dream is still attainable. be sure to watch washington journal at 7:00 and join the discussion. judge isrict court weighing whether a texas immigration bill is constitutional and it will allow a federal district court judge is weighing whether a texas immigration bill known as sb4 is constitutional. a hearing was held in san antonio and late june. the texas bill and similar immigration laws around the country were discussed by a panel at the annual conference of the national association of latino elected and appointed officials in texas on june 24. this was part of the annual conference of elected officials. it is about one hour.

for us to spread the word about not only this very bad legislation but also arming ourselves with the information we need to unite ourselves to fighting legislation like this anywhere in any state in any city anywhere in this country. because only working together will we be able to stop this kind of scapegoating and rhetoric. today, we will focus again on the racial profiling bill that's what i call it. others call it the show me your papers bill but it does not matter what we call it because we know what it is. it is targeting our communities. whether it is like what started in california under pete wilson with their proposition or whether it's the arizona sb1070 or hours which is sb4, it is bad. call it what you want that

it is bad. i have mentioned to you in the opening remarks that we made at the beginning of this conference on thursday that the one thing we have already seen in houston has been the drop in reporting of crimes. remember what i said, already our police chief has frowned that reporting of rape among hispanics is down 42.8%. the reporting of violent crimes is down by 13%. that is just out of the fear of what the president is doing nationally and knowing that sb4 may come because it is not take into -- it is not going to affect until september unless we stop it and that's what we will focus on today. on your program, you saw that dina perales was supposed to be here. maldive has always been there. maldive will be there again

and she is preparing for litigation and the hearing is on monday and i plan to be there and a lot of my colleagues from texas will also. in her place is sleelena moreno and we know that texas is not alone. arizona has been through this. you have a former senator of the time to talk about the arizona experience. we have the state senator from california who will talk about their experience. we have experts to talk about this from the professor to a litigator so you will see that our panel will look at different perspectives to make sure we all understand exactly what we are facing and how you might see it in your own community and how to fight back. leading the conversation is professor -- is the professor from texas and

victory is a contributor to msnbc, pbs, and cnn as well as a regular political analyst for porto del mundo. she is a fellow at the center for politics and government -- governance of the lbj school of public repairs -- public affairs. she has been named some debts one of the top 12's colors in the country. this panel will be ready to go. you all make sure you have questions ready in case we have time, we will try to make sure we allow for a little bit about that. please remember, this will impact all of us. i always say that it may start with that traffic stop because you don't have a taillight. but it could lead to a detainment and ultimate deportation that will lead to a broken family.

and all of that will lead to broken faith in our system on the part of our community. let's all work together, let's listen, let's get ready and above everything else, let's unite and fight back. professor? [applause] >> thank you, senator garcia and thank you all for being here today. >> thank you, senator garcia and thank you all for being here today. professionally, i have been looking at the issue of immigration for well over a decade. but for most of us in this room, immigration is not just another policy issue.

it's something deeply personal. it's something that infects us in terms of her children, her siblings. you add onto that what has happened in the last couple of years of immigration policy becoming even more personal, even more localized. when we look at the arizona sb 1070 or the texas law, this is something that happened beyond us. it's something that happens in our community. in this panel, we are going to take a deep dive into what these laws mean and what these laws mean for us on a day to day basis, how we live our lives, what decisions we make in terms of whether or not we will run an errand or not because we are scared we might get pulled over and second, what are the political implications?

what is the long game here ? where are we going to be as a community as latinos? in two years, five years, in 10 years, is a result of these laws? i'm a teacher and so i cannot help but give a lecture when i have a microphone. i will take two minutes of your time because i think it's really important to understand the larger context of the history of immigration and emigration policy in this country. the country is 250 years old and we need to context of the history of understand what is happening now in texas in particular factors into that. it's interesting but for the first 100 years of this country, we had a completely open armed policy when it came to immigration. but then, in the late 1800s, we started to see that policy start to constrict, what we call the closing door of immigration and i

think this is an important date for us to remember. 1882. it was when the u.s. congress passed the chinese exclusion act. what happened there is a set of precedence in our country looking to exclude persons based on their race and their ethnicity. and the door to immigration has been closing ever sense but more particularly, it has always been targeted toward one group or another. i joke and a sense that latinos cannot take it personally because, at one time or another, the ancestors of nearly all americans were targets. italians, jewish, irish, now it's latinos.

