The policies of the latter being clearly racist, deporting brown people without trial (have they deported any white folks without a hearing...there a lot of white "visa overstayers" in the country). Removing references to minorities (including CMH recipients) on government websites. How is that not racist by any definition?

Because they're treating white people terribly, too, and tossing them out without hearings. It made the news! Remember the German tourists who were detained for more than a month (even though they were perfectly willing to just go home)? Or the Canadian one?

theguardian.com - German tourists ordeal reportedly ending returned from US detention
nytimes.com - Mooney canadian american pie actress ice

If you're having a negative impact on minority communities, how is that not racist by any definition? Your actions should be either neutral or positive, or you likely are discriminating against that community.

That's the rub. Most people who are being removed are brown...because most people who have crossed into the country illegally are brown. So if you just enforce the existing laws - even if you were doing it for reasons that have nothing to do with race - there will be a greater impact on brown people than white people. The big cultural divide between the Ibrahim Kendi view of racism and the "old-school" 1970's school of racism is exactly based on whether policies that aren't motivated by animus based on race but have a completely foreseeable disparate impact on people of different races are "racist."