Despite all the downvotes, I think it's a reasonable enough question. It happens to have a very reasonable answer though.

First of all, your concern is largely addressed, since immigration control can still access law enforcement databases if they have a warrant.

As for why this law exists at all, well it's actually to the benefit of law enforcement: the idea is that immigrant communities are more likely to cooperate with law enforcement if they aren't scared that they will be the target of immigration control. This is all the more practical now, when ICE has degraded into a largely lawless and authoritarian organization, since you can imagine most immigrants wouldn't want to say a word to any police officer unless they at least have the protections of the 2017 TRUST act in place.

Now, what I'm a bit confused about is why you are so up-in-arms about the existence of this law instead of the violation of this law. Surely if you are so law-abiding as you make out to be in your comments, you should be shouting for legal action against the police officers involved in breaking the law.

This isn't a good argument.

If law enforcement had access to all of your social media, e-mails and live video feeds from inside your house then they would be able to catch criminals more effectively.

We have laws specifically limiting police powers because we recognize that there are more things to consider than simply maximizing arrests.

Protection against unreasonable search is written into the constitution, after all

Do you think a person should be seperated from thier families, put into prison, subjected to violence, and sent to a country they've never been to for a misdemeanor?

Because thats a criminal misdemeanor, not civil like immigration. But you dont care do you? You got yours..

Ghoul

I'm not responding to you're entire verbal vomit. am going to say this.

What youve written at the end is not what's happening.

when ICE has degraded into a largely lawless and authoritarian organization

I think you're mistaking actually enforcing the law as being "lawless and authoritarian".

Now, what I’m a bit confused about is why you are so up-in-arms about the existence of this law instead of the violation of this law.

I'm not so "up in arms" about anything, just questioning why the authorities are handicapped on what they can use one of their systems for. Sure, the violation of the law is bad - but the law itself seems ridiculous. The only people it benefits are literally criminals.

Hmm, why have you not responded to the substantive reasoning for the law? As a self-professed freedom advocate, well, that's obviously a lie so do you actually have something of value to add or are you just trolling?

I have responded - I don’t agree with artificially handicapping what they can use a law enforcement system for. There’s no good reason for the law.

Would you like to at least engage with the discourse a bit more, eg explain why the reason I have mentioned and other possible reasons are not good to you? Otherwise you're not adding much to the conversation.

For being illegal immigrants? No they're not lol.

For being illegal immigrants? No they're not lol.