Civil War II, with crossover to pretty much everything, and a bunch of Civil War: [insert here/group/corny slogan here] tie-ins.

There's a list here.

It's basically about an Inhuman that seems to have visions of future crimes and disasters, and how it splits the supeheroes again.

It's weak sauce - they make the arguments against very, very poorly, when the simplest argument against that type of predictive justice they if they are successful, they are showing that the visions are not fact but one possible future.

They equally weakly deal with the counter-argument, that someone with the IQ of Tony Stark should have made immediatey: When the pro-intervention people hail successes like Thanos, he should have pointed out that those are uncontroversial. Thanos is a supervillain that they would have fought on the basis of his presence, without waiting for him to break the law. Likewise, while what happens to Hulk (spoilers) is bad, intervening should not have been controversial.

Starks response to "but Thanos" should have been that "sure, intervene when the mere presence of someone in the visions is bad - if you're wrong and they don't' show up, no harm has been done, and if they do show up that itself is enough reason to act. Do the same for anything sufficiently bad: show up. Then wait for evidence of something bad. The problem is arresting an innocent without even giving them the chance."

The issue for the "good guys" should not have been the method overall - but what happens as it turns from being prepared to stop threats to incarcerating people who are not yet criminals, and conveniently ignoring that the arrest prevents the crime from happening.

The counter again should be that some things may be too risky do wait to see if someone does something wrong, such as e.g. waiting to see if someone has a bomb.

Instead the arguments are all weak attempts that doesn't explore the issues at all.

But part of the problem, I suspect, is that if both sides had made good arguments, then Carol's side would likely end up looking too much like comic-book-nazis, as you can find compromises to most of these situations that protect civil rights, unless the "bad guys" insist on punishment with prison sentences etc. or other extreme measures against someone who never commits a crime.

So either you resolve the conflict, or half the Marvel heroes come out looking like wannabe nazis, or you cop out and make the arguments unreasonably weak so that it's possible to make Carol and her supporters misguided rather than evil.

As it was, Kamala did have to deal with a little Hitlerjugend style group, and even that they botched in having the characters be staggeringly bad in arguing the points.

If you want a good story about predictive justice, I'd say watch Minority Report the movie and/or read Philip K. Dicks original short story (they are very different) - Civil War II is not it.

EDIT: Accidentally the name of Minority Report.