Eh, I wouldn’t necessarily argue against this either. Now that you mention it, I do recall learning from a TA back in college about a group of people who immigrated to the US as very young children who committed felonies as adults and were deported back to their countries of birth, despite having no ties to said country and not even speaking the language (it was his doctoral thesis project). Deportation was certainly a much more harsh penalty than they would have faced from the regular criminal justice system for such a crime. So I’ll say I’m on the fence, a bit, as to whether or not deportation is an appropriate penalty, but leaning on the side of “no” since you reminded me of this situation. While there may be a crime where deportation may be appropriate for those who have established roots, it is not for the majority of them and, if we have to choose one of the options, no deportations at all is the better option.
Separate issue, but sadly probably true, mostly due to the combination of the average American being a moron and there being a not insignificant number of asshole Americans who are fine with the status quo and who could be “smart” enough to take advantage of the morons to push their agenda.
Abolishing ICE could be done strategically, perhaps gradually, to deal with the moron problem. I think the divide between the “reform ICE” and “abolish ICE” camps is probably pretty small and probably has mostly to do with the process to achieve the same end goal: no more gestapo tactics, no more human rights violations, etc.
As far as I’m concerned, the ICE “brand” has been tarnished beyond repair, hence my talk about breaking it up, removing all non-immigration-related duties from it, and perhaps restoring the old INS in its place to handle legitimate immigration enforcement issues.