Many people do not see a functional difference between "enforcing unjust laws" by-the-book compared to "worse ways to enforce unjust laws" (I presume, based on the topic of this particular thread, that you're alluding to whatever the fuck ICE is doing right now). Whether ICE nicely follows all the regulations while arresting and deporting an immigrant family, or they storm into the house of an immigrant family and beat them up before arresting and deporting them, the net effect is the same when observed from a certain level of abstraction.

To be clear, I personally think it's clear that the scenario in which the immigrant family gets beat up is worse (as it results in the family being beat up, and the outcome is otherwise the same). However, if presented a "choice" between the two options it's hard to see the first one as particularly compelling. It's like asking "would you rather fracture your skull in a car crash, or fracture your skull in a car crash which also breaks your arm?", it's hard not to look at the two shitty choices and not be bitter that there isn't a choice in which you don't get hit by a car.