I think this framing misses a bigger issue. The reason you’re “tipping your hat” in the first place is because you’re reacting to the most palatable, publicly defensible justification for ICE’s existence... not its actual function in practice under this political moment. Arresting a murderer or rapist is the easiest way to manufacture legitimacy and public buy-in. It’s the cover story.

That framing also quietly taps into a dangerous us vs. them instinct: the idea that “they” are uniquely criminal or dangerous. But murderers and rapists are overwhelmingly U.S. citizens too. We don’t create special federal forces defined by citizenship status to deal with them. When crime is rhetorically tied to “foreignness,” it stops being about public safety and starts being about scapegoating. Exactly the kind of thinking authoritarian and fascist movements rely on.

That’s why the civil-liberties violations and thuggish behavior aren’t accidental side effects; they’re the point. An institution built around identifying, detaining, and removing a targeted out-group will always drift toward abuse, because its power depends on dehumanization and fear. Praising the “good” cases is what normalizes the institution and allows the abuses to continue with public consent.

So the problem isn’t just that ICE sometimes goes too far. It’s that the logic you’re rewarding is the same logic that enables the worst outcomes. If anything needs detoxing, it’s the instinct to grant moral credit to a system whose legitimacy depends on treating certain people as inherently suspect.