure they all have this chance to realize the american dream. has been unimportant part of it. worked forioned, i this aspect of giving american workers for the fact -- confidence that after this bill passed, they would still have jobs. of only do we have the head the chamber of commerce, but the head of the afl-cio backing this bill. you cannot be from the state of illinois, you cannot represent the city of chicago, you cannot bring up immigration without two words -- luis gutierrez. he is going to be on the next panel. more than anyone i know, he has committed himself to comprehensive immigration reform. he has been a strong voice,

sometimes getting under people's skin, but a strong voice to make sure this moves forward. please, let us not miss this opportunity. let us keep this dream alive, for the dreamers and everyone else. let us turn to those in the house who think, maybe we will wait until another congress and say no, because it has to be done. the longer we wait, the tougher it will be. let us have it done in the house as in the senate, in a bipartisan, solid way, affirming that we are a nation of immigrants, and proud of it. thank you. [applause] >> we have another panel that is going to follow us, numbers of the house of representatives, led by congressman gutierrez. we have one or two questions we want to ask our colleagues here. think we have all referenced elements of this, but what do we expect as a result of

immigration reform? maybe share with the audience some of the trade-offs that we have to be able to give, which has been the subject of some tocern by some, in order achieve a 68 vote threshold in the senate. john, do you want to talk about some of the elements? >> we have been very sick -- very respectful to our colleagues in the house. they know we are all snobs. we are always very careful to be very respectful to them. to membersed a lot of congress, and told them that we understand their concerns. what we would like to do, and our goal is, to get the bill to a conference. we believe we can make the appropriate agreements with the fundamental pathway to citizenship that bob menendez

would kill me if we ever butdoned that principle -- there are many ways of getting there. our proposal, as hard-fought as it was, as difficult to get there, is not engraved in stone. we are willing to look at other proposals, as long as we preserve the fundamentals that are so important to comprehensive immigration reform. optimistic.ly i would like to say one other word as a republican. i am a proud republican. i am a proud reagan conservative republican. but i am convinced that if we do not pass this legislation, we will never be on a level playing field with the hispanic voter. i do not think if we passed it, it would change one single vote, but if you are a politician and you look at the numbers, if there is not a level playing

field where we can compete for hispanic votes, there will not be, if we do not pass this legislation. the first reason i am for it is because it is the right thing to do, and the united states of america should live up to its reputation and its heritage. but i also speak as a republican. i think it is important that as a party we understand the power and the strength of the hispanic voter. which is fine. it is what america is all about. [applause] say that i agree with everything john said. we are open to other people's suggestions. the way they do it in the house may be very different. i think one of the things we came to see when doing the bill is how interrelated so many of these issues are. we have had to make all kinds of trade-offs, whether it is low skilled visas, a trade-off between having people that could

come into the country to supply labor, wanting to make sure that no american workers were displaced -- similar issues that we negotiated around the agriculture provisions of this bill as well. it is the first immigration bill that has had both the farmworkers and the growers' endorsement. that has never happened before. as chuck said, it is the first bill the afl-cio and the chamber have supported. you can go online and see the other supporters. every part of this bill matters to somebody. i think people are going to find these moving parts work very well together, and there is a reason to try to keep them together, at least in the final product that we produce, which reflects the way it is in my state, which is the typical state, i think. we have a set of concerns the farmers and ranchers have, the human rights community, high- tech, and even our ski resorts, believe it or not.

it makes sense to try to take care of all that at once, as long as we take the trouble to get something done in a broad, bipartisan way. loiter,a liberal arts but i want to talk -- liberal but i want to talk about the genetics of immigration. othersother's and grandm who picked up and came to this country are special people. there was something different from their neighbors and friends. there were willing to risk everything to come to the united states, where perhaps they did not speak the language, to bring their children and start brand- new, at the bottom, and work night and day so their kids would have a better chance in life than they had. it is my family story. my mother was an immigrant. i am a united states senator. that is in the genetics and dna

of this immigrant america. i was invited recently to st. louis to speak to the chamber of commerce on immigration. they had just analyzed the economy of the city of st. louis and could not understand why they were lagging behind the rest of the midwest. they finally concluded, not enough immigrants. not enough immigrants. they realized that this is a powerful driving force, not just a labor force, but a force for achievement and opportunity. i think that will happen with immigration reform, as it has happened generation after generation. make these folks who are not -- who are hiding in the shadows legal. give these kids a chance to finish college, and you are going to see this erdman of economic growth, the spark that has made america what it is today. that is my genetics course. that is what i think this bill is all about. [applause] >> and i think all of us, when

we were debating this -- some people talk about security. and that certainly was important. but you can know who was here to pursue the american dream versus who is trying to do it harm. you cannot know with millions of people in darkness, without the government knowing they are here. the bill is about national security. you do not meet the consequences of continuing the present system unless you ultimately create reform. as we have talked about numbers of the congressional budget office -- in real terms, as i have traveled the country, i have heard from a score of different industries, who said we need this incredibly -- human unit capital capital to be able to achieve. in the hospitality industry, you cannot have the hotel manager, and the chef.

if you cannot clean in the hotel, nobody is going to want to stay there. on the other end of the spectrum, you have some of the most significant high-tech companies in the nation, who say, we need the human capital, among the best and the brightest, among the dreamers as well as others, to be able to be at the cutting edge of the curve of intellect, and to be able to compete globally. economy,t security, it for serving our nation as a nation of immigrants, and honoring that, preserving the rule of law, but also promoting growth and opportunity. i think we all believe we achieved that. one final question for my colleagues, which is, to my mind, the most important question of the day. senator mccain mentions that we respect our house colleagues. we certainly do. but we also want a vote at some point. what i would like to hear from my colleagues, who obviously all

have members of the house of representatives from their respective states, as i do -- how do we get to that vote? what is it that needs to be created? what environment in the house needs to be molded so we can have that moment that will have a vote in the house, which i believe can move us onto the final path toward a conference, that can then be reconciled and lead to a presidential signature? does anybody want to take that question? >> you are building a home in brick at a time. we are building the winning majority in the house the same way, with individual members of congress. many of you have worked and spent a lot of time there. do not beg, threaten, or always believe you are right, what we have to reach out to individual members of congress, and look at the people who are backing us up. labor, business, virtually every religious group, from the most conservative to the most liberal. all of the different groups we

can turn to an appeal to one of these members, democrats and republicans, to bring them over to our side. i have been hardened. in my state, a couple of republican commerce man, i did not believe we had a shot at, and one of the major corporate ceo's did it. them, and they are part of that list of 84. we have to continue this, congressman by congressman. >> i agree with everything said, and do not have much to add to it. as john mccain said earlier this afternoon, this is one of those rare illustrations of washington actually working so far, this immigration bill. with a very large bipartisan vote in the senate. i think we should continue to remind people of that. even when they are having fights about various things, there does seem to be this piece of legislation that has gained a

large consensus, a super majority in the senate. we are open to changes, as everybody here has said. but we need to capitalize on that momentum, i think. the most important thing is for people to hear from their constituents at home that they want them to pass this bill. i surprise a lot of people when i tell them that some of the strongest supporters of this legislation are republican farmers and ranchers in colorado. what they are some of the strongest supporters of this legislation. i think we have done a good job but weding a coalition, have to sustain that coalition. we cannot fail, and we simply cannot lose interest in this. i know nobody in this room is going to lose interest. we have to make sure we keep the attention on this, even with all the fights that are going on, and, in my view, silliness that exists in the united states congress.

