This is a common objection I hear raised, so I think it's good that you raised it here. Respectfully, I think there is a lot of rhetorical slippage in your argument.

First, I did not support the very loose amnesty policy, but I also don't support ICE teargassing the grocery store parking lot outside of my old apartment in Logan Square. In any case I don't think one's opinion on the first thing should disqualify them from having a take on deportation tactics.

Second, I think there is substantial ambiguity in what people voted for on deportation. There were lots of promises of deporting dangerous criminals (something that I agree would be a good idea). A subset of Trump voters in 2024 did want to round up migrant day laborers standing outside of Home Depots, and they are getting what they voted for. But I think another large subset believed that there was going to be a targeted deportation of "the worst of the worst". The administration claims to be doing this, but the worst of the worst are very unlikely to be looking for work outside of Home Depot.

Lastly, to your question, I think there are many many ways for the tactics to be more humane (and constitutional). To take just one example, I think the feds should resume allowing Catholic clergy into the Chicago-area processing facility at Broadview to administer the sacrament of the Eucharist.