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: How do the deportation policies of the Biden and Trump administrations compare?
Executive Summary
Deportation totals and tactics differ sharply between the Biden and Trump administrations, but both have recorded very large numbers of people removed or repatriated; recent counts show the Biden years reached roughly 1.1 million deportations since FY2021 and nearly 4.4 million repatriations including expulsions, while the Trump administration claims removal or self‑deportation figures exceeding 2 million in a later period and projects nearly 600,000 removals in its first year [1] [2]. The debate centers on methodology, priorities, and the economic and social impacts of mass removals [3] [4].
1. Why the headline numbers diverge — counting removals, expulsions and self‑deportations
Analysts emphasize that apples‑to‑apples comparisons are rare because administrations report different categories: formal deportations (removals), administrative returns, expulsions at the border, and voluntary self‑deportations. The Biden record cited 1.1 million formal deportations since FY2021 and nearly 4.4 million total repatriations when including expulsions and other actions to block entry, which inflates totals relative to removals alone [1]. The Trump figures cited by the administration combine formal removals with self‑deportations and other exits to reach claims of 2 million people out of the country, which critics say can mislead if not broken out by type [5] [2].
2. Who was prioritized under each administration — a change in targeting, not always totals
Policy changes shifted who Immigration and Customs Enforcement targeted: the Trump approach broadened arrest priorities to anyone in the country illegally, expanding enforcement scope and using tools such as military air transport for removals, while the Biden administration emphasized recent border arrivals and people assessed as national security or public‑safety threats, and relied heavily on administrative returns for “easy‑to‑remove” nationalities [3] [1]. These different priorities shape both the composition of people removed and legal exposure, meaning similar totals can mask very different operational strategies [1].
3. Recent Republican claims and DHS tallies — rapid increases and disputed voluntary departures
In 2025 the Trump administration and DHS announced that over 2 million illegal aliens have been removed or self‑deported since January 20, and projected nearly 600,000 formal deportations by the end of the first year, with an estimated 1.6 million voluntary self‑deportations included in the tally [2] [5]. Observers flagged that combining voluntary departures with forced removals can overstate enforcement intensity, because voluntary self‑deportation often reflects a mix of policy deterrence, deportation pressure, and migrant decision‑making rather than a direct one‑for‑one enforcement action [5].
4. The Biden trajectory — record administrative returns and a contested equivalence to Trump totals
A June 2024 study found the Biden administration on track to match Trump’s deportation record in sheer numbers, citing 1.1 million deportations since FY2021 and the most administrative returns in at least 15 years, driven by border expulsions and returns of nationals considered “easy to remove” [1]. That framing presents Biden as achieving high aggregate removals via border expulsions and administrative processes rather than broad interior arrests, a distinction that shapes legal debates and political narratives about whether Biden’s approach represents continuity or a policy shift [1].
5. Economic fallout predicted by critics of mass deportations — local and national costs
Multiple analyses warn the Trump mass‑deportation agenda would inflict major economic harm: local economies such as Chicago’s Little Village have already experienced business declines tied to enforcement actions, and national forecasts estimate GDP reductions over 7 percent within three years, with millions of job losses across sectors like construction and child care [6] [4] [7]. These studies present deportations as a macroeconomic shock, asserting that removing large shares of the workforce depresses demand and disrupts industries dependent on immigrant labor [4] [7].
6. Human and social impacts — communities and services under strain in both eras
Beyond macroeconomic models, reporting highlights immediate community effects: stores closed and sales plunged in neighborhoods heavily affected by enforcement, signaling localized collapses of consumer economies and social networks [6]. Whether through interior arrests under Trump or mass expulsions under either administration, the result described across sources is recurring: disruption of families, labor markets, and essential services, which feeds into the political arguments about policy trade‑offs between enforcement and social stability [6] [7].
7. What remains uncertain — transparency, methodology and political framing
Key disagreements trace to data transparency and presentation: administrations selectively emphasize figures that bolster their political case—Trump highlighting large totals including voluntary departures, Biden emphasizing legal categories and border management metrics—so readers must weigh both the numeric claims and the underlying definitions [5] [1]. The most important unresolved points are the proportion of removals that are formal deportations versus expulsions or self‑departures, the timeframes compared, and the longer‑term socioeconomic effects, which are central to evaluating whether similarities in totals reflect policy convergence or distinct enforcement paradigms [1] [2].