Top kek, no way there's any kiked judicial activism going on! As I said I think the issue was raised primarily because of jurisdiction. The guy was held for 7 days in county jail, and then ICE requested they hold him longer so they could arrange to pick him up. That's why they requested the 48 hour additional hold. There's two potential problems there. First, the guy served his 7 days and is free to go, you can't keep someone in jail past their release date, and if you tried to set that precedent you are going in to very dangerous territory indeed. Convenient as it may be in this case, it would be potentially disastrous for everyone else, and in this sense the kikes are right to oppose it even though they're doing it for the wrong reasons.
Second, he's being held in a county jail and not a federal facility. My presumption is that when ICE picks these people up, they go to a federal holding facility and not a local or county jail. There are probably procedural issues with holding him in a county facility at the behest of federal authorities, who in theory should have the larger budget and manpower to handle cases like this. So it's a combination of judicial activism mixed in with some legitimate jurisdictional issues.
His illegal status was not yet been proven in immigration court, as far as I can tell from the article. He's very likely a non-citizen, and ICE clearly had probable cause because they ended up nabbing him as soon as he got out of jail, even without their requested 48 hour hold. I'm sure that nigger expected he'd disappear back in to the shadows as soon as he got out, and instead jumped in to the back of an ICE car.
That said, ICE still has to prove in immigration court that the guy is here illegally in order to get a deportation order and actually physically remove him, and technically he isn't an illegal alien until after that determination has been made. Practically speaking he's illegal as fuck and probably always was, but the law requires certain formalities. Part of the reason why things like this exist is that it's possible actual citizens could be accused of being illegals, and there needs to be a venue for someone to establish their legality (or not).
This is more along the lines of the philosophical reasons of why the Constitution protects all people, not just citizens - you can't accuse someone of wrongdoing without giving them a means to establish their innocence, and for you to conclusively establish their guilt. When the accusation is of being an illegal non-citizen, the default assumption must be that they are innocent, and ICE attorneys must prove they are in fact violating U.S. immigration law.
By the way, can you imagine being an RWDS immigration judge? Holy fuck that must be the job of a lifetime right now, I can't imagine how happy I'd be at the end of each workday.
Anyhow, as much as the deportation process is horrible, again as I mentioned towards the end of , it's not really the fault of the framers of the Constitution. I doubt they ever envisioned the legal protection of non-citizens being a significant procedural obstacle to removing them by the tens of millions - I doubt they ever expected it would get this bad. This is why the biggest fix is removing the influx of illegals no matter their origin, otherwise you're fighting against a kind of horrible compounding interest that you may never pay off. If you can curb immigrant entry, you have a better chance at removing all of the illegals, and if someone like Rep. Steve King has his way, we can reclaim the original intent of the Fourteenth Amendment and kick all the illegals and their anchor babies the fuck out.
DO THE CRIME, DO THE TIME. ON MEXICO'S DIME.