How is abolishing ICE logical?

Politics
1

I am really confused here. I am hearing that many Democratic lawmakers and congressional candidates want to abolish ICE. I say to myself, “what why?”

From my own moderate conservative or moderate Republican eyes, this profoundly confuses me. This to me comes across to me as a great talking point and campaign rally for The Trump Party (formerly known as the Republican party).

My beliefs on immigration are pretty straight forward:

  • I support allowing immigrants from all across the world to come to America and live. It doesn’t matter if they are “low-skilled” or “high-skilled”.

  • I support legal immigration. Come in through the proper way, otherwise, go home and re-enter the country the legal way.

  • I support quotas. The United States should be a generous and giving nation, but at the same time, we’re not the welfare capital of the world or the refugee camp of the world. We do this in order to prevent overpopulation and the negative consequence of it.

  • I support giving the Dreamers the opportunity to stay if they go through extra loops and pay fines.

  • I support e-verify, updating our border wall between the U.S-Mexico border, and putting up a virtual wall.

Now I think it’s perfectly legit to argue that the way we process immigrants should be different.

My issue with this “abolish ICE” mentality makes me question if Democrats really want to protect our borders and make sure people are following the law and waiting their turn. Abolishing ICE does indeed sound like the Dems believe in open borders and go back to pre-1880 standards. In other words, if we don’t have ICE, how are we suppose to deport illegals for breaking the law. And yes, they are breaking the law at least once. First time offense is a misdemeanor. Carrying a fake ID is a crime too.

If people want to make the argument that ICE needs to be REFORMED, that’s one thing. But it’s another to suggest it shouldn’t exist in the first place.

2

We deported illegals before ICE was established in 2003. Those who want to abolish ICE want to replace it with something better, not leave a vacuum.

3

what did you do before it was created in 2003

4

Two questions:

What is wrong with ICE?

What exactly do they want to replace ICE with?

Deporting illegals is a good thing.

5

no one suggesting deporting illegal is a bad thing.

6

The Border Patrol protects the borders. Not ICE.

7

I beg to differ. Democrats criticized Obama for deporting too many illegal immigrants.

But back to my questions before: What is wrong with ICE? What does the Dems want to replace ICE with?

8

INS did the job under DOJ. ICE falls under DHS.

9

Personally I’d like to have an agency under DOJ, not DHS.

10

Yes, that is the real question.
Those masses of protestors most likely want to end ICE and do away with interior enforcement of our immigration laws.
The 19 ICE agents who want to separate ICE into a pure immigration enforcement arm and another arm for drug smuggling etc want something very different
And politicians probably want people to think they mean whatever any particular voter means, without too much clarification.
If Trump said tomorrow that he was willing to end ICE but replace it with a really honed in interior immigration enforcement agency, we would seen very clearly this is not what the protestors are talking about when they say to end ICE.

1 Like
11

I’m sure Kate Brown would be more than happy to see ICE abolished. After all, she’s been writing state laws left and right making it illegal for state agencies to cooperate with them and gets pissy every time they come in the state and do their jobs without her approval (as if they need it.)