Chris Murphy

rather than what we have today, which is folks coming into the country and waiting 10 years before they get an adjudication. I tried to pass that bill. I ultimately got, you know, most Democrats, but not all, to support it and only a handful of Republicans.

It was a heterodox position inside the Democratic Party at the time to say that we should essentially not allow people to leave the border before they get their asylum claim determined. But it was the right thing to do for a In part because the rules around how you became an American were becoming really hard to understand.

It was a heterodox position inside the Democratic Party at the time to say that we should essentially not allow people to leave the border before they get their asylum claim determined. But it was the right thing to do for a In part because the rules around how you became an American were becoming really hard to understand.

And I don't think that that's acceptable in the kind of society that we are trying to build.

And I don't think that that's acceptable in the kind of society that we are trying to build.

So you let's do it backwards. You should not remove individuals who right now are playing by the current rules and in line for a determination around legal status. Right now, the Trump administration is removing people who are waiting for their asylum claims. to be adjudicated. If you are here with a pending claim, you should not be removed.

So you let's do it backwards. You should not remove individuals who right now are playing by the current rules and in line for a determination around legal status. Right now, the Trump administration is removing people who are waiting for their asylum claims. to be adjudicated. If you are here with a pending claim, you should not be removed.

If you are an individual who has lived here for a long period of time, have family member, have children who are American citizens, I do not think that you should be removed. The prioritization I think was right during the Biden administration and the Obama administration to focus on individuals who had committed crimes, people who had violent histories.

If you are an individual who has lived here for a long period of time, have family member, have children who are American citizens, I do not think that you should be removed. The prioritization I think was right during the Biden administration and the Obama administration to focus on individuals who had committed crimes, people who had violent histories.

There's then a gray area, right, of people who are not in line for asylum, have not committed serious crimes, do not have American citizen children. Those people are eligible for And I think that's just a question of how many resources you want to devote to that exercise. But there's no question that that category of individuals is legally subject to deportation.

There's then a gray area, right, of people who are not in line for asylum, have not committed serious crimes, do not have American citizen children. Those people are eligible for And I think that's just a question of how many resources you want to devote to that exercise. But there's no question that that category of individuals is legally subject to deportation.

And I don't think there should be a complaint if a government acts to remove that category of people.

And I don't think there should be a complaint if a government acts to remove that category of people.

Last question.

Last question.

So I don't accept the premise. That's fine. if we are only able to mobilize Americans around that specific threat to democracy, which is this high stakes confrontation between the executive and the judicial branch, that may happen. But most democracies that die or many democracies that die, die without that high stakes confrontation.

So I don't accept the premise. That's fine. if we are only able to mobilize Americans around that specific threat to democracy, which is this high stakes confrontation between the executive and the judicial branch, that may happen. But most democracies that die or many democracies that die, die without that high stakes confrontation.

What happens over time is that the mechanisms of accountability, the lawyers, the journalists, the college campuses, the places where truth is protected, where protest as midwife, they become co-opted by the regime or they become weakened enough that the opposition really never has enough oxygen in order to operate.

What happens over time is that the mechanisms of accountability, the lawyers, the journalists, the college campuses, the places where truth is protected, where protest as midwife, they become co-opted by the regime or they become weakened enough that the opposition really never has enough oxygen in order to operate.

I think that's more likely to be the story of American democracy's demise is that there actually isn't this grand confrontation between the Supreme Court and Trump. But that is not the But I guess we won't know the answer to your question, whether the public cares about that other more methodical assault on democracy until we tell that story.