the other important thing we need to keep in mind when we are talking about immigration is that it is a federal level issue. it's squarely something that should be in the purview of washington, d.c. as we all know here, our immigration system has been broken for a long time and limping along. what has happened then is that our states have taken up the baton and tried to figure out for better or for worse what to do about immigration. in the mid-1990's, we saw california take its first stab at trying to deal with issues related to immigration. there was a law and in 2010, we saw a number of states spearheaded by arizona put into place restrictionist immigration laws. today, we see texas doing the same. understanding that yes, this is happening on the local level but it is part of a much bigger constellation of federal level laws that have not worked for us and while we work to change what is going on in our local levels, we cannot move our from what is going on in

d.c.? with akamai will turn it over to our expert panel which we are lucky to have this morning. let me briefly introduce each of them and then we will start the conversation. to my immediate left is texas state representative who is the chair of the mexican-american n legal caucus and former naleo chair. next we have harris gonzales, a lawyer, a partner at law firm focusing on issues related to immigration at the local level and also a formal -- a former senior counsel for immigration rights in the obama administration.

last but not least, california state senator, if we can welcome them all with a round of applause please. [applause] let me start with representative achia. you have been in the trenches so if you can give us a sense of the genesis of sb4 beginning with the legislative session in january and how it moves through the texas legislature to end up being signed by governor greg abbott recently. >> thank you for the question. if i can contextualize it for everybody, at the outset of the session in the governor's state of the state speech, he declared quote unquote, sanctuary cities and emergency item.

that insured that the bill is going to speed through the process, receive preferable -- preference in terms of treatment over other bills and that's exactly what happened. mexican-american legislative caucus and many of my colleagues are here today. they worked really hard to slow down the bill, appeal to the speaker of the house that there's bill would get out of control on the house side which it ultimately did, but the wheels of the legislative process were greased for this bill. it spent very little time in procedural committee, unlike other bills, and despite the fact that in the committee hearing, there were over 600 people who testified against the bill and less than 10 people who testified in favor of the bill, it was shot out of committee and to the house floor very, very quickly. the senate passed a papers

please bill and the house -- and the house include a provisions that only would trigger the asking of citizenship status or lawful presence of there was an arrest. which in our view, minimized the impact -- it's still a bad bill and the pretext for the bill was still bad, but it minimized the damage to our community which was the goal of many of us. we said if something is going to pass, we want it to impact as few people as possible regardless of what the motivations which i think were impermissible and unlawful motivations for the bill. we warned the speaker of the house, every member of the mexican-american caucus, who is a committee chair thomas sent a letter -- sent too, i think -- to the speaker to not bring this to the floor. an immigration bill on the texas house floor in this political climate where you have a president who calls latinos

rapists and criminals will get out of control. that was represented to us that his leadership team would hold and not get out of control but in fact, the minute it hit the house floor, the bill was attacked from the right to make it papers please again and the members, the gop members of the house, headed for the hills on ultimately voted for the most egregious form of the bill possible. once that occurred, the senate which had a pact -- past that egregious form, concurred with the house and went straight to the governor who bragged that he was getting his signing ready to go. there was going to be a massive action against the governor at the governor's mansion that day he was slated to sign it, so he signed it on a sunday night in private via facebook live as opposed to standing in front of the media, standing in front of members of the public and that's really how this thing went. there was a lot of intrigue i could give you but i don't want it to be it to inside baseball.

the reality is the governor declared as an emergency item despite the fact that virtually 100% of ice detainers are complied with in texas. i'm not speaking as to whether that is good or bad policy, but the study we did showed 99.78 percent of ice detainers are complied with so it was clearly not an emergency. what it was was an attempt by the governor and numbers of the legislature to put a brown face on an item and use impermissible use race to push a lyrically -- politically motivated agenda. when the governor and his state of the state pointed to the most important case you could show, he pointed to a latino immigrant, an undocumented immigrant, who had murdered a woman in texas and said this is exhibit a for why we need this. well in fact, that exhibit a had been in ice custody three times and deported three times and regrettably, because of our broken immigration system

had murdered someone. the sanctuary cities would not have stopped that case yet it was willie hortonesque. for those of you who are too young to remember, willie horton was a black man used as a political pawn to attack someone. this bill is built on a foundation of lies and really, some racist pretext and i think that's what made at most a gracious in a state that is 40% latino. >> i think it is very important to highlight just how much effort was put into trying to stop sb4 first in the senate. i know the house was putting forward every effort they could but as we said, the larger political contacts, not just here in texas but nationally, was just too much of a wave to fight against. this is where i think we moved to a different strategy in this is the judicial -- the legal strategy. once we saw the writing on the

wall and knew this was going to pass by governor abbott, we knew it was a foregone conclusion that this was going to be fought in the court. so selena, if you can talk to us about the court challenge that was brought almost immediately and how you see that challenge in the short to medium-term playing out. >> first of all, thank you to the chairman and everybody in ,he legislature, our allies over 1000 people came out to speak against sb4 we came up short but we are taking the fight now on monday to federal court in san antonio to block the law before it ever takes effect on september 1. we are proud to represent san antonio, san antonio city councilman and three amazing organizational plaintiffs.

