Typically when you break laws in a country, for example violating the terms of a visa, you face consequences. For everyone else, there’s no issue. But none of this is a “threat to safety”. Again, this is activist hyperbole.
> We know more than enough to point out that it shouldn't have happened at all.
You don’t know any real details. You just have vague claims from individuals that likely were breaking the law, and partisan news media amplifying their claims with zero investigation. There is no evidence of why these people were questioned or detained. We know at least a couple of the cases involve explicitly violating immigration law - visa overstays, attempts to cross the border after a denial, working while on a travel visa, etc.
> The Guardian is a centre-left outlet, not a far-left outlet.
Except the link you're responding to is literally linking to reports of threats to safety.
> Activists who are in opposition to the US presidency are overreacting to a few lone cases of people being detained at borders without knowing the details of those situations.
We know more than enough to point out that it shouldn't have happened at all. Even without those incidents, the previous concentration camps are not acceptable.
> Three of the stories linked are from the guardian, a far left publication that has been attacking the Trump administration.
The Guardian is a centre-left outlet, not a far-left outlet. Also, other outlets across the political bias spectrum are reporting the same thing so your comment here is boiling down to ignoring the message and attacking the messenger.
> All of the stories lack details and evidence of wrongdoing. So this just looks like hysteria and manufactured outrage.
You mean, except for the details, and the evidence of wrongdoing?