Are we really deporting violent criminal immigrants more than before?

1. Bigger churn, not a bigger share of violent offenders

Federal and independent tallies document a large increase in removals and departures in 2025–2026 — DHS claims hundreds of thousands of deportations and voluntary exits, projecting on‑pace totals near historic highs ^{[1] [6]} — but the composition of who is being detained and removed has shifted: several analyses of ICE and leaked internal data show the proportion of detainees with any criminal conviction dropped from a majority earlier in the year to roughly a third or less, and only a small single‑digit share have violent convictions (reports range from about 5% to under 10%) ^{[2] [7] [4]}.

2. Conflicting official framing versus independent data

Public statements from DHS and ICE frame the surge as targeting “criminal illegal aliens” and “the worst of the worst,” and DHS press releases highlight headline removal numbers ^[1]. Independent monitors and research groups — including Cato, TRAC, the Deportation Data Project, and immigrant‑rights organizations — counter that detailed or nonpublic ICE datasets show most of the net increase in detentions consists of people without criminal convictions or with minor offenses, suggesting a gap between political messaging and enforcement reality ^{[2] [3] [4] [5]}.

3. Why percentages matter more than raw removals

A rise in total removals does not automatically mean more violent‑criminal deportations; it can mean more enforcement against non‑violent immigration violations or prior re‑entry cases. Independent estimates and FOIA‑driven analyses find the share of people in ICE custody with violent convictions fell during 2025 even as total removals rose, meaning the absolute number of people with violent convictions removed has not kept pace with the overall spike and may have stayed flat or even declined proportionally ^{[2] [7]}.

4. Data limits and definitional traps

Assessing trends is complicated by differing data sources, timeframes, and definitions — ICE, CBP, OHSS monthly tables and watchdog compilations categorize “criminality” differently (convictions versus charges, federal versus local records), and some public releases emphasize removals at the border versus interior deportations, making apples‑to‑apples comparisons difficult without full public datasets ^{[8] [9] [10] [11]}. Several watchdogs note the administration has been opaque about detailed targeting breakdowns, which limits definitive statements about absolute counts of violent‑offender removals ^{[4] [5]}.

5. Policy motives, practical effects, and competing narratives

Political priorities shape enforcement: elected officials and DHS have incentives to emphasize crime‑focused enforcement to justify broad actions, while immigrant‑rights groups document expansion of detention capacity and argue the goal is mass deportation not narrowly defined public‑safety targeting ^{[1] [5] [12]}. Economists and analysts also warn that the larger churn — including voluntary exits induced by enforcement — has macroeconomic effects and reflects a mix of border‑side and interior removals that change the migration picture beyond just who is removed ^{[6] [13]}.

6. Bottom line and what remains unresolved

Based on available public and leaked data, the nation is deporting more people overall, but evidence does not support the claim that the U.S. is deporting a higher number or a higher share of violent criminal immigrants now than before; rather, the share of violent convictions among detainees and deportees has fallen even as totals rise ^{[2] [7] [4]}. That conclusion is tempered by inconsistent disclosures, varying datasets, and political spin from different actors; fuller DHS/ICE transparency on convictions, charges, and timeframes would be required to make a final, unambiguous accounting ^{[10] [11]}.