In 1945, 200,000 people died in the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings. [1] It is indisputable that this was one of the most heinous atrocities committed in human history. It is also undoubtable that amongst the victims were criminals, perhaps of the worst kind. Murders, sex offenders and pedophiles are all statistically likely to be a part of the victims. Yet we don’t use this rhetoric to justify the deaths. This is because when we imagine the horrors, we do not focus our lens on the abstract, albeit dodgy, good that may have been done, but rather on the price that had to be paid for that good.

Several reports have been released showing that up to 30% of detainees possessed no criminal records, with 67% also having pending charges or past minor charges. Only 7% of the detainees had violent criminal records. This is a 7% success rate in the stated objective of removing only violent criminals. [2] Numbers like these show that ICE employs a blanket tactic to eliminate all migrants. Through this lazy methodology devoid of investigation and procedure, they hope that within this sweep, they may also arrest all the criminals that they justify their tactics with. The suspect nobility of this goal is, in my opinion, vastly overshadowed by the complete lack of civility within these tactics. [3]

Philosophers and legal experts have often debated the question of what justice means. I will pose a question to all of you. What is more just: imprisoning 99 innocent people to ensure that the one guilty person is punished, or absolving 99 criminals in hopes to preserve the innocence of one innocent person? [4]

The truth of the matter is that this question has no answer. There is no utilitarian price to impose nor any moral standard to supplant. The only hope we have is to mitigate the risk of either circumstance becoming reality. [5]

Any self-respecting political scientist, lawyer, judge, etc., will understand the pricelessness of the justice system. The magnificence of the justice system is not in its exclusivity of only affording rights to citizens. The American justice system has been admired because of its sheer naivety in the face of decision. Trials are afforded to everyone, with all the proper procedures and methods to ensure the preservation of innocence and to sift the truth from the falsehood. The notion “innocent until proven guilty” is prime for this reason. [6]

The critique that underlies most of the opposition to ICE is not regarding the stated mission. It’s the fact that this mission is not being delivered justly. The administration insists they have been perfect and managed to preserve a 100% record. Even minimal inquisition proves that this is untrue. There is a very harmful narrative that those opposing ICE want to put criminals in the street. This is reductive, damaging and untrue. ICE has been operating as judge, jury and executioner. Beloved notions such as the U.S. Constitution and the separation of powers exist exactly to prevent such ruthless totality and probable fallibility. What everyone is demanding is procedure, trials and protective measures, handled by lawyers, bailiffs, judges and legal experts. People are demanding trials based on the foundations that are the same as those of the American Republic. The same standards of justice that are enshrined in the Constitution. 

I heavily doubt that there are people who believe criminals must be treated the same as law-abiding residents. This stands true regardless of citizenship status. Criminals are ideally punished in every nation on earth, but the difference lies in the corruption of the system that seeks to enact justice. America is not devoid of this corruption. Criminals do indeed end up on the streets without having been rehabilitated. This is true regardless of citizenship status. ICE and its tactics are not in opposition to this reality, but an enabler who happens to be on a different side. They are not the force to fight against the corruption of the system, but an equally guilty party enabling this corruption. 

I also want my family to live in a safe and respectful nation. Most people do. Most immigrants do. No one is special for simply wanting safety and security for their families. That is a responsibility. I also want my family to live in a nation with respect for their fellow humans, to trust the law we live under to protect us, not through ruthless villainy but through the preservation of law and order and primacy of justice and fairness over the supremacy of an ideology. 

Sources:

1. Hiroshima and Nagasaki Bombings.
2. New York Times Article showing deportation statistics.
3. ICE tactics in detaining migrants.
4. Harvard Law Review, Blackstone ratio.
5. Harvard Law Review, Mitigating risk.
6. U.S. Constitutional Interpretation by Supreme Court affording due process to all people.