Agreed, nobody’s arguing against enforcing border laws. That's a dishonest right-wing canard.

ICE is doing things that have nothing to do with them. DHS has subpoenaed tech companies to unmask people who criticize ICE online, and a federal judge ruled ICE likely violated the First Amendment by sending agents to warn a man over an email.

Hundreds of US citizens have been detained by immigration agents, and most were never charged with anything. Federal judges, including Trump appointees, have found illegal detentions THOUSANDS of times.

Enforcing the law is the OPPOSITE of violating the Constitution.

> Agreed, nobody’s arguing against enforcing border laws. That's a dishonest right-wing canard.

This is dishonest. Claiming that it is bad for " ICE and the DOJ have used social media and every government database they can" to detect illegal immigrants, especially in the context of talking about Nazi Germany, with the implication that ICE is morally equivalent to the Nazis using bureaucratic records to find and persecute their enemies, is in fact an argument against enforcing border laws.

It's completely reasonable for the government to have records of which people are citizens and of what the specific legal status is of non-citizens present in the country. It's completely reasonable for the police agencies in charge of enforcing border laws to use those records to find people in violation of those laws and arrest and deport them. It's completely reasonable for the same police agencies to look at social media posts of people talking, sometimes even bragging, about their undocumented status and use that as a basis to arrest and deport them for violating immigration law.

The only reason not to think this is if you think it's inherently wrong to enforce immigration laws at all, which many people do, and often lie about because it sounds extreme to say it that bluntly.