rosenkranz, final? >> some of the standard questions may be tricky, but again the ultimate check on presidential law is elections and in extreme cases engagement, but elections by really should be a check on -- >> so when the irs prevents the word from getting out they infect thwarinfact thwart the e, therefore, elections are no longer the final answer, are they? >> to the extent that the irs targeting is an example of discriminatory enforcement, you're quite right. it's actually the most corrosive form of -- it does cast on everything that follows. it cast doubt on elections that followed. you're quite right. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> the gentleman from georgia mr. johnson, is recognized for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. for holding this very important and significant hearing today. get my notes squared away. this hearing is pure political theater. it's a comedy but the audience has seen it so many times now that it's no longer funny. in fact, this hearing is an egregious waste of this

professor rosenkranz. some defenders of the president's actions asserted that his actions were merely sten exercise of prosecuteorial discretion. >> there are many cases that are -- cases i agree with professor turley but some of these cases are not close. wholesale suspension of law is something else. that is what has happened under obamacare. case by case prosecuteorial discretion is another thing. a blanket policy will not apply to 1.8 million people is quite something different. this is a scale of decision aking that is not in prosecuteorial discretion. >> the president has take it a step further and given legal documents to people in that circumstance dieding to leave them there and not prosecute them and actually enable their violation of law giving them documents to help them evade the problems from living in a country they are not lawfully present. [inaudible] >> differences with the witness to his left and i would like to ask if he could pick up that line of discussion. we're pleased that you're h

professor rosenkranz. some defenders of the president's actions asserted that his actions were merely the phrase is mentioned several times. tax an exercise of prosecutorial discretion. is this correct or is there a fundamental difference between that and many of the president's unilateral actions? >> there are many cases that are cases i agree with professor turley but some of these cases are not close. prosecutorial discretion is one thing but wholesale suspension of law is something else. that is what has happened under obamacare. likewise in the immigration context. case by case prosecutorial discretion is one thing but a blanket policy that the immigration acts will not apply to 1.8 million people is quite something different. this is a scale of decision making that is not in traditional conception of prosecutorial discretion. >> in fact, the president has taken it a step further and given legal documents to people in that circumstance to leave them there and not prosecute them and actually enable the

rosenkranz i'm always leery about people who say the solution. the framers didn't intend for the elections to be the solution to the problems. they created a system with checks and balances to allow the system to correct itself because there are plenty of abuses. you can have a majoritarian terror that can continue through elections. also in impeachment is not a good device for regulation. it's a very difficult thing. i testified a testify that the t hearings. it's a very difficult standard and certainly isn't there as a substitute. what this -- i think the hearing that this body should seriously consider is the hearing on the members standing. i've been writing about this for years and i recommended if we have members standing and members could go to court and raise unconstitutional acts, much of these problems would go away because we have guaranteed review that no one would be able to call them into account. >> i believe you are right. you said you are an optimist but i'm an optimistic realist and i don't get on the plane to come to washington

professor rosenkranz replied, "quite right." this matter's not going away. we're going to deal with it. i truly believe the american people expect this government of theirs, that works for them to produce an immigration system, a legal system that involves obamacare and other policies that is committed to law and not to the feelings of the chief executive and not to his policy preferences. we avoid that, then we've got a serious, serious matter in this country that goes to the heart of the strength of this republ republic. you could sap that strength, erode the power of our legal system and the legal system, in my opinion, is the greatest strength this nation has. i thank the chair and would yield the floor. i will yield the floor. the presiding officer: under the previous order, the senate stands adjourned until 9:00 >> you can see past programs and get the schedule on our website and join in the conversation on social media websites. >> coming up, the communicators examines the government's role in supporting health care technology. and then a look at the

if i could start with professor rosenkranz, i want to explore the issue of prosecutorial executive branch discretion. particularly in the context of nation'scement of our immigration laws. but i can start with foundational questions -- if i can start with foundational questions, the department of justice is an executive branch agency. the federal prosecutors are exercising executive branch action in the context of their participation in need from the justice system. >> they are exercising executive authority. >> and prosecutors make a when prosecutors make a decision to charge someone with a serious offense bargain agree to a plea to a lesser included offense, it short of what they may have concluded that the evidence that particular defendant was guilty of, is that an appropriate use of prosecutorial discretion inside of the constitution? >> it would not be appropriate if it was motivated by race or something. described,s that you if the prosecutor did not think he had the resources or evidence, that is an appropriate exercise of discretion. contextrosecutorial inside the department of j

as professor rosenkranz minchin, an important element is whatever crimes or misdemeanors that he's committed were committed knowingly. and whether there is a pattern of abuse of his office. in my testimony you will see that finally out a pretty consistent whereby president obama has ignored and try to rewrite portions of the protection of the portal care act. and i think that the most egregious of these is the one where he has -- he's implementing it in a way such that he is taxing and borrowing and spending over the next ten years. $700 billion that congress never authorized. now he may disagree with my interpretation of the law. i know mr. lazarus does. i know that you and i and mr. lazarus would all agree that a president were trying to tax and borrow and spend them hundred billion dollars without authorization tha that may be impeachable. >> does anybody think that the actions of going into iraq without actual knowledge of weapons of mass destruction or anything else would have been an impeachable offense? esther lazarus, you seem to be nodding. >> this regard the nod. i was very upset a

the second witness is nicolas rosenkranz a professor of law at georgetown university law center. professor rosenkranz served and advised the federal government in a variety of capacities including as a clerk to supreme court justice anthony kennedy and as an attorney advisor to the department of legal counsel. he has published numerous articles including the subjects of the constitution which is the single most downloaded article up at the constitutional interpretation of the history of the social sciences research network. the third witness is simon lazarus senior counsel with the accountability center. he's a member of the administrative conference of the united states and during his career he served as the public policy counsel for the national senior citizens law center as a partner at powell goldstein and associate director of president carter white house domestic policy staff. mr. lazarus has written articles that appeared in journals as well as publications such as the atlantic, the "washington post" and the new republic. our final witness is michael cannon of the health p