together, the senate and the house -- get this done. >> we need to have border security. the provisions in this bill will provide it, in my view. and it will be largely through the development and the use of already-developed technology for surveillance. and that, i am confident, we can achieve. do not forget there is still the flow of drugs across the border. there is also the threat of terrorists crossing our southern border as well. ofis not just an issue preventing illegal immigration. it is also this incredible issue of drugs, which we have got to have a national conversation about, because there is still a great demand for it. there is going to be a supply when there is a demand. we also have to worry about the continued threat of people who want to come to this country and do bad things. here is what we have to do to succeed. we have to galvanize the

overwhelming majority of americans who support this legislation. in my state, it is about 70/30. that is usually enough, but the 30 is very galvanize, very angry, very vociferous, very committed. we have to get the 70% committed. we have to get every single small and large business person in my state and across this country engaged and involved, because it is good for them. i have to get our evangelicals that have committed to this. we have to get the catholic church. there should be a sunday sometime between now and when we pass this bill are that is the only message from the pulpit, no matter what church it is in america. the have got a coalition the likes of which i have never seen, and there is not, frankly, the kind of enthusiasm and commitment that makes this the number one priority for the business community, for the churches, for all the different coalitions in support of this

legislation. and every time you see a businessperson, large or small, ask them what they have done lately for comprehensive immigration reform. >> let me ask the audience a question. [applause] and be honest -- do not raise your hand if you did not, which is fine -- but how many of you, back in your home state, or while you were visiting in washington, has spoken to your member of the house of representatives about immigration reform? raise your hands. that is a good number. >> shame on the rest of you. >> for those of you who had and those of you who have not, i am reminded of what adlai stevenson used to say. he said, when i get the heat at home, i see the light in washington. generating personal contact with your member of congress is an extraordinary impact. some people think it is not. congressman in the chair know impact ofersonal

constituents and groups who are affiliated with, whether they be a local chamber of commerce, whether it be your church, whether it be a civic group, is incredibly important. you can make the difference. we met with speaker boehner and members of the congressional hispanic caucus. i got the sense that the speaker wants to get there. but he is constrained by a certain universe in his party that makes it difficult. if we get enough members on both democrats and republicans to go to the speaker and say, we believe this is an issue, whether i vote for it or not -- this is an issue that deserves its vote so that we can ultimately go to a conference, a jointure of the house and the senate, and work out the final details, and have a final vote in each of our houses. we will have individually done as cesar chavez did in that video, and we will have made

history. then you for coming. and thank you to my colleagues. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] >> our next panel is an important one, because it is really where the ultimate success of everything we have talked about resides, which is in the house of representatives. the senate having voted and sent its package over, this now all resides in the house of representatives. i hope all your collective focus will be there. to help mold for us what that focus should look like, we have someone who i was privileged to come to, 21 years ago in the house of representatives, someone who i consider a dear colleague,ond a

someone who i call the moses of immigration in the wilderness, going to lead us to the promised land, and someone who, to show you how much he cares about this a more senior committee assignment in the house of representatives to a junior committee assignment in the judiciary committee, which has jurisdiction over immigration, so he could help push this as a reality, and that is none other than congressman luis gutierrez of chicago. [applause] he is tireless, and he has been there during the last two decades. in the senate, when there was no one, there was always tom

menendez. and i am so thankful to him and his leadership. where do we begin? let me try to put it to you this way this afternoon. i think 11 million people should be citizens of the united states , so that they can have all of the same responsibilities and duties that i have as a citizen, fulfill all those same responsibilities, whether it is serving in the military, paying every tax known, and having every responsibility. that is what i think. i think we should all be equal. ofal in terms responsibilities and opportunities. i think we should have e-verify. i was born in america. i think anybody born in america should get first crack at any job created in america. but i know there are other jobs that need to be built. americans get first crack.

any other reason? i am also for comprehensive immigration reform, because i want to secure that border. i think america should have a secure border. i think we should have an exit and entry visa system. if somebody comes to visit us, we should know when the time is up. that makes america safer. that is come for hands of immigration reform. we should also allow people to come legally to the united states. those are all reasons for comprehensive immigration reform. othert me suggest some reasons for comprehensive immigration reform. women in protect our the armed forces of the united states of america. you know it. i know it. think of the most vulnerable women working in the field today, and what they have to confront. you cannot confront them -- protect them in the world -- we cannot protect them in the armed forces. facing inat they are

the field today. right now, people died trying to get back to their wife, husband, and loved ones. i want comprehensive immigration reform. somebody is going to lose a finger, a hand, and i've. they are going to lose their life today. workers go to work today, and fewer americans get hurt and i working. they are being more protective. but as that is happening, latinos are being hurt more at work, and dying more. it is increasing. i do not want people exploited anymore. i want to make sure we end this travesty. today, when we celebrate, and ,[speaking spanish] every day, 1100 people get deported. i want it for all of those reasons.

youme suggest to all of that we continue to keep our eye on that prize. i would like to ask -- we have this. , i know the chairman is right here in the front row, as he always is, leading. these give the chairman this applause for wonderful leadership he is demonstrating for us. i have been with him in the valley. he actually has a center, the cesar chavez center, in his district. it is wonderful to visit there. i would like to welcome the panelists to please come up on the stage and join us, please. these give them a round of applause. i am going to introduce them to you. [applause] you just heard from the kids across the hill, right? we are a little rowdier. we are a little less well-known.

