What policy changes under Biden affected deportation totals and enforcement priorities?
Executive summary
The Biden administration immediately rescinded the broad 2017 Trump enforcement order and instructed DHS to rewrite enforcement priorities, producing interim memos that narrowed interior enforcement to national-security, public-safety, and recent border-crossing cases while temporarily pausing most removals—a pause that was legally blocked and never fully implemented [1] [2] [3]. At the same time, operational choices at the border—continued use of Title 42 expulsions, incentives/disincentives to deter crossings, and a tactical focus on recent arrivals and “easy-to-remove” nationalities—shifted the composition of deportation totals toward returns and expulsions rather than interior removals [4] [5] [6].
1. Revoking Trump’s broad enforcement framework and ordering a review
On Day One President Biden revoked Trump’s 2017 executive order and directed DHS to review and revise enforcement priorities, prompting Acting DHS leadership to order a 100‑day pause on most deportations while crafting new guidance—an interruption that was legally enjoined and curtailed in practice—signaling a top-down policy reorientation from indiscriminate enforcement to prioritized discretion [1] [2] [3].
2. New interim memos: narrower interior priorities and prosecutorial discretion
DHS and ICE issued interim guidance in early 2021 that limited enforcement presumptively to three narrow categories—those who pose national‑security threats, public‑safety threats (serious felonies), and recent unlawful entrants—and urged prosecutorial discretion for others, effectively restoring a prioritization regime and instructing agents to avoid pursuing lower‑level offenses such as many nonviolent or older convictions [7] [8] [9].
3. Border strategy: deterrence, expulsions, and “easy‑to‑remove” targeting
Faced with surging encounters, the administration combined deterrent mechanisms—continued or newly shaped use of Title 42 expulsions, CBP One processing, and diplomatic return agreements—with guidance that prioritized removals of recent border crossers and singled out “easy‑to‑remove” nationalities (e.g., Mexicans, Central Americans, and certain Caribbean and Latin American nationals), shifting enforcement resources to the border rather than widespread interior sweeps [4] [5] [6].
4. How those policy choices changed deportation totals and types of removals
The practical effect was a redistributive shift in deportation statistics: overall numbers in certain years approached or equaled prior administrations’ totals largely because of border expulsions and voluntary returns, while formal interior removals and arrests of long‑standing residents fell relative to Trump-era priorities—the administration carried out many repatriations from the border even as it framed interior enforcement more narrowly [4] [5] [9].
5. Legal, operational, and accountability frictions that altered enforcement in practice
Legal setbacks (a federal judge blocked the initial moratorium), inconsistent implementation within ICE, and political pressures constrained the administration’s stated pause and priorities, with watchdogs and advocacy groups documenting instances where ICE operations did not fully follow the 2021 guidance—revealing a gap between policy memos and on‑the‑ground enforcement—and highlighting that priorities can be undermined by prosecutorial choices, resource allocation, and interagency tactics [3] [8].
6. Competing narratives and the policy tradeoffs at play
Proponents argue the Biden changes restored discretion and humane focus—protecting longtime residents and nonviolent immigrants—while critics contend the border‑centered deterrence approach and expanded expulsions created de facto mass deportations and shifted rather than reduced enforcement; analyses by Migration Policy Institute, American Immigration Council, and other observers emphasize both the narrowing of interior priorities and the administration’s heavy reliance on border removals and temporary protections as defining the mixed legacy [4] [10] [9].
Conclusion
Policy actions under Biden—revocation of Trump’s order, interim memos narrowing interior priorities, a short‑lived moratorium, and border‑focused operational choices including Title 42 expulsions and targeting of recent arrivals and “easy‑to‑remove” nationalities—collectively reshaped who was prioritized for removal and altered the composition of deportation totals from interior removals toward border returns and expulsions, though legal challenges and uneven agency compliance complicated implementation and accountability [1] [7] [4] [8].