Fact check: How do 2025 deportation numbers compare to previous presidential administrations?

1. Summary of the results

Based on the available data, 2025 deportation numbers under the Trump administration are currently running below the pace of previous administrations, contrary to what might be expected given the administration's rhetoric.

The most recent data shows that ICE deported around 11,000 migrants in February 2025, which is lower than the 12,000 deported in February 2024 under the Biden administration ^[1]. Additionally, President Trump deported 37,660 people during his first month in office, which is far less than the monthly average of 57,000 removals and returns in the last full year of Joe Biden's administration ^[2].

While there was a reported 29% increase in April 2025 with over 17,200 people deported compared to April 2024 ^[3], this pace still falls significantly short of historical records. The current pace is less than half of what would be needed to reach the record number of deportations set by the Obama administration in 2013 ^[3].

For historical context, Obama's administration deported over 3.1 million people through ICE deportations, while Trump's first administration had deported around 932,000 people in its first term ^[4]. The Biden administration was on track to carry out as many removals and returns as the Trump administration did, with 1.1 million deportations from the beginning of fiscal year 2021 through February 2024 ^[5].

2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints

The original question lacks several crucial contextual elements that affect the interpretation of deportation numbers:

• The Trump administration has opened up new pathways to send migrants to Mexico and Central America ^[6], which may not be reflected in traditional deportation statistics but represents additional enforcement actions.
• The Obama administration shifted focus towards removing criminals and recent border crossers ^[7], meaning raw numbers don't tell the complete story about enforcement priorities and effectiveness.
• Public opinion data shows that 65% of Americans believe there should be a way for undocumented immigrants to stay in the country legally, and 58% say there are now fewer people crossing the border to request asylum ^[8], indicating that enforcement effectiveness may be measured differently by the public.
• Economic research has found that deporting immigrants does not lead to more job opportunities or higher wages for U.S.-born workers, and may even lead to fewer jobs ^[9], suggesting that the economic justifications often cited for increased deportations may be questionable.

Immigration advocacy groups and civil rights organizations would benefit from highlighting the lower-than-expected deportation numbers to argue that harsh rhetoric doesn't match reality. Conversely, the Trump administration and immigration hardliners would benefit from emphasizing the percentage increases and new enforcement pathways to demonstrate progress on their policy goals.

3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement

The original question itself is neutral and factual, seeking comparative data rather than making claims. However, the framing could lead to potential misunderstandings:

• The question doesn't specify whether it's asking about total deportations, ICE removals specifically, or broader enforcement actions, which can lead to different conclusions depending on the metrics used.
• Without specifying timeframes, the comparison could be misleading since different administrations had varying lengths of time in office and faced different immigration pressures.
• The question doesn't account for policy changes that might affect how deportations are categorized or reported, such as the distinction between removals and returns that has evolved over different administrations.

The most significant potential for misinformation lies not in the question itself, but in how the answer might be selectively used by different political actors to support predetermined narratives about immigration enforcement effectiveness.