but guess what? the constitution says that unless we do our job, the hard work of the senate and the gang of eight, and the leadership of patrick haley in the judiciary, and harry reid, the majority leader -- all that hard work goes to nothing unless we in the house get the bill across the finish line. the democrats in the house are more unified than ever to pass an immigration law. a bill is coming perhaps this week. i will be signed on to show that democrats are pushing to move immigration reform forward. but i have also seen unprecedented vocal support from republicans on immigration reform. i have stood with them in san antonio and in chicago, and across this country, with good men and women from the republican party, who are for comprehensive immigration reform , and care deeply about fixing our broken immigration. about a third to half of the republicans in the house support

serious immigration reform and legislation. i will introduce our speakers in the beginning, and recognize each of them for four minutes, to talk about where we are in immigration reform, and where we are headed. i will pose questions and then go from there. in being the moderator, i do not get to make the same opening remarks they did, but i guess they want to make luis gutierrez the moderator so they can moderate me. [laughter] let me say i think that each of these people -- i think of each of them as my siblings. we are like clinton up its. [laughter] -- like quintuplets. [laughter] together ine months a cramped room, sometimes bickering, offer him -- often making her dress. and we are charting a move forward. first, i want to introduce to you host [indiscernible]

he came to congress the same year i did, and has risen to the position of house democratic caucus chair, previously held by none other than senator bob menendez. he is on the ways and means committee, the first latino. he was a member of the congressional supercommittee and is the former chair of the hispanic congressional caucus. amigo.i [speaking spanish] and it is true. he is my dear friend, and someone who stayed with our group, and is continuing to persevere to bring immigration reform. that is none other than mario diaz-balart of florida. welcome, mario. he is the republican quintuplet of the group, and he and i have appeared on spanish and english television so much together that

univision is thinking of giving us our own tele-novella, "the odd couple." active as part of the leadership institute. next, we will hear from so longer and -- we will hear from a leader of the democrats when it comes to immigration. she was the chair and is currently the ranking member of the immigration subcommittee, so that all immigration issues flow through her committee. it is not her title, but rather her compassion, her expertise, the quality of the staff she surrounds herself with, that makes are indispensable when it comes to immigration reform. for joining us. and finally, we will hear from john yarmuth of kentucky. at the beginning of this congress, and the democratic leader, nancy pelosi, suggested

to the group that was forming that yarmouth join us. they were really smart and picking him. he is white. he is from the middle of the country. but most importantly, he knows how to get things done across party lines on difficult issues like immigration. he was indispensable to the democratic leader in our party on health care. he is a reformed journalist and newspaper publisher. but the reforms and there. he knows a thing or two about messaging. he has been in congress since 2006 and serves on the budget committee, and recently was chosen by the house leadership to serve on the exclusive committee of energy and commerce. that is none other than john yarmouth. congressman,much, for joining us. [applause] let me get my paperwork

together, because i am going to sit down. the chairman of the democratic caucus -- we got together in 1993 in the conference. you have the floor. please, sir. fromlcome, everyone, washington, d.c. the lights are still on here, and that is good. we will continue to work. those of us who believe this is the moment for comprehensive immigration reform will not stop working either. we thank you for being here and taking interest in this session. i think the leader in the hispanic caucus, luis gutierrez, for moderating this event, and for all the work he has done over the years. it almost feels like we should be negotiating in front of people, because this is what we would do. we would get together and have conversations. no reason we cannot do it now. actually, let me put it in context.

now,ieve that today, right the votes exist to pass comprehensive immigration reform, with a path to citizenship, in the house of representatives. he must strike now. strike now. while it looks kind of tough, remember where we have been. here, my brother, lincoln, had joined us in 1992 in getting elected. we were sworn in in 1993. when i sat on the judiciary committee in 1993, on the immigration subcommittee, it was not alabama and arizona that were passing these rigid, hurtful laws. it was the state of california. in 1994, we passed proposition 187. to see now where california is, from 1993, it is a world of difference. alabama,you look at

georgia, arizona, and california, you can see where they are going to go. we are saying, let us fast forward. let us not take 20 years to get there. but we will get there. the votes are there now. it is great there is still a bipartisan group of members in the house who are trying to get us there. it is a matter of navigating. we can get there. it is important to recognize immigration is not something we do because we feel it. for many of us, it is very personal. we know families that need this, so we do not separate them. the real reason we should do this is, it is good for the economy of the united states of america. especially middle-class families will benefit if we fix our immigration system. office,ressional budget the nonpartisan fiscal scorekeeper for congress when we do legislation, has said, do a comprehensive migration reforms similar to what the senate did, and you'll save the united states of america and the

federal budget close to $1 trillion of spending over the next 20 years. that is a trillion dollars you can use for other things, because you fixed the broken immigration system. so we can do it. but we must do it bipartisan. there is no way to pass a real fix to the broken immigration system without getting democrats and republicans to do it together, the way the senate did. it must be bipartisan. that is why the group that has been working for several years, and several of my colleagues are here today, made every effort to try to move forward. we have a good product that at some point may get to surface. we have to continue to try. i would say to you that if we recognize this is good for our economy, if we do this in a bipartisan manner, and if we realize that right now we have the votes to get this done, there is no reason why we should not achieve everything we have been wanting for quite some time.

i close with one last thought. i -- how do we do it? all five of us could tell you, it is pretty simple. it will be tough, because we have to protect our security. we will be smart. we have new technology. we have a lot of ways to do this. but at the end of the day, we have to be fair. nobody should believe we would pass a law that would create a second-class in this country who would never have a chance to become citizens. we can do this. tough, smart, but fair. vic singh the broken immigration system is good for our economy -- fixing the broken immigration system is good for our economy. thank you very much. >> mario? >> since luis gutierrez is the moderator and cannot say much, i just want to say something first, before my very brief comments.

you are going to hear a lot of agreement here. luis, you talked about fairness. and you are right, and we all agree on that. and equality, you mentioned. how do i say this diplomatically? on the issue of immigration reform, on the issue of ,rotecting the most vulnerable on the issue of never forgetting those who are working day in and day out, under very tough circumstances, there is no equality. there is no equality, as far as who has been the voice. all of us are working hard, but who has been the number one voice, the conscience, the passion for the immigrant community in the united states? he is my brother, because i have seen him fight. there is no quality -- no equality. nobody has worked as hard as you. nobody more than you.

nobody. >> thank you. >> now that i get that inequality off the table, i will tell you -- in my years here, i got elected in 2002. you deal with a lot of issues. i am on the appropriations committee. i have never had a more pleasant, and more difficult, a more joyous, a more frustrating issue to deal with than the relationship i have developed with these folks. we have had disagreements. we have had tough times. individuals know ,ho are honorable, hard-working integrity, decency, committed. with our disagreements and our agreements, i want you to know that when things get tough, and it gets tough for all of us -- i think, this is tough.

what gives me hope in this process is that i have gotten to know people like these. it gives me hope that even when you have disagreements, you can have trust. you can work together. you can do this quietly. what a privilege it has been to be able to have these individuals. i consider them my dear friends. it does not mean we are not going to disagree and argue, and everything else. i agree with what you said. let me talk about the good that immigration reform will do. it is absolutely true. but let us look that over. let us think about if we do not get it done. you hear the negatives about the current status. millions of people here are undocumented, so we have a border system that does not work. that is true. if you want to fix the border system, you have to fix immigration. we talked about how there are folks that do jobs that americans will not do.