along with our other plaintiffs, we are going to court to tell the judge that this will have irreparable harm to our community, to the jurisdiction in the state of texas and this law is unconstitutional and it cannot stand. the chairman mentioned the way the governor signed the bill into law. the very next day, the governor actually took a playbook -- a page out of the book of governor pete wilson in california but he didn't finish reading until the end, because when prop 187 was passed in california, governor wilson sued as governor bennett did, both governors were trying to intimidate our community from standing up in court against this bill. i know we draw tremendous strength and inspiration from

our clients, particularly those that are most vulnerable. they are certainly not intimidated and neither are we and we look forward to the courtroom fight on monday where nina perales will be presenting oral arguments and live witnesses for the court on monday. >> that's a good excuse for why nina is not here. we will let it slide. sheriff gonzalez, as a law-enforcement officer, you are on the ground, you are seeing firsthand the effects of a law like sb4 where the rubber meets the road. can you talk to us about what you have seen, and the justification was that sb4 was not anti-latino or anti-immigrant but it was about public safety and it was about making texas safer. are we safer? are we not safer? >> in my opinion, this law will

make us less safe. i represent harris county, which is primarily in the greater houston area. it's the third largest in the country and the largest here the -- in the state. as a law-enforcement officer, to me, it's imperative we work with all communities especially the immigrant community to make sure we are getting information, to make sure we are solving crimes, violent crimes, and also making sure they come forward to report. there is a trust factor there and to me, this diminishes that that's what i try to advocate at the state level with our allies. our voices were ignored by the governor, in my opinion and those that passed this. i think it's important for them to understand that in our diverse community, there is already a sense of fear to begin with. there is already an underreporting of case of family violence, sexual assault and this just makes it worse. we have heard anecdotally or some individuals, some women have said i should never have

called out my husband because now he may get deported even though he is beating me, for example. we have heard cases like that. we have heard children say they are worried that the parents will not be able to pick them up from school. i am grateful for the the law enforcement specialists like those who understand the verse commodities who have stood up and advocated against of this. again, those voices were not heard of many people to feel comfortable and come forward and they can't when we have this kind of law. that's why i have been an office in this role since january and soon after taking office, i ended the 287g in my community [applause] because i knew this type of law again brings negative connotations and there is a fear that's associated with it. instead of is going forward, we are going backwards, it seems. i think it's very offensive as an elected official, i can run the risk of being arrested and

removed from office by not complying with this. i was elected by the people to serve and represent and determine what the best priorities -- [applause] what the law enforcement priorities should be for my jurisdiction. i am on the ground. i know what happens to local control. i was elected to represent my constituents and we should be addressing violent crime. this type of law with people being in fear hurts everyone because if there is a latino who was a witness to a crime, now they will be afraid to come forward and report those crimes and i am unable to go after the perpetrator or the latino community could be targeted because those predators will know that they will not come forward because they will be afraid. it also could lead to racial profiling, as well, because now with any lawful stop, they could be subject to immigration. if we want to be immigration -- if we wanted to be immigration officers, we would have signed up to be an immigration. [applause]

again, it's very unfortunate and ground zero.xas is >> thank you, sheriff. gabriel, you come at this issue from a very eclectic background. you're in d.c. with the obama administration in the civil rights division of the education department, but then back in the 1990's -- a long time ago -- you are in the trenches with malda in the stop 187 and now you're working with local communities to figure out how to best address the fear that has consumed our communities at the national level and also the local. if you can talk to me about the most effective education policy approaches for policymakers in this room to take back with them when they are talking to their constituents or talking to their community members about the fears they have about immigration. >> sure, i'm a partner at law firm in california that

represents the majority of school districts and community colleges and after the election of president trump, we had a lot of questions and concerns that were related to how to support and protest undocumented students. it was our effort to brief our clients and the public about what are the laws that are still in effect. unfortunately, when you hear pronouncements by the white house or members of the administration, that leads to a lot of confusion and a lot of palpable fear. our main course of business was to ensure that the public new -- knew what was in fact still the law. we reminded individuals that this is the law of the land. what does that mean? that means any individual cannot be denied visa immigration status to attend a public elementary or secondary school under the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment. this is a case that was brought

by the mexican american education fund in 1992 and it's still the law of the land. i want to ensure that everyone across the country understands that. we still have federal immigration laws that are in effect. individuals should not be harassed, be bullied, discriminated against. we want to make sure that individuals knew that was still the law of the land and we can ensure that individual being discriminated against or harassed, they should know what the policies and procedures are at the school district, at the community college district, at the university so those matters are addressed. we also heard concerned about the prospect of ice coming to campus. there are a lot of entities throughout the state of california that are putting together protocols to ensure that individuals feel safe or understand that if ice were to come knocking on the door at our school site and our campuses, there is a protocol in place that they understand there are limitations and they need to

