How do enforcement metrics (apprehensions, removals, expedited returns) compare between the Trump, Biden, and subsequent administrations?
Executive summary
Border apprehensions and "encounters" under the second Trump administration fell sharply compared with Biden-era daily averages, according to DHS and CBP statements [1] [2] [3] [4], while interior enforcement—ICE arrests and detentions—rose substantially early in Trump’s term even as reported removals and overall deportations did not clearly exceed Biden-era totals and in some analyses remain lower [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10].
1. Apprehensions and encounters at the border: steep declines by Trump’s metrics
Federal statements and agency releases under Trump report dramatic reductions in Southwest border encounters and Border Patrol apprehensions compared with Biden-era monthly and daily averages, with DHS and CBP publishing month-by-month claims of record-low encounters in mid- to late‑2025 [1] [2] [3] [4]. These official statements present a simple arithmetic comparison—monthly or daily averages under Trump versus Biden—that shows encounters and apprehensions sharply lower, a central pillar of the administration’s claim of a "most secure border" [3].
2. Interior arrests and detentions: a return to aggressive interior enforcement
Independent trackers and policy analysts document a rapid rise in ICE interior activity once Trump returned to office: arrests and book-ins surged, detentions doubled on average daily counts, and the share of non‑criminal "other immigration violators" in custody increased noticeably—trends that echo Trump’s first-term enforcement posture [11] [6] [5]. Deportation Data Project and TRAC reporting also show that release rates within 60 days plunged and the rate of removal within two months of detention rose substantially, reflecting more sustained detention and faster processing for many apprehended people [11].
3. Removals versus expulsions and expedited returns: mixed signals and contested totals
Measured removals (formal ICE removals) do not produce a straightforward pro‑Trump advantage: TRAC and other analysts find that the Trump administration’s daily removal averages have often tracked at or below Biden’s FY2024 levels and that cumulative removals in Trump’s early months were, at times, below Biden-era daily equivalents [7] [8] [9]. Migration Policy notes that Biden-