Your statement is far too broad-brush and is emotional not rational.
1. According to the Yuma paper's story, the charges appear to depend on the fact that the encounter occurred on federal not private land. If the encounter had occurred on private property, the illegals would have been committing trespass, which is grounds for arrest.
2. Second point, the formula relied on by the LEO's who made the arrest implicitly claims that since the illegals were arrested on federal land, then therefore no trespass was committed. This is a very weak argument, since the accosted people clearly had no right to be there.
3. The unjustifiable-force argument will get short shrift from any jury that isn't contaminated by the pro-illegal NGO's and rabble-rousers, in view of all the gunfight and murder stories posted above involving illegals and drug smugglers.
Bratcher said though that statute deals specifically with citizen’s arrests, entering the country illegally is a federal misdemeanor and doesn't qualify as a breach of the peace, meaning the state statute would not apply in this case.
County officials said the state statute can't be used to justify the detention of illegal immigrants, unless it is done on private property, where the illegal immigrants would be trespassing.
Let's be sure not to advocate committing felonies because of misdemeanors, unless we want to earn the title "illegals."