and yet the system is such that there is no real legal system to do that. that, yout to fix have got to pass legislation. it does not work for our economy. you want to fix that, you have to pass legislation. whatever you are looking at, the problems that we have right now -- and there are multiple problems with the current system. people are here that are undocumented. we do not know who comes in or leaves. that is all under the current system. and people talk about, we do not want to give amnesty to the folks that are here, but the current system gives amnesty to the folks that are here, de facto amnesty. we have to fix a system that is absolutely broken for our economic interests, our national security, for the rule of law, for everything. the only way we are going to do and has to be done in a

bipartisan way, is to get together and pass legislation. this. finalize with i am as optimistic now as i was six months ago, five months ago, four months ago. it will be an ugly path. we will have bad days and good days. i think we have a very good opportunity to get it done, and i am convinced that when we get it done, a lot will be because of the efforts, the hours and days and years, this group has put together, and the staffers, to give us a way forward. what a privilege it is to be with all of you. thank you all. and thank the chairman for putting it together, of course. you know that when i arrived here 20 years ago, i joined the banking committee. today, it is an exclusive committee, one of the important committees. left that committee this

year, as senator menendez shared with you. i left that committee to join jo member. the ranking the only way was to get to judiciary, because i wanted to work under her leadership. you have four minutes. >> thank you very much. find myself in the senior democratic position on the immigration subcommittee, but my experience with immigration law goes back a long way. a long time ago. i taught immigration law at the university of santa clara. and i have seen immigration law become increasingly dysfunctional over the decades, to the point where it really does not work for any sector of our economy.

valley,rom silicon where nearly half of the residents of santa clara county are americans by choice, americans born in another country. and yet we have a problem where hotshot engineers who just graduated from stanford are forced to return home. dependent one are farm workers who come from other yet we have about a million and a half migrant farm workers. forave 5000 visas a year those workers. who set up this dysfunctional system? the congress did. i run into american citizens who are married to husbands or wives born in another country, and they cannot get their spouses legalized. this does not work for business. this does not work for families. it is dysfunctional. reforms thatke the

are necessary, that work for america. i know that we can do that. when we started getting together as a bipartisan group over four years ago, it was an experiment. comed not know if we could to agreement. sometimes, there were 25 people meeting secretly in the capital, hours on end, time to see if we could come to an agreement. we found that we could. we could come into a sensible agreement that would reform the immigration laws that very conservative people could notort, and people who are conservative could support. the question is, can we now move that forward to change the law? there are plenty of republicans who want reform, and i would say almost all the democrats in the house want reform. is, what will be put on the floor for a vote? i agree if we put the senate

bill on the floor for a vote, it would probably pass. we wrote a bill as a bipartisan group. if we put that bill on the floor, it would probably pass. if we put some small piece on the floor that would allow us to conference with the senate, that would likely pass. the real issue is, is there space, time, and motivation by the republican leadership, because they make this decision on what bills are voted on, to move forward? i hope there is, and i have every reason to believe there is. but i also think it is up to all of you to have your voices be heard, because we are a representative democracy, and although people do not always realize this, one of the most important voices is the voices of our bosses, which is you. we go for a re-hiring every other year. it is called an election. if you want action, demand it.

the excuse that there is not time is not a valid one. i am sure we could spare some time for this bill. we could not have a consensus? that is not correct. i know that we can. that we need to slow it down and be more thorough -- give me a break. we have looked at this for decades. we know what we need to do. we need to allow 11 million people who responded to the "help wanted" sign that was next to the "no trespassing" sign at the southern border to get right with the law. we need to make sure families can get reunited, that american businesses can thrive. and there is no excuse for not doing that. our economy will be boosted by that. but more than that, our american future will be secured. when you think of all the things

that we like about america and american character, it is people who are entrepreneurial, people who are optimistic, people who are risk takers, people who believe in their future and in their families. every one of those characteristics is what immigrants are about. our country was built by immigrants. if we do not allow immigration to flourish in the future, we will cripple america's future. i look forward to working with my friend mario and others to get that consensus. i know that we can do this. thank you very much. >> thank you, zoe. thate take a moment to say we were huddled for all those months together. there were eight of us that do not always agree with the democratic leadership in the house of representatives and decisions they make. but when javier and zoe and i

wanted a work our dinner, i made aeader pelosi wonderful decision, a wise decision. because they brought somebody who wins among the eight, the nicest guy in the room. and he is the one that was the glue and the cement to our group. please welcome again congressman yarmouth from kentucky. [applause] >> i also brought the bourbon to the meetings. >> that is true. >> and i was pretty much the only one who drank it. it is an honor to be here with you, and an honor to be, as mario mentioned -- it has been such an honor to be part of this group. it has been one of the most productive experiences in my now seven years in the house. can reachven that we across the aisle. we actually can come to an

agreement and make policy the every americank would expect it to be made. you give and take. would this work? i do it that way, i lose these people. we need it this way. we will have to look at that. normal human direction. i think the process did engender a great deal of trust. everyone asks me why in the world i am part of this group. i am white. it is true. first of all, kentucky is a border state. that was during the civil war. we are a border state. i just went to louisville. now, thee is, right city with the fourth fastest growing immigrant population in the country. we are becoming a very, very diverse city. kentucky obviously has a very

large agricultural sector. most importantly, we have the number one thoroughbred reading -- breeding operation in the country. that is a huge industry. and it would not function without immigrant labor right now. behave lots of reasons to for immigration reform, or to be concerned about it. reason say probably the i wanted to be part of this group was, first of all, 100 years ago, my grandfather came from russia. butcher shopkosher in passaic, new jersey. it had a son who went on to become a successful businessman. he had me. i am in congress. the beauty of that is that my story is very ordinary, very common. we all know, everybody up in this stage, everybody in this room, has known similar stories or is living them. that is a critical part of my

interest. the thing i most enjoyed as a member of congress is going to naturalization ceremonies. i saw a friend of mine mulling around with his three kids one day before the ceremony started. his his name is michael. an immigrant. isaid, you know somebody who being naturalized today? he said, no. i just wanted my three sons to see what it is to be a citizen. isn't that incredible aaron pan? for all sorts of good reasons -- isn't that incredible parenting? --r also is of good reasons, for all sorts of good reasons, i am glad to be part of the group. hardgoing last, so it is to say something different. i am incredibly optimistic. when i am out talking about this, people say, i am hearing there is no chance to get it.