work in concert with their president's office, with their councils to ensure that not only civil rights laws are not being violated, but our constitutional protection. we also wanted to ensure that we still have privacy rights. under the rights and privacy act, individual student records are still protected under current conditions. this is incredibly important. it's about communicating with is -- what is the law, what still is in force. because unfortunately, sometimes individuals -- the mere fact that they are teaching our students, doing what they're supposed to do is in violation of the law. this is creating confusion and it's our responsibility as leaders in the committee to ensure that there is constant real-time communication with individuals across the nation to let them know we are still fighting for rights that still exist within the constitution or the courtroom or whether it has to do with civil rights and that's what we have been doing across the state on ongoing basis, working with

organizations and leaders like the senator. >> in this climate of fear, misinformation tends to multiply itself. hey's hard enough to already grasped, and then you add the fear. thank you. >> supervisor gallardo, a fellow arizonan. a special place in my heart. seven years. we are seven years out from arizona's sb1070 which came on the heels of the tea party movement and really held the banner for this larger trend in localized anti-immigrant laws we have seen. so can you talk to us about the good, the bad, and the ugly that has resulted in the past couple of years since sb 1070 was signed into law? >> let me start off by saying texasf the governor of

and the lieutenant governor, who continue to want to push or pass the bill, if they do not think there is an economic boycott around the corner, they are fooling themselves. they are living in never never land. [applause] my suggestion to my fellow texans is to be aggressive. the author of senate bill 1070 was removed from office a year and a half later. [applause] we made it a point. he was target number one. he represented the most redist legislative district in the state of arizona. we made a point that we were going to make an example of this individual. we knew we would not be able to beat him with another democratic candidate but we thought another republican candidate who was sympathetic to our needs, we invested millions of dollars and we removed that senator from

elected office. i would -- [applause] don't wait for the courts. there is a lot of positions you can take in order to push back. otherwise, they will continue. one of the things -- and it goes back to 2004, we had our own or proposition 187, it was prop 200. we waited to see what the courts did. later on, they came up with proposition 300 and targeted our students, our dreamers and then we had proposition 100, 101, employer sanctions, we did english only three times in arizona and then ultimately, senate bill 1070. you've got to push back. you've got to be aggressive.

you've got to be bold and brave. one of my favorite congressmen is from arizona. from tucson. right after senate bill 1070 bravely went on cnn and said it is time to boycott the state of arizona. let me just put this out here -- since that, we have not had any anti-immigrant or anti-latino legislation introduced or past out of the arizona legislature over the last seven years. [applause] a lot of that was because of the actions we took as a community to get more engaged. we created a program to be more aggressive in our elections. we started building relationships with allies we have never had before. i am a progressive liberal gay

labor senator. and i had no interest -- [applause] back then, i had no interest in meeting with a lot of groups, particularly some of the business groups. it pushed me to say, wait a minute, we need to build alliances with these groups. my question is, where is the business community on senate bill 4? where are they? it is their elected members, let's be honest, it's republicans that are pushing these types of bills. who are the strongest supporters of many of the republican elected officials? it is the chambers. the business community. why aren't they stepping up and saying wait a minute, knock it off? right after senate bill 1070, we had 60 ceos in the state of arizona send a letter to the republican caucus telling them to knock it off. knock it off. not only are you damaging the

-- oftion of his arizona arizona, you are hurting our economy. we lost nearly $250 million in tourism. i think it is a lot more. it has created a black cloud over the state of arizona that it is going to take forever to get out from underneath. we have to engage with allies, we need to reach out to folks we've never reached out to before and get them on board. to be able to tell those handful of republicans that want to continue to push this that we are not going to stand for it. we will not accept it and we will push back, let it be from an economic standpoint or a political standpoint but you've got to make a point. i would encourage to not just wait to the court, be aggressive, go after those sponsors. you don't have to chalice them with a democrat. challenge them with a republican.

get them out of office. making -- make an example of them. [applause] >> thank you, supervisor. and thank you for highlighting that this is a battle that has to be fought on many fronts and that also politics makes for strange bedfellows. and to embrace that. senator latta, close to 25 years since prop 187. prop 187, many thought for a while that it was going to be the exception that confirmed the rule that states were not going to get involved and now we see that they have, in fact. with the time that has passed, we have seen big changes in california demographically and also politically, so you can you talk to us about how prop 187 affected latinos politically but also the larger dynamic in california since then? >> right, thank you. first, i would like to say on

behalf of the california latino , we stand in solidarity with our caucus in texas. we were watching closely what was happening here. we offer any help we can from california. prop 187 is very bittersweet for us. because i don't think gabriel and i would be here sitting if it were not for prop when 87. it really politicized a large group of us that thought we were all white. oh my gosh, we are american. all of a sudden, no, you are not like us. having two parents that lived in this country as undocumented immigrants in l.a., put a face racism,itriol that is profiling. and so, a couple of things have happened in california since

