Sen. Lankford: There’s Still Urgency To Complete DACA Deal

United States lawmakers are in recess this week after failing to pass three approaches to making the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program permanent. The DACA program protects from deportation immigrants brought to the U.S. illegally as children.

“I told my colleagues, ‘Hey, it’s halftime. Let’s come back, let’s regroup, let’s keep working on this,” Sen. James Lankford, R- Okla., told KGOU.

Sen. James Lankford speaks with KGOU's Claire Donnelly.

Lankford, along with a group of senators, including Sen. Chuck Grassley, R- Iowa, and Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, backed a*proposal*called the “Secure and Succeed Act.” The measure advocates, among other things, a 12-year path to citizenship for DACA recipients who meet certain criteria and a $25 billion investment in border security. It failed last Thursday.

In September, President Trump’s administration set a March 5 expiration date for the DACA program and called on Congress to come up with a more permanent solution as part of a broader overhaul of immigration policies.

Two separate federal courts have since blocked Trump from ending the Obama-era program. The Feb. 13*ruling*requires the federal government to continue processing DACA renewal requests for people already enrolled in the program and those whose enrollment lapsed before Sept. 5, 2017.

The ongoing legal arguments could mean DACA will stay in place past March 5, removing some of the time pressure on lawmakers working toward an immigration overhaul.

“I still have a sense of urgency. I want to get this resolved,” Lankford said. “We have a deadline. We should work towards that deadline...I don’t think there’s any way any federal court is not going to allow President Trump to be able to change a previous executive action with one of his executive actions.”

Lankford and other federal legislators are expected to return to Washington, D.C. Feb. 26.

Full transcript of Sen. James Lankford's interview with KGOU's Claire Donnelly:

Claire Donnelly:*So the Senate took up the immigration debate last week but nothing was passed. I know you've said you were disappointed about that. What were you hoping would happen? What do you see as the next steps?

Sen. James Lankford:*The hope was to be able to find a bipartisan agreement that didn't have all these little hidden pieces in it--that we could actually all pass and work together on. Everyone seems to have moved quite a bit on the immigration issue. The White House, the House and the Senate--everyone seems to be having a reasonable conversation about what do we do about these individuals that came with DACA, or that were DACA eligible--that were deferred action, just the kids themselves--as well as some border security issues.

Obviously, we have around 11 million people here in the country illegally. Clearly, that means we have some border security issues that are there. We weren't able to be able to pull that agreement together. But I told a lot of my colleagues, "Hey, it's halftime. Let's come back, let's regroup and let's keep working on this."

Donnelly:*OK. So the Trump administration set the expiration date for DACA-- that's the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program. It protects from deportation people brought to the U.S. illegally as children. They set that deadline for March 5, which is now less than two weeks away. Two federal judges have blocked Trump from ending DACA. I'm wondering if you feel like there's still a sense of urgency with that March 5 deadline?

Lankford:*So I would say that I still have a sense of urgency. I want to get this resolved. I think it's the right thing to be able to do. Congress has not done immigration reform in 20 years because there's been no deadline. There's been no importance to be able to do it. Everyone sees the problem, but when's the deadline to get it complete?

We have a deadline. We should work towards that deadline. The two federal courts that have stepped in haven't stopped or kicked out completely the executive agreements. They've just asked the administration, or required of them, that they continue to enroll people in DACA until this is heard.

I think once it's done--it's very hard to be able to say one administration can't change the executive actions of a previous administration. I don't think there's any way any federal court at the end is not going to allow President Trump to be able to change a previous executive action with one of his executive actions. So, to me, the priority is still to be able to get it done and to be able to get it done as quickly as we possibly can.

Donnelly:*So you do still feel like there is a deadline even though that deadline is not maybe as strict as people were thinking it was going to be?

Lankford:*That's correct. Because there is eventually that deadline coming. It's not going to be March 5, it looks like, but it may be early April, it may be other time periods that they're--some federal court is going to step out and is going to rule one executive can change another executive's decisions. It's not law. And what President Obama did was not a legal action in the sense that it went to the House and the Senate, [was] signed by the president and became law. It was an executive action. So a future executive can always change a previous executive's action.

Donnelly:*Last week, a shooter in Florida killed 17 people at a high school using an AR-15 rifle. I know you said on "Meet the Press" this weekend you would not support a ban on AR-15s. But I'm wondering where the Florida shooting has left you in terms of your thoughts on gun control?

Lankford:*The hard part about this is just the raw emotion that everyone feels towards these families. And everyone says, "surely, there has to be something that could be done." The most difficult part is there were some things that could have been done: identifying a person that was intent on being a murderer and trying to be able to interdict that early. That's what the FBI and law enforcement does. And that was missed at this point. So, whether that kid had an AR-15 or whether he had a pistol, he was intent on carrying out an act of murder.

There are millions and millions of people in the United States that are gun owners-- that are legal, that are not going to carry out acts of school violence. To be able to say to all millions and millions and millions of those people, "Gosh, we need to take all of this away because this person did this," is not reasonable. Neither is it to say nothing could be done. I've worked with Chris Murphy, D-Conn., Dianne Feinstein, D- Calif., with John Cornyn, R- Texas, to work on trying to fix our background system, so we can identify more aggressively individuals that have these tendencies. And so they can't buy firearms.

Donnelly:*President Trump tweeted this weekend that the FBI failed to follow up on a tip about the Florida school shooter because "they're spending too much time trying to prove Russian collusion with the Trump campaign." So you are on the Senate intelligence committee. What was your reaction to that tweet?

Lankford:*Yeah, I was surprised at that tweet because clearly, the individuals that are working in Florida and those FBI officials who are working on the Russian collusion case--that's two completely different sets. Not every FBI agent in the country is working on Russian collusion investigations.

It might be a bunch of platitudes, but thanks, Lankford.

Now I don't feel so bad for having such a weird crush on you.

Mixed feelings on the court rulings giving GOP another excuse, but hopeful for the future.

If they havent given up now, they will not give up until something passes.

Good news.

At least they know it's urgent. They kept delaying. Hopefully we see something happen next week.

atleast hes reasonable, unlike fucking Tom Cottons smug ass.

Damn. Could’ve fooled me

I feel like gun control has taken center stage and we will have been forgotten.

America had the attention span of a squirrel. No disrespect to them, I believe they are just as important, but come March we'll be back on the headlines.

Lol so true.