there is a context of negativity or skepticism that we have to overcome. we are all very optimistic, but the world is not. i am optimistic for two reasons. one is, there has never been a more diverse, varied group of supporters for a policy, a national policy, then there is lined up for comprehensive immigration reform. and we had the farmworkers the growers, the afl-cio and the chambers of congress -- chambers that isrce, high-tech, afflicted in the polls. virtually everywhere in the --ntry, even kentucky, a sip a conservative state, support is forhe high 60's, low 70's immigration reform. and there is no money on the other side of this issue. there is nobody out there ready to spend $100 million to defeat

comprehensive immigration reform. in fact, all the money is on the side of pushing it. a couple of weeks ago, we met with mark zuckerberg. he has raised a lot of his own money. he has raised $50 million to run aresupporting people who running who will support conference of immigration reform, and to pressure people who may be on the fence. [applause] i think the most compelling thing he said when we met with him was, with his buddies in the high-tech industry, they said they need to give this money not for economic reasons, but for humanitarian reasons. that is significant. i think the stars are aligned to get this done.

do have the mechanics of the house, which are not going to make it easy. with the energy and passion of so many people, those of you in this room and others, we can get this done during this congress, and the country will be far better off for it. thank you. [applause] >> to see why he is important to this process. i am going to ask a couple of questions. hopefully, there is time to go out to the audience and get questions from them. i am going to go back to javier, my friend from california. how critical is the issue of citizenship to immigration reform? is it important to you that all 11 million undocumented be given a path to citizenship? there has been a discussion a path tohout

citizenship, a legalization program, may be giving the dreamers the citizenship, but they cannot sponsor their parents -- how important is that to the immigration debate? >> i think -- i do not think it would be just someone who is the son of immigrants who would say this. i think you go out to be part of the country, and people will say this to you. what we do not want this to relive the days when we tried to keep people in a different class . there were times when we, by law, restricted peoples freedom, and said to them, you can be in this country, but only if you are owned by someone. we left those times. it took a long time before those americans had a chance to really have rights. even today, we still see how folks fight for those rights. i have got to believe that in america today, the people are way ahead of the politicians in saying, if you are going to fix the system, fix it right.

if you want someone to have a chance to stay here legally, they should have a chance to become lawful permanent residents, which means a green card, which then gives them the right to become citizens. there should be a path to lawful status, but the path should not have a closed door after some form of lawful status. it should allow people who earned it, who proved that they have done everything right, paid our taxes, obeyed our laws, learned our language -- he should give them a chance to ultimately become united states citizens of a great country. i think the american people are way ahead of the ball. >> you are the highest-ranking democrat. feel about the issue. >> i think it is in or mislead important. i am not going to say how i am going to vote on a bill i have

not seen yet. about it fromink the point of view of the immigrant. i want to talk about it from the point of view of america. take a look at countries that have separated out people. you see it does not work well. in germany. they have turks who were never able to become germans. it caused all kinds of problems in germany. look back in people who were even formed in the united states were not told to own property. that did not work out so well for us. it is very important that we embrace our future with people who are coming here to become americans. my grandfather was an immigrant. he was so proud of being an american that he has

naturalization certificates framed. it hung in my grandmother and grandfather's living room. in -- that passion for citizenship still exists. i went to a naturalization ceremony. there were citizens of 113 countries at that ceremony. were there taking the oath, they walked out citizens of just one country. of america.genius >> incredible. thank you so much. [applause] i never quite thought of it that way. >> not only when they walk out are the citizens of one country, but they are founding fathers. it is a concept we cannot take

for granted. it is a concept we have to cherish. you're seeing a lot of agreements. i think it would be very detrimental for the united states to have a group of people who go through a process where they get right with the law and then do not share the same rights once they have gotten right with the law than others do. been there is his argument, what does it mean? they share the same rights. it goes right to the country. a lot of people say how about the rule of law? we can do so protecting that sacred thing, which is one of the reasons we are here. we can do that. i will tell you how we get there. there is no magic bullet. i do not like drawing lines.

there is no perfect bill out there, by the way. whether it is a senate bill, which has things i like and do not like, i commend the senate. eat if you do not like parts of it. they move it forward. there are millions of people there but cannot aspire to be citizens. there's no such thing as a perfect solution. we have a definition of an imperfect situation that cannot stand. it is interesting. i apologize. we are kind of a among friends here. when he got put on the group i was like, what the heck? it did not you that not long to understand i do

agree with mrs. pelosi much. that is on a secret. it did not take me long to realize what a wise choice. >> i like her more than you think. >> i can agree with her on one issue. a guy that is the epitome of common sense. he's not one of these guys that talk a lot but when he does, everybody is like "whoa." i think we can get there. we have some issues that we have in the house. we should deal with. it is not make it easier. i like what you are seeing appear. i think we are more than alive. i think it will be an interesting dance. i think we are ultimately going to get there. i do not want to draw a line in

the sand. there are however certain things that if they were in the villa not in the bill i would walk away and say "i am sorry, no deal." the important thing is not to draw a line in the sand. we need the flexibility to get there. the senate needed flexibility. they still have citizens. they needed to make changes at the end. our process is more difficult than the senate. we are going to get there because there are people willing to sit down. how many activists say they do not have a role to the citizenship?

tell us how you feel about it. segway, one of a the things that is important about our product is we set out from day one to do two things. to create a product that will work and can pass. in almost every instance we are saying we know we cannot be to the left of the senate bill on a particular matter. it has to pass a more conservative body. mario and his colleagues were going back to their constituency and vetting this bill with them. that republicans can embrace much of what we have done. labrador is doing

virtually what we have all done and is responsible for writing some important parts of the bill. that is be the vehicle in the house. or something very close to it. in terms of the activists, when atalk to my family, they are pretty interesting group. i talked to everyone of them. there are five others. all of them are open to immigration reform. securitys the border is strong enough. we have a sales job to do. it is going to be people out in when they make it known and reinforced his interest in passed.

they can give the wavering members cover. our group worked very hard. product will be able to be presented. we have said the only way to do it is on both sides. about theu think environment? how do you feel about bipartisanship as it relates to immigration reform? >> it is interesting. this is a very positive experience. that was felt by all the members.

he did not have anyone he felt he could trust. this is not mean you work together on something that is important for the country. the fact that two of our colleagues decided they needed to withdraw, i regret it that i am not negative about them. they do not like president obama. i knew that already. is whatthe real issue can the republican leadership support? we can have the best product in the world. if it is not put on the floor for a vote, it does not matter. the bill is drafted. we could come up with other republicans. it does not matter unless the republican leadership decides to put it up for a vote.

does not matter if it does not go up for a vote. at what piece of this and that could we report to clean up? is there is a lot more agreement than people suspect, i have talked to lots and lots of conservative republicans. i work with a lot of the t fighter guides. know some of them. we do not agree on this late at budget. the real issue is what is there going to be a decision?