187. you have a much more informed electorate in the latino community. that does not mean there is bill anxiety and fear given the new administration. something that is very critical in california was that the proposition was passed to create independent redistricting commission, that really took the redistricting power out of the politicians in sacramento and into the board and many of us were very concerned with that. i was a member of the house of the time. what it meant is creative and fair districts that became much more competitive. even in the respect can -- republican districts in california, i don't think one single legislative district does not have over 30% latinos. it has helped make more moderate republicans and even some of our democratic colleagues much more

confident that not only they can get reelected but these are the right issues we need to tackle. california has completely embraced immigration law. we have taken it upon ourselves to write our legislation regardless of what happens at the federal level. and so, we are moving our century state bill, we are moving bills to protect our databases in which we provide services like health care and education and so on. and so we're not going to wait for the federal government for anything. that's coming from a place of being the fifth largest economy in the world. and being california, but we know that we have the responsibility to engage in policy in arizona and texas and with any service, colleagues to go through what we went through 20 years ago. i agree with their supervisor that we need to attack this on multiple fronts and be unapologetic of who we are as a

community and be unapologetic about -- [applause] about the fact that some of us are undocumented and there should be no shame in that. and that this goes beyond any border. we have to be able to engage fully in other states that are seeing this and continue to push back at every level of government. >> thank you, what i want to highlight from the senator is the battlefront of the redistricting. this is something we may not immediately think of, but we are coming up on another redistricting. in texas, we have had a lot of gerrymandering. high point.bably a another battlefront would be not getting other districts gerrymandered. >> can i weigh on the on the -- weighing on the very quickly? it provides further context for sb4. the week before sb4 came to the floor, a sixth federal court

decision came down, finding intentional discrimination by the state of texas in either photo id legislation or redistricting. and to put it in further stark relief, we are still in illegal -- seeing legal maps today that were originally drawn in 2013. it's discriminatory intent and not democratically appointed judges but also republican appointed judges in three different courts in washington, d.c. a -- washington, when you think about where we are on sb4, you have to see it against the discriminatory intent that the six federal court decisions have found and that's important. as latinos, were being impacted not only by sb4 but by gerrymandered lines that disenfranchise us across the

state. we can't takehat, for granted and assume that led to knows -- latinos, our community, understand what the senate bill is about. >> i can almost guarantee that you have latino families -- fourth generation latino voters that will look at it or hear or read in the paper that that does not affect me. i am a third or fourth generation latino. why do i care? the fact is, you cannot implement senate bill 4 without racially profiling. you can't. if anyone thinks it is only our immigrant brothers and sisters that are targeted, i'm sorry. we had in the state of arizona, we saw with our sheriff who was pulling over anyone who looked brown regardless. it is going to be the third or fourth generation latinos were -- who are going to be pulled over, detained, they will be

questioned. they will have their rights violated. and that is the message we need to send to the entire community, inform them what senate bill 4 is all about. it's not just attacking the immigrants, it's attacking everybody. you cannot implement it without racially profiling. >> so i -- picking up from the arizona experience and you mentioned this earlier, where is the business community? we know there was a battle within the republican party. it wasn't just democrats and republicans, but within the republican party. so talk to us. how the chamber of commerce was able to chip away and we saw them take over?

>> in 2011 a papers please bill passed the house and senate and they were doing discriminatory gerrymandering. the difference was that the business committee showed up at the end of the session and into special sessions and said this has to stop. you have the largest homebuilders in the state, perry homes out of houston, the largest -- the ceo of the largest grocery store chain in the state and said we are not doing this. it died a quiet death. this time around, the big difference was that the business community was unable to fight the two front war. i have been very critical of this unity in texas. they were so focused on the bathroom bill that while discriminatory was horrible and negative for the state of texas, the impact to be very clear, it was a much smaller cohort of people sb4. sb4 impacts conceivably 40% of the population but they were unable to do it. they were successful so far on the bathroom bill. they were going in on the 18th of july for the bathroom bill but they could not fight a two front war. on sb4 they completely collapsed

and were ineffective and some of them like the texas farm bureau, you think the farm bureau, the farmers need immigrant label in the state may actually put a card in for the papers please bill on the senate side and that is inexcusable and unforgivable. >> we would be remiss if we did not talk about the politics and the political chess game here. it was no coincidence in arizona that then governor jan brewer was losing and she latched onto this immigrant proposition in 2010. same thing in california, governor pete wilson and you go back to the 1800s and back to the early 1900s. any time you had a politician, an elected official that was floundering, they would look to immigration as a life boat because it conjures up so much emotion and passion. we saw a lot of that here in texas as well with governor abbott feeling heat from the

right flank. we cannot divorce the issue of political calculus and the political chess game from this. do you want to jump in? >> you have to hold the business community accountable. the fact is, they are reaping the benefits of undocumented labor. they are making money so hold them accountable. i think that's where organizations in texas, national organizations you look at in texas, there is an economic type effort is needed here. this is what got the business committee's attention in arizona when we have an economic boycott. we lost millions of dollars in tourism. there was a similar hands-off and arizona. you have to send that message. [applause]

