zlacker

My argument is not about the legality, but selectivity of the outrage. Somehow if it's politically beneficial there are a ton of people outraged, and in other times like the pedophile scandal of the century, with a lot of powerful people in it, no one seams to really care.

>>throwf+(OP)
You don't get MS-13 in the kind of operations that the populace have been protesting. If people are showing up with whistles and megaphones you have lost the element of surprise by such a long-shot what you are basically are getting are people who have to be there to wait for their kids to get back from school, or are sticking around because they need to go to their regular doctor appointment.

If they were getting gang members the protests would be useless because tactically they would be in and out every time before anyone could protest their operations.

>>mothba+51
Look, this is tangential, for what is worth I don't agree with a lot of what ICE is doing.

My argument is that if you have two injustices A and B with severity of lets say 50/100 and 90/100. And injustice A is being globally protested, but injustice B is ignored, then your fight is not for justice, then you are being used as a political tool.

>>throwf+j4
Or you are seizing your moment to temporarily ally with your enemies on a 50/100 topic when the 90/100 topic doesn't have the moment you need. I generally despise the politics of most people protesting DHS/ICE but I find them to be useful idiots on this particular topic so I'm happy to form a tenuous agreement with them.

>>throwf+(OP)
Funny because the first line of your point is "The last time I looked illegal immigration is still illegal." so specifically about the legality, and I explained what you said is not true, and that if it was these people would have legal protections that match what the Constitution requires and the public would be way less upset.

It sounds like you don't really care about the law, or people that want the constitution enforced, you care about the politics and if it the Constitution is politically inconvenient. Following the Constitution is ALWAYS the politically correct choice in the USA. Choosing the law over 'civil immigration enforcement' used as a loophole to bypass the law/Constitution is always the correct choice.