>> given your important leading roled your in building bipartisanship, tell us how you feel today and the prospects. he hit it right on the mark. conversations that would lead you to conclude that there is bipartisan support for getting this done. they see this with the shutdown of government. we all had to figure out how we are going to get to a point where we feel comfortable. in the case of the republican leadership, i think speaker boehner and the republican leaders in the house have to figure out a way to navigate this to be able to bring along sufficient number of republicans and keep a sufficient number of

democrats to keep is bipartisan. there is a tipping point. at some point it becomes difficult politically to sell this in one direction. is you have to figure out how to navigate this for your own party that you got elected to be speaker as a result of. at the same time, your speaker now for the entire body. you have to reach across the aisle. i think the speaker has the toughest task of all of us. he has to figure out a way to navigate this to an endpoint. that is not easy. immigration has never been an easy subject to confront and solve. never beforeg is have we seen so many stakeholders and constituencies supportive about getting this done. of theple are way ahead politicians. they want it done. we just have to do everything

possible to start to close the trap door so no one can escape the fact that we're going to have a vote on the house floor to give us a chance that we want to fix the broken immigration system. hopefully we can make this so the speaker can say this is a bill that can be put on the bill and ultimately passed. >> i do not disagree. of our internal rules, the speaker cannot really put anything on the floor and must get the majority of republican support. that is one of the things we have been working on. the reasons i feel optimism is because i think we are going to get there. therek we're going to get because so much work has taken place over the years. i may say so. is probably one of the most educated as far as reform

issues. it is not only the work that her and others have done. it is the conversations and work that goes on every single day. i feel we are going to get there. if we are going to get the majority of the support, we can bring it to the floor. too much to one side you lose all the republicans. is enoughto the other to kill the bill. it is a delicate balance. sayingthe things we keep mathematically we can get bipartisan support. this is why i think we have a shot.

it was said that it is very important that the outside groups of the community contact members of congress. let me give you some free advice. there are ways that are affected in ways that are not. when i see twitter and people that threaten him, that turns everybody off. you see things you better vote this way or else. then one can feel good about that but you do not get any support. been veryou who have verytive, you have a positive sense. you talk about the issues. we have had a million disagreements. it is calm and focused on the issue. if you threaten, you lose folks. it either this or nothing. is nothing.hing, it

all of us have a role to late. we will continue to do our part. i am not sure i have a lot to add at this point. we know because we did it that the bipartisanship as possible. one of the reasons we were able to do it is that we did it in were not out in the world or the advocacy shot at was taking a everything we do in the talk radio world goes off and scares everybody to death. i come from the media world. the media is one of our biggest problems right now in terms of being allowed to be that partisan. -- to be bipartisan.

every politician knows you can tell within 15 seconds whether siloody is in the fox news or the msnbc silo. that is just one of the problems , it is veryissue vulnerable to the kind of outside influence that makes it very difficult to work together. can be done because we have done it over the last year. it has to translate to the larger body. >> i was given 12 minutes for east of the questions and we have four minutes and 50 seconds left. good job.ne a i do not know how you want to do this. i am the president and the

chair of the latino teachers in california. i want to thank you on behalf of the children in california. i want to take you back to 1986 and ronald reagan and the amnesty of 1986. you that i am a teacher at 15 years. my sister is a teacher's aide works in the school setting. the vision he had was the potential of the kids. the potential of these kids to be somebody. i hope you would focus on that and so the focus on the danger. >> thank you. we can hear a lot. continue. i am from chicago. i wanted to thank you for your

time here and also thank you about the real threat that is portrayed in the media. projecting an in kernel i sing the fear in the audience and elected officials. one that is easy to scapegoat on. i am wondering how can we take a and redesign the image that people think when they think immigrants. right now it is conflated with thinking of mexican drug cartel. >> i am going to let everyone think of these questions. >> we will get a lot more questions and comments to add to our conversation. today we havet the government shutdown and it has a lot to do with the affordable health care act. , the obama

administration said those who had deferred action will not be able to participate in health care. system -- the patent citizenship means is to have good health care, affordable education for my family and future children. it means so much more than a piece of paper. to me it means being able to called one day to represent in a jury. what does cap the citizenship mean to you? have as a lot of people lot of different ideas of what it means. >> keep moving that microphone around. we will come back to you. >> thank you. i live like to hear from you

what you think the president can do to help this. i cannot help but think that daily deportations of having citizens and their families. that is not help you get the job done. >> last question appear. >> this is pretty much a question. we have seen that there are many people in the gang is seven and eight and a house that had been championed. there are many republicans who are the same opinion who want to get it done. that is something we are seeing the bipartisan efforts very improved. there is the whole procedure that has to move. takenally, they need to action.

you have incredible efforts. what does this look like? >> we're running out of time. why don't we give 30 seconds to each of us. >> i will answer that. judiciary committee, the chairman has moved for bills that are just outrageous. one would make every undocumented person and united states a federal criminal. no democrats voted for that. that we dod is piecemeal legislation. that would be the basis for somehow moving forward. yetjudiciary committee has to produce any specs that could allow for that to happen. the decision needs to be made orher by chairman goodlatte by the speaker to take either the bill we wrote or the senate

bill or some other piece and move it forward. there are other match nations that occur. machinations that occur. i do not want to bash them. i want to help them. i want to support them in reaching a decision that works. >> i know how difficult this is. why don't you take a minute and give us your reflection. >> thank you everyone for being so patient. i want to thank all of my colleagues. this has been a fabulous experience to try to work this through. i believe we are going to get there. we cannot let anyone make us believe that we cannot get it done. the votes are there. we have to keep pushing. have ad every one of us

responsibility to prove that we are ready to get this done. you keep pushing us and extraordinary ways. the frame that we hopefully will put out there. even if you do not, as john said, and kentucky two thirds of the public and kentucky want this done. the more we put out the face of what real immigrants are like, inspiring, i think we will be ok. do not give up. we will get it done. >> i would like to address the question of what the president can do. probably the best thing he can .o is post it >> he has made this the top priority item for the second term. his job really now as he is not

going to sell it to the country. .e can help keep us together i do not think he will be the one that will influence republicans or speaker boehner to move this. >> three points if i may. let me take questions directly and then i will use you to tie it and. i thank you for doing that. one of the issues that we have to deal with is in essence what you're hearing from the conservatives. part of the things that was promised that we would have border security so we would not have to deal with it again. this aspect and not take place. there is a lack of trust there. what do we have to do?

one of the issues we have to , if the speaker today were to say we're going to put this on the floor and he does not have the majority of republicans, he is gone. he cannot do that. more folks to be on top of that. one of the issues that convince is that we'rey not going to do this again. that we're going to deal with this. we're going to provide border security and we're not going to do this again. we will have zero tolerance for any future lawbreaker. can we get there? i think we can. a privilege.uch there are legitimate people who care about this issue. i will and how i started.

when it comes to concern and it comes to his own. i am getting older. let me first of all thank the comingul panelists for together. i just want to give you some parting thoughts. [applause] chamber of commerce never got involved. they do not. they did on immigration. you can read the editorial from the wall street journal. they look like they're plagiarizing one another. created by the union cesar chavez reached an

agreement. there is a lot to celebrate because of your tenacity and your support and the diligence of the community. this is not happen in a vacuum. agree, there exists a has never happened before. i'm going to tell you something. when democrats were in a majority in 2007, we did not have a vote on comprehensive reform. democrats not 218 comprehend that -- for conference of immigration reform. we do not do it in two thousand eight. we did not do it in 2009 or 2010. many of you begged and implored us to do it. do you know it exists today? the majority.