business communities listen to their pocketbooks and when you hit them in their pocketbooks, that's when they wake up. they will not send a letter to the republican caucus saying knock it off similar to what they did in arizona. 60 ceos sent a letter a year after senate bill 1070 and told the legislature to knock it off, you're hurting arizona, you're hurting our economy, your damaging our reputation. arizona. you have to engage the business community. >> to your point in using the immigration issue -- it's very easy to do that. immigrants, regardless of which generation are vulnerable folks. this is why it's critical for us to be unapologetic about owning

our immigrant story, now more than ever. even in your own social circles, being very upfront about the issue. this is why politicians use it because as latinos, widow like to talk politics, we don't like -- we don't like to talk olympics and our own stories even with their own parents talking about their immigration stories but this is why we need to take a playbook from our lgbt community. we are very upfront about who we are. we know that if you meet somebody who is openly gay, that changes your perspective. we are your neighbors. we are your colleagues and coworkers. we as latinos need to not accuse anybody from talking ill about immigrants or about latinos. we tend to shy away from these conversations but we need to be more upfront and unapologetic about who we are. when you understand who we are, you understand that about your neighbors. we care about the economy. we are talking about the economic impact.

when i landed here, our attorney general is on our patronized list. [applause] the governor called me last night, what are you doing in texas? i said at the moment, i'm two-step and i failed miserably. [laughter] it behooves us to have other states weigh in. the fact is now no one from our legislature can attend conferences in texas or mississippi or alabama. this is a coordinated effort for us to push back as well and to be able to demonstrate that we are an economic engine, that latinos contribute to the economy and be able to demonstrate that by hurting folks temporarily where it matters the most which is their pocketbook and understanding we have an additional perspective

and support our legislative colleagues here in texas and empower them to push at every level of government here. there is light at the end of the tunnel. california was that place before and to see how far we have come, to be able to demonstrate that you can have the most inclusive immigration policy and the sky is not going to and. you'll will continue to be an -- not going to end. you are going to be able to be an economic powerhouse in the world. by demonstrating that inclusive policies work. we incorporate everyone and everyone continues to be part of the post-american dream. let's not just let one election or one bill determine who we are as americans and the we are as latinos. we need to continue to push and support every effort to defeat this in texas and anywhere where it rears its ugly head. >> there are a lot of lessons to be learnt so let's look to arizona, let's look to california, but i think your

point about looking to the lgbtq playbook is incredibly important. look at how other communities who have been repressed have followed suit. i want to turn to the topic of what's going on on the ground level. sheriff, you hope for the best and you prepare for the worst. let's say september 1 rolls around and sb4 goes into effect , what can law enforcement departments across the state do to mitigate the effects of sb4 in the community? >> one of the things we can do is to continue to reinforce that -- although i agree with the supervisor that racial profiling will still creep up in this because of the latino community being targeted -- that we reinforce that racial profiling

is not allowed and to create a policy where i make sure that the deputies document why they are asking and to identify the probable cause and make sure they are documenting in a report what their purpose was. what was probable cause for asking and the steps did they take and the documentation so i can better understand and see who is really out there. they should be focused on other police priorities instead of being an ice agent. many sheriffs and chiefs of talked about that. >> may i highlight something to rip off the sheriff? the first time in texas history you have spanish surname sheriffs elected throughout the state in austin, and harris county, houston, here in dallas and throughout the valley. isn't it a coincidence that this

papers please bill creates a provision that allows the state government and the attorney general to remove democratically elected spanish surname sheriffs from office if they fail to comply with this papers please bill? i don't think it's any coincidence. in their county -- in bayer county and el paso county in travis county in dallas county, spanish surname latino sheriffs that are democratically elected in these urban areas that were one-time strongholds and they are getting elected so boom, all of a sudden we see a bill the can remove them. >> to add more to that, we are seeing a difference between the major urban law enforcement leaders and the rural ones. we have more diverse communities. houston is recognized as the most racially diverse community now in the country.

the l.a. times had an article in may talking about this. hundreds of languages are spoken. they talk about safety. i was the only county before me taking office that was involved. the only sheriff in the state out of 200 and four counties. -- 200 54 counties, nobody else had it. they could have signed up for any part of this if it was about safety. the new presidential administration and other things are happening and now the smaller municipalities are looking to sign on. where was the fear before? what is this trying to solve? if you want to solve these issues, we need tougher immigration reform, not put unfunded mandates at the local level. [applause] i don't think that is the issue here. >> that is exactly what they're

