Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
Fact check: Was southern border under control under the biden administration
Executive Summary
The claim that the southern border was “under control” under the Biden administration is partially supported by official Customs and Border Protection (CBP) data showing large declines in recorded southwest border apprehensions in 2025 compared with 2024, but the phrase “under control” is imprecise and politically charged; measuring control depends on metrics, timeframes, and policy context. CBP monthly reports from early and mid‑2025 document historic drops in encounters and apprehensions, while other analyses and institutional reports note ongoing operational, legal, and humanitarian challenges that complicate any simple verdict [1] [2] [3].
1. Dramatic drops in CBP encounters — what the numbers show and when
CBP monthly updates from February and April 2025 record steep declines in southwest border apprehensions versus a year earlier, with reported decreases of 71–94% in key month‑to‑month comparisons and April 2025 showing a 93% drop from April 2024, plus days‑per‑day averages falling from thousands to a few hundred. These official tallies indicate fewer recorded illegal entries and encounters in early–mid 2025 compared with the same months of 2024, a fact repeatedly emphasized in CBP releases and reflected in the dataset summaries provided [2] [1].
2. What “control” can mean — operations, deterrence, and metrics
“Control” can denote different operational realities: sustained low encounter counts, fewer at‑large individuals, functional ports of entry, or capacity to process and remove migrants. CBP’s reported declines address the encounter metric specifically, showing fewer recorded crossings; however, that metric alone does not prove comprehensive control. Other elements — asylum processing backlogs, detention and removal capacity, and migrant flows through other corridors — also matter. Official reports highlight improved enforcement posture, yet they do not resolve every downstream legal, humanitarian, and resource constraint [1] [2].
3. Timing matters — 2024 versus 2025 and policy shifts
The sharp reductions appear concentrated in 2025 relative to 2024; CBP statements emphasize historic low monthly encounter totals in early 2025. This timing aligns with policy adjustments and operational changes implemented by the administration and border agencies. Interpreting whether the border was “under control” at earlier points in the Biden presidency or during surges in 2021–2024 requires separating those prior periods from the documented 2025 declines. The snapshot of improved numbers in 2025 does not retroactively apply to years with higher crossings [2] [3].
4. Alternative viewpoints and potential agendas behind the claims
Supporters of the administration cite CBP statistics to argue that the border is now effectively managed, using percent declines and record‑low monthly figures as evidence. Critics counter that selective metrics obscure problems like asylum case backlogs, humanitarian risks, and uneven enforcement, suggesting the administration highlights favorable numbers for political benefit. All parties use the same CBP data but emphasize different frames; readers should note that claims of full control often serve partisan narratives rather than offer neutral operational assessments [2] [4].
5. What the Congressional Research Service and other analysts add
A CRS review of White House immigration actions provides policy context but does not offer a simple yes/no on control; CRS highlights the complex interplay of executive actions, statutory constraints, and resource limits that shape outcomes. Independent analysts echo that improved encounter counts are meaningful but insufficient to declare a conclusive end to border challenges. Institutional reports point to legal limits on expulsions and the need for congressional action to address systemic issues, underlining the point that operational improvements coexist with structural problems [4].
6. Gaps and uncertainties the data do not resolve
Official CBP encounter declines do not directly measure unrecorded entries, the pace of removals, asylum adjudication outcomes, or local humanitarian conditions. Data may lag, and short‑term enforcement intensifications can lower encounters temporarily without eliminating underlying migration pressures. Key unknowns include the durability of the 2025 declines, effects of foreign‑policy and economic drivers, and legal challenges that could reverse trends. Policymakers and observers require multiple indicators beyond apprehensions to judge sustained control [2] [1].
7. Bottom line: supported claim, but limited and conditional
CBP’s 2025 monthly reports substantiate that border encounters and apprehensions dropped substantially, supporting claims that conditions improved compared with 2024; however, describing the southern border as unequivocally “under control” oversimplifies a multifaceted reality. The correct conclusion is conditional: operational control improved by some measures in 2025, but remaining legal, humanitarian, and structural issues mean the label “under control” depends on which metrics and timeframes one prioritizes [1] [3].
8. What to watch next — indicators that will matter going forward
Future judgments should track sustained trends across multiple indicators: monthly CBP encounters, detention and removal rates, asylum processing times, and congressional or judicial developments affecting policy. Observers should treat single‑month improvements as encouraging but not definitive, and scrutinize how agencies translate reduced encounters into durable capacity. Monitoring these diverse metrics will show whether 2025’s declines mark a lasting shift or a temporary reprieve [1] [2].