200 and eight democrats. that is not the way. is not a successful road. when you look at this situation, you can look at everything and put it in some kind of perspective. is oneot look at this problem or another. i know when the congressional caucus said you have a rubio problem. i was very proud that day. i said we do not have a rubio problem we have a deportation problem. i'm going to take my democratic put my one hat on, the hat of the immigrant community. as i listen, democrats have to

understand that we are not in the majority of the house of representatives. we cannot have everything. republicans on the other hand are the majority. i think they should understand that they lost the referendum on november 6. people want copperheads of immigration reform. between democrats and i believe we can realize a real solution to this problem. we are about to come upon 2 million deportations. under a democratic administration. you know what that means, right? hundreds of thousands of children without a mom or a dad. and wives haveds been separated and destroyed? we have a bill that does not allow them to come back and reunite.

do you know what? we have got to get it done. there are issues and challenges for both parties on this. i want to commend my colleagues for how they put the situation together. guys know me. i in the consummate warrior on this issue. it will not be perfect. arnie said i will sign the senate bill. what do we know? congressional budget office. out of legalization. out of legalization. one of our most respected think tanks and we would leave 3 million. here is what i think are challenges.

here's what we can do from the greatest good. i know that if we signed that bill tomorrow at next years conference what will we be discussing? how to bring the other 3 million and. we will not give up until they are all in. we will not give up until they are all in. it may be hard to recognize. this is a conference on policy. [speaking spanish] i would vote for that bill today. i want to stop our woman from being raped. i want to stop people from having to die on the border. tired of people

dying. we have that challenge. thank you. what can we say? he has tenacity. he showed up with four other democrats here. he sticks with us. thank you so much. thank you for joining us. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] to missill not want tomorrow morning's gala event. 5:00 p.m.. please get there early so you have time to get through security. it is the largest and most prestigious gathering of the private sector leaders in the

nation. have a great evening. >> turning back now to the

government shut down as it heads into a new week, john boehner and jack lew or on the sunday talk shows this weekend. here is some of what they had to on abc's "this week" and nbc's "meet the press." >> the president saying i will not negotiate. i will not have a conversation. though president reagan negotiated with democrats who controlled the congress. even though president george herbert walker bush had a conversation about raising the debt limit. during the clinton administration there were three fights over the debt limit that you and i participated in. obama himself went there in negotiation. now he is saying i'm not going to do this. i am going to tell you what. riskation's credit is at because of the administration's refusal to sit down and have a conversation. it is yoursaying

refusal to pass a clean debt limit. >> we're not going to pass a clean debt limits. there's no way we are going to pass it. the votes are not in the house. the president is risking default by not having a conversation with us. >> under no circumstances will you pass it? >> we are not going down that path. it is time to deal with america's problems. if we areuld it mean not able to pay hospitals. there would be little pretty crises at home and important institutions. it is irresponsible. we need to negotiate. does the president want to watch this go into default? >> the president believes that they know the consequences and that this does not matter.

>> will he not come to the table at all? >> i know the leaders of congress. i do not believe any of them want a default. they are going to look at how they let a majority in congress work there will. at theow to a look supreme court on the eve of a new term. this term begins tomorrow. , his go to tom goldstein wife, and pete williams of nbc news and toni morrow of the national law journal participated in this forum. it was hosted by the university of georgia. >> this is the terrific and very well to program. my name is sonia west. an associate professor of law.

we had some great information about theng groundbreaking work covering the united states supreme court and what it means to cover an institution like the court in this digital age. today we are going to move on how to focus. i do want to share one personal antidotes about what this has meant to me. the summer on june 26 as it happened to me, my five-year-old daughter was scheduled to have her tonsils out. june 26 also happen to be the , thehat windsor and perry same-sex marriage cases happen to come down from the court. my daughter was wheeled back from surgery at 959, one minute

before the court handed down. i was put in this terrible sophie's choice tight position of caring for my daughter and refreshing the scotus blogs. i am sure the nurses have no understanding of what i was doing. it shows the extent that we lie blogs to get our information. i'm grateful for the work you are doing. today and so honored for anky to have with us our country's most prestigious and keen observers of the united states court. we felt we cannot let them leave without taking their print about the roberts court. vividlyus probably all remembered be seen of chief

justice williams rehnquist's funeral in 2005. it was a moment of significance. he was one of the largest serving justices of 33 years. -- influential justices. his death brought to an end an 11 year time during which the same nine justices had served together. that was the second largest consistent roster of justices since 1823. striking about that moment was the image of one of his pallbearers which was a former clerk of his named john roberts. at the time, the nominee to be the new chief justice. esqueshakespearean- symbolism was lost on few of us.

this year the roberts court will mark its eighth birthday. the supreme court has gone through a number of changes. it has three new associate justices. the changes are showing no signs of being over soon. four of the members are over the age of 75. really highlighting that we are in a stage of transition among the court. it seems like a great time to take a look at the roberts court as it began to hit its stride. more knowledgeable sources that are panels you have been watching the court from the front rows of the press box and at times the advocate podium. we wanted to begin by asking them to tell us what we should be paying attention to about the roberts court. noteworthy, what is striking them as interesting, potential differences between its predecessor of the rehnquist

court. many of you have been following all morning but i did want to take a moment to give another quick introduction to who our panelists are. we have tom goldstein, the publisher and cofounder of .cotus blog here's advocated 30 cases before the court. we have amy he was cofounder and editor of the blocks was also argued before the court -- of also argued will before the court. at the end we have tony who has been covering the united states supreme court since 19 79 most recently for the national law journal. i will start by getting them eat a few moments to tell us what interesting about the roberts court. i will follow-up with a few questions and then we will definitely be looking at questions from the audience.

i hope we can have a terrific conversation. >> thank you so much for coming. this is great to talk about. it will be wonderful to have your questions. i guess if we're talking about the ark of the roberts court, i will make a short-term and longer-term point. watch, i amcases to particularly focused on a set of is trueat show how it that the major constitutional debates never ends. these were a reaction to the era where conservatives, particularly in the reagan justice department thought they had gone off the rails. on a whole array of issues, whether race or abortion or religion, for the past 30 years or so, conservatives have been trying to fight back a set of

prudence that they want to overrule. doneve seen that successfully by conservatives trying to put in place a course correction and an array of access to courts, the second amendment property rights, lots of things. that is not to say that the orservative view is right wrong. there are a couple of areas in the law that are up in front of the supreme court this term that are helping to complete the score. we have the possibility of an abortion case coming back to the supreme court which has been referred to the oklahoma supreme court. they have an abortion protesters case as well. conservatives have been very interested in protecting free speech rights generally and the rights of abortion protesters. that is one of the most significant areas that the roberts court really has not tackled.

