defending the rule of law and we are grateful for that opportunity and happy to answer any questions, scott kellerending the constitution and so whether we have people out here or not isn't relevant to. any other questions? [inaudible] i'm encouraged today. i feel like the justices will support the constitution which requires the law to be faithfully executed by the president and he doesn't have the authority to make law. we had questions from almost all of the justices. spinnaker that the questions about the lawfulness [inaudible] they keep asking why not challenge? the judge kept asking you about the challenge of the lawfulness. it's always been about the separation of powers. and what does this transforms the conduct and i think if the president has the power to do that, that should trouble every american because we have the separation to protect our liberties and that's what it is about. i would like to read a quote. there is a monument from robert taft and it's as if we wish to make democracy permanent in the country let us abide by the fundamental principle laid out by the constitution. that

we are open to any questions to scott keller or me. [indiscernible] >> we are here defending the constitution and so whether we have people out here or not is not relevant. any other questions? you know what, i am encouraged today. i feel like the justices are going to support the article in the constitution that requires the lobby faithful executed by the president of the united states and he does not have authority to make law. we had questions from almost all of the justices. thomas did not ask the questions i am aware of. ofwhat about the question [indiscernible] -- why not go after the -- you seem to be going about kind of -- why not challenge the memo itself? >> did you heard the question? she wants to know why -- >> the justices asking you, why not challenge the november memo and the drivers licenses? beenis case has always about the separation of powers. it transforms unlawful conduct into lawful conduct. i think that should trouble every american the cousin it is congress's power. we have power from the congress to protect our

el abogado scott keller que representa al estado de texas, uno de los demandantes, insisti en que elsidente obama a la hora de diferir cualquier deportacin, por lo que reiter que la accin ejecuva noiene base leg. por su parte, el magistrado samuel alito, visto como el mas favorable a la demanda liderada por texas, defendi a ese estado afirmando que el tema de los beneficios q ribiran indocumentados eran el punto mas importante y representaba el argumento mas solido de la demanda. representando al gobierno claro al decird vrli fue que cualquier demanda a una accion ejecutiva no puede estar basada en problemas como las licencias de conducir en la corte suprema hay ocho magistrados: anthony kennedy, john roberts, samuel alito y clarence thomas, se ubican en el "banquillo nseador". losjueces keagan, ruth ginsburg y stephen breyer estn en el "banquillo liberal" del mximo tribunal de justicia. la decisin final de la corte depender de lo que diga anthony kennedy, quien reemplaz al fallecido anthony scalia. kennedy ha votado a favor de decisiones respaldadas por el banquillo liberal y se cre

the more liberal justices standing to the -- turning to the standing question with texas' lawyer scott kellernd justice breyer said your view of injury here is so broad that every time the state has a political disagreement with theh federal government, it would sue the federal government, we could have a flood of litigation. >> sreenivasan: so those are the two big issues. >> that's one issue. >> sreenivasan: just one issue. >> yes. the second issue is the fundamental issue, is this program legal? does it violate the law? did the president go a step too far? there again youo saw almost the ideological breakdown. the government said we're exercising enforcement discretion. there are eleven million immigrants, congress never appropriated enough money for us to deport all of them but congress does give us this enforcement discretion that presidents have been exercisingg for decades.s. texas says, huh-uh, this is a different type of program, by giving deferred deportation to a whole class of illegal immigrants, you are actually changing their legal status, and you can't do that without a congres

those two will have 45 minutes of oral arguments in on the other side, texas solicitor general scott kellerhe president's plan on immigration followed by aaron murphy of lawyer for the u.s. house of representatives after the house presented an amicus brief to the court. we are taking a look at the sights and sounds here outside of the supreme court and again across the street at the u.s. capitol. ♪ [cheers and applause] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] ♪ [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [chanting] [chanting] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [chanting] [chanting] [chanting] [chanting] [chanting] [chanting] [chanting] [chanting]

we are happy to answer any questions to scott keller or me. [indiscernible] >> we are here defending the constitution and we are here defending the constitution, so whether we have people out here or not is not relevant. any other questions? [indiscernible] >> you know what, i am encouraged today. i feel like the justices are going to support article to of the constitution which requires the faithful execution of the law and the president is not have the authority to make law. [indiscernible] >> we had questions from almost all of the justices. thomas did not ask the questions i am aware of. >> what about the question of [indiscernible] -- why not go after the -- you seem to be going about kind of -- why not challenge the memo itself? >> did you hear the question? she wants to know why -- can you ask it again? >> why not challenge the november memo and the drivers licenses? >> this case has always been about the separation of powers. it transforms unlawful conduct into lawful conduct. the president thinks he has the power to do that and that y