talking about, it's a violation of the voting rights act of 1965 and i think that will -- is what we will be arguing monday in court. these are folks that are duly elected often by a latino majority district. part of what the voting rights act does is it supposed to read -- to protect the choice, the candidates of their choice. when latinos elect somebody, that is the very purpose of the vra. you cannot just thwart the will of the voters. it's governor greg abbott. [applause] >> it's a very important point that the attack on the immigrant community is being waived by the republican administration here in the state on multiple fronts. we will have to fight it on multiple fronts. going back to this theme of fear that is pervasive, what are the

tools and the information that superintendent, folks who work in the administration of community colleges can take back with them especially in light of the threat. there have been a lot of threats of funding being removed from the federal government, educational dollars. what can you tell these administrators? >> fortunately in california, we have individuals working together from the governor to the attorney general, we have nonprofits and they are working together. what can we do together to work in a concerted way to assist other communities before they do not have that type of test immigrants have been a part of history since day one. what can we use as a vehicle to provide toolkits dropped the

communities in a more focused way when there is a solicitation from our community and different states that are not as progressive as california? but we are doing is to reach out to stakeholders. we are advising and encouraging our school districts and our community colleges, they are hubs of the community to work in tocert with organizations develop not only opportunities to provide legal services, but to ensure the undocumented immigrants find they are supported by administrators. policies been passing that emphasize that they are what to continue to do they were hired to do and that is educate students. they are not focusing on issues

that are problematic. we know that our individuals that are taking advantage of a document immigrants in the community. we make sure they are reminded of that. ande are school districts community colleges that are identifying one person who remains aware of what policies are to place at the federal level and the state level, because the community needs real-time information. we also understand and workciate that we need to with our elected officials. invest funding so individuals are being represented if they are facing a proceeding. the key issue here is to provide munication to those who are affected, that you are supporting them and you do this through public pronouncement. our communities that maybe don't

want to do a board resolution but the key part is they understand that there is a superintendent or a president that is concerned with their welfare and they are there to help them out. a letter could be done by public pronouncement because right now, there is a need to ensure that we are all in line to protect our undocumented students and families. folks have been doing across the state -- board resolution, changing policies, having someone who is charged with the responsibility to provide support and provide real-time information. as a mentioned, when i first spoke, there is a lot of confusion. it is our response ability to get accurate information. >> you want to jump in on this issue? >> this bill is so packed that there is a section where he campus provision in the -- a sanctuary vision on this bill that allows any employee to

report that campus to the attorney general. if that campus as a pattern of accommodating immigrants, a dreamer student group is meeting on campus, an employee can make a petition to the attorney general to sanction that campus and have a declared a sanctuary campus. this something that governor abbott insisted on. we demanded that it be taken out because so many are texas dream act students. mean-spirited that they wanted to put those kids in fear by including this provision. i find that so offensive. that is why this governor needs to be called out. [applause] >> i have got to highlight that texas was the first state -- even for california -- texas was

the first state to grant in state tuition to undocumented students. how have things changed. gabe, -- >> let me add, since where cities are campuses, a threat made by federal government today will be defended. there was an executive order that was issued and that has been action taken by municipalities in california for that to stop people in other -- we know that san francisco --ught a long suit seeking right now, the particular provision of the executive order that was issued by the trump administration seeking to defund six where he jurisdictions is at a stop -- defund sanctuary jurisdictions is at a stop.

there have been a lot of school districts and other administrators from community colleges requesting if they would be unfunded -- defund it if they supported undocumented immigrants. it is also important to understand that there are a lot of barriers that the trump administration has to overcome to ensure that there will will take place. is there a 10th amendment protections that states and localities cannot be commanded by the federal government to take on which is a part of a federal regulatory scheme to the receipt of federal funds has to be related to the purpose. in this case, educating our todents are antithetical enforcement of immigration laws. administratorst

-- the third part is there has been a clarification issue recently by the attorney general in response to the cases that have been filed at the county of santa clara and san francisco that states the funding that they are going to go after are those that are issued by the department of homeland security or justice. not by the department of education. that is something that is incredibly important to ensure that individuals feel at ease as they continue to do what they're responsible these are under existing law. -- what their responsibilities are under existing law. we don't have a king in office pit we have a president of the united states who needs to be checked and balanced. >> we're on the topic of the judicial strategy and the setup to malta.

are we comparing apple store just when we talk about -- apples to oranges when we talk about the legal battles? is as before another animal because of the -- is sb4 another animal. we constructed it in such a way that we would pass all of these hurdles. is farome ways, sb4 70 in that the0 state overreached. he goes into the higher -- because their free speech rights are violated, so they can't now -- if you are a professor in a classroom and you want to speak out and have a political debate in the classroom on the topic of immigration and you want to speak out against as before

, you canou are now make liable your university and what it does, it makes universities less likely to hire folks that are speaking out. there's a real threat in terms of contribution rights. not in the sense of racial profiling, first amendment rights of professors. in that sense, i think it goes far beyond, even though the paper please provisions are little bit different. sb4 is such a state overreached. >> sb4 though, there are some unintended consequences much .arger it is the k-12 system as well.