that is abortion. in the coming years, including in this term, we may see them tackle it. the second is religion. issued a lotsnot in the way of big religion decisions. this term they have a legislative prayer case. if you put this term inside the continuum of what has happened over the past eight years, those are subjects that really interests me. in terms of the bigger picture, i think that american not lookional law will anything like it does now. his point about the demographics of the court that there are so 75 orustices that are older. you cannot expect that ruth scaliainsburg or justice will be on the court in eight

years. what that means is that they have formed a kind of moderate conservative core. justice o'connor is gone. justice kennedy is not going to be there in 10 years in all likelihood. whoever wins the presidential election has the real possibility to give them. the left has made no bones about the fact that they would overrule a swath of the last 24 years. justice ginsburg were replaced by a republican president that the limiting hadt would be gone and they moved this more to the right. >> going into the same-sex marriage arguments, particularly when they piled the case that challenged the proposition

eight, many people have been this.hly opposed to they may no bones to the fact that they wanted to wind up at the u.s. supreme court and get the fundamental right to marriage. a lot of people worried that it is too much. the same-o badly for sex marriage. i think the people that have been concerns about the lawsuit were in fact very excited. justice kennedy gave a speech in which he complained that the court was taking on too many hot but that hot button issues that

should be preferably left to congress of the executive branch. the speech should not getting a lot of play at the time. people should have paid more attention to it. on the one hand, people who follow the court, you think what are these folks complaining about? they have near perfect over the cases they have to pay. if they do not want to take these cases they should leave them alone. arguably, there are some are compelled to take. different circuits have reached different outcomes. they need to step in to resolve the case. we think justice kennedy is a swing vote on the core. it illustrates the fundamental tension on the court. many of them like to think of .hemselves as oracle like

we simply decide the law and we issue it and then everyone follows it. inevitably when they take these care, same-sex marriage, abortion and the health care case will be back legislative prayer, campaign finance, they get sucked into politics. i think this fundamental tension of what their role is and the divisions on the court, we have the conservatives on one side, liberals on the other and the prospect perhaps of some significant change in one direction or the other. it may help to explain some of the decisions like the fisher case that were incremental rulings. challenge to the university of texas use of affirmative action in the

undergraduate admissions process. everyone certainly was concerned that the court was going to strike down the university of texas policy and get rid of action altogether. after the argument it seem like it would serve to fight another day. at least in theory it has. the court has made it much harder for them to use affirmative action. that it tookwas from october to june to get a decision we have this 13 page opinion that justice breyer and fun don. this is something we will probably know. they released their papers. i am hoping that my children will read them to me and then nursing home. it will take that long.

these can bet bigibuted to waiting for a swing on the court. they were willing to impose some additional limits on affirmative in return of saving it all together. by a vote of 8-1, they allowed the voting rights act to survive another day. a lot will have this. we're going to have legislative prayer, campaign finance. we have the challenge to the birth control mandate.

different courts of appeals have reached different results. that is almost certainly coming back. we're going to get issues of cell phone privacy coming back to the court. it will be interesting to see whether or not in some of these cases that we consider the core constitutional law the roberts continue a more incremental approach in the years to come. a couple of other things i think are interesting to watch. ginsburg wasbader not retiring. she has made it very clear that she is sticking around. not retiring because she really enjoys her job. termw her in this past emerge as the new leader of the court's liberal wing, taking over from justice evenings. theme will depend a lot

on the shifts in the court on years to come. you have the chief justice and justice kagan who are in their early to mid 50's. you can get the sense that perhaps they are playing the long game. it is like a chess game. they are thinking about where the law will be going in years to come in trying to start to shape that. just say that the single most important change in the supreme court has been the retirement of sandra day o'connor and her replacement by samuel alito. is replaced'connor by some of by who you can scratch the world -- the word "moderate." the importance of the retirement of john paul stevens. ruth bader ginsburg is the

leader of the left side of the court. seen several examples of where the court does like to take baby steps. in the voting rights act when a couple of terms ago they came right up to the edge of striking down the voting rights act. and then out of taxes said we are going to leave it up to congress. this is out today. we think congress has not done their homework. have another chance. they didn't. the court then take the next step. we also saw when the supreme court ruled for the first time what the second amendment means. every term brings some narrower slice of exactly what the fourth amendment applies to.

is it the person sitting behind the driver? there's always some new tiny little slice about what the fourth amendment provides. then you get a case involving the gun rights. for the first time in our nations history the supreme court said what is the second amendment mean? is the supreme court said the second amendment protects your right to own the gun in the home for self-defense. it was not a freestanding, free- floating, you can have a gun wherever you want. we have seen a lot of cases that are in the new lower court about exactly where can you have a gun . can the state make you pass a test. we have a lot of big deal issues. , isan have an abortion case

the supreme court really going to roll back roe v wade? anytime a country for the supreme court there's always that possibility. in recent years, the byword has been incrementalism. .> thanks i also want to mention in your introduction you did not mention i was the first person to take you to the supreme court. how long ago was that? >> 1995. >> ok. admission.or the >> a few general talked about the court. this was an extraordinary term. i do not know if you'll ever see one like it again. we have seen it before. for the court to take on affirmative action, voting rights, they decide them all in the same week.

it was really an amazing affirmation of the fact that this court in particular has no hesitation about taking on the big issues of the day. i can imagine other courts in the past having wanted to let the issue of same-sex marriage percolate further. they did not end that matter altogether. andthem to embrace it now to really make a dramatic change in how same-sex marriage is viewed legally, it was just extraordinary. i do not think we would have seen that before. then to have justice ginsberg

officiate over same-sex marriage and washington, d.c. just step back and think about to be sweet of it all. it is extraordinary. the courttive action, make a compromise or middling stance. why justice breyer joined it is he solved the majority had declared that grutter in particular was still good law. let's just stick with that and see how it evolves. mention that io think this term and previous thisdemonstrated that

really is the roberts court finally. he is taking control of the and has tremendous influence over the outcomes as well. i've just written a story that will be in american lawyer chiefne about looking at justice roberts career as an advocate before the supreme that career,ing if what it tells about his chief justice ship. ,here are a couple of things the incremental approach you were talking about on voting they stepped up to the brink and almost declared it unconstitutional. congress'turn to

do something. congress did not act. that made it much easier for the court to take this term. justice ginsburg said she not separating herself from the opinion. the affordable care act decision the year before, one of justice robert's tricks as an advocate write --e court was to every question you can imagine the justices asking, he would write it on an index card and categorize it.