A compatibilist view, to me, is usually immoral, because it seems to maintain the pretence of agency while admitting it's an illusion, and so persist in accepting treating people as if they have agency.

People who at least genuinely believe in free will and agency has an excuse if they e.g. support punishment that is not strictly aimed at minimising harm including to the perpetrator. A compatibilist has no excuse.

It is of course possible to hold a compatibilist view and still argue we should restructure society to treat people as if they do not have agency, but then the point on holding onto the illusion drops to near zero.