students left our school districts like you would not believe it cartwright a limited school district, we lost 1000 kids overnight. we closed down schools, laid off teachers. parents are scared. they don't understand it. they keep their kids from going to school or they decide to move to a more friendlier state. we lost so many families to california, nevada. they left arizona. when you start talking about the , we cannot forget our k-12 schools where our families, they trust our elementary school. they trust them with the most precious thing they have. they are not going to allow their child to go to school if they believe they are going to be in danger. you might see an impact on your k-12 schools, for you school board members from texas. it will be interesting to know

if student enrollment drops at all because of senate bill for -- a senate bill four. >> we only have a couple of minutes. i would like to ask each of you to think about -- to take about two minutes and give texas your advice. it already so i'm a little bit of -- i'm a little caffeinated. you might want to go to somebody is because my advice might not be pg-13. >> we are live streaming soap lee's pg-13. >> one of the things that really mobilize folks in california and arizona was all of the hate 1070 and he saw that again in texas. culminated on the last day , as a representative who many of you have probably seen,

said that our community doesn't love our country, called ice on the folks who were in the house did what wereally fear most about sb4 and saw a group of ground people -- group of brown people. do not get mad, get even. that is my advice. we have the power. [applause] >> don't get mad, get even. >> thank you. i hope, this is another reminder that elections will do matter. it is important that we look at who represents us at all levels. hopefully we could use this as an opportunity to galvanize the latino community to really take note of who is advocating for them and who is not, and how issues that are debated have a

tremendous impact on all of us. that, becausesee i think it could impact our state and local communities. impacts, theomic strain on our workforce. the are jurisdictions that are friendlier to the immigrant community. really hurt our local economies in that way. i hope that communities can come together and work around these issues and really step up and give people -- get people to office who are going to advocate . that is very important for us to learn. >> abraham? -- gabriel? >> i've been working on these issues since the 1980's. this is been an ongoing struggle and an issue that we need to come together and in more consistent way. , but we understand

there are a lot of individuals who want to take office. it is our role to ensure they understand the importance of civil rights compliance, .onstitutional protection they should become equal partners walking shoulder to shoulder to protect each of us and hold our elected officials accountable. shed light on why are they on certain actions that affect our communities in certain ways. we try to understand the role that other civil rights organizations continue to play. collective concerted effort that will be ongoing. that is something that i understand and appreciate, that we all have a role to play, whether it is a school board member or an individual who is elected. what role are you planning to

move this agenda forward to ensure that no student is discriminated against because he or she is undocumented. that is important. texas, the entire country is watching. everyone is watching to see what happens next. my only suggestion is a bold, be aggressive, push back as hard as you can peer it however this gets resolved debts. however this gets resolved, chances it doesn't work out correctly the way we like but you can bet it will pop up in other states. everyone is watching. build those alliances, work with that segments of society you can join forces together. right after 1070, i went to my brothers and sisters and told them you might as well come and join us because it will not be long before they come after you.

now they have a bathroom bill. build those alliances because i berantee you it is going to the native american community or african-american brothers and sisters and we have got to push back with the hateful type of rhetoric. [applause] texas, we are all watching. we are with you. whatever we can do to help, we are there. >> i would say to all of the texans and our legislators were fighting know that you are the right side. deterred, you are doing what is correct. it is difficult. tv comewere seeing on everybody who turned out to the capital, you know what i saw? i saw future governors, senators, future members of congress.

[applause] let's take this opportunity that is going to have ramifications to organize, mobilize and diversify our movement and to be able to use this as a tool to provide more leadership in our community, to demonstrate that out of this effort they are going to regret the day they even put that bill into that session, because you are now mobilizing an entire community that is not going to forget. like the latino community in california has not forgiven governor pete wilson and to think of the fact that california 20 years ago was reliving this, to now, understanding that california was not a part of this country's founding. now california is a keeper of this country's future is telling of where texas can really

foresee the future and understand that this is a movement that sb4 has created. this is a movement that is not going to go anywhere and we are going to use it to mobilize and organize to now take the reins of the future of this great state. [applause] so, don't get mad, get even. matter.s we all have a role to play. getd alliances and you bullish, you get aggressive, you push back. it will be difficult but in the end, it will be right. thank you all for all of your bullish, you getinsights. thank you to the panel. [applause]

>> c-span's washington journal live every day with news and policy issues that impact you. coming up this morning, chair of the ethics and public policy center will join us to discuss the american dream is still unattainable -- attainable. watch washington journal live 7:00 eastern this morning. joined the discussion. next, author david horowitz speaks about the history of the communist party and his views on socialism, conservatism, and liberalism. this is part of a conference. he is interviewed by the center's director and he will take questions from the audience. this is one hour and 10 minutes. >> everybody welcome, ladi