If you're trying to assert this isn't a child with cancer (and an American citizen) being sent out of the country before his treatment is over, present evidence. Otherwise you're trying to ignore the facts in your face by deflecting and equivocation. Which you must if you hope to maintain this endeavor to defend the administration, because the facts are monstrous.
I've seen your other posts on other threads. You are attempting to cope with the wheels coming off of the United States by shutting your eyes to the news. It has to be lies, because if it's not lies then what this administration is doing is an existential threat, and you'd much rather not be facing an existential threat. I get that. It sucks being in the middle of history.
I will entertain for a bit accepting your premise that there is a national threat on the border and something must be done (I think it's a flimsy premise; I think these immigration laws are an attempt to build a beaver dam against a rising tide of demographic shift globally, and their incompatibility with the reality on the ground is demonstrated in their inability to be enforced; I think Americans get, at some fundamental level, that we don't get to enforce border constraints like a scared ethnostate while at the same time being America, but we aren't willing to admit that to ourselves yet).
It is entirely possible for the goal to be just, but the process to be monstrous and the administrator to be too stupid to find a balance between efficacy and mercy. You kicked off this subthread by interjecting that people should have just enforced the law. Well here we are. This is what enforcement looks like. It is not the people we want to be.
If previous administrations didn't do this? Good. That was wise leadership that we replaced with a fool.
(Concretely, in this situation: they simply could have let them stay until the treatment was complete. That is always a choice. The executive has broad leeway over enforcement, and that's a feature not a bug.)
Sorry but I'm simply not wasting any more time on this. You've addressed none of the points I've made, none of the extraordinarily corrupt behaviour of the previous admin and you are completely detached from reality on almost all issues of significance. Your arguments are weak and immature. I could equally make a moral argument about the enormous harm caused by the previous administration on so many levels but you'll of course, ignore that and focus on the one scenario you believes supports your case. I'II leave you to have the last word as it's clearly a waste of time engaging with you.
I've seen your other posts on other threads. You are attempting to cope with the wheels coming off of the United States by shutting your eyes to the news. It has to be lies, because if it's not lies then what this administration is doing is an existential threat, and you'd much rather not be facing an existential threat. I get that. It sucks being in the middle of history.
I will entertain for a bit accepting your premise that there is a national threat on the border and something must be done (I think it's a flimsy premise; I think these immigration laws are an attempt to build a beaver dam against a rising tide of demographic shift globally, and their incompatibility with the reality on the ground is demonstrated in their inability to be enforced; I think Americans get, at some fundamental level, that we don't get to enforce border constraints like a scared ethnostate while at the same time being America, but we aren't willing to admit that to ourselves yet).
It is entirely possible for the goal to be just, but the process to be monstrous and the administrator to be too stupid to find a balance between efficacy and mercy. You kicked off this subthread by interjecting that people should have just enforced the law. Well here we are. This is what enforcement looks like. It is not the people we want to be.
If previous administrations didn't do this? Good. That was wise leadership that we replaced with a fool.
(Concretely, in this situation: they simply could have let them stay until the treatment was complete. That is always a choice. The executive has broad leeway over enforcement, and that's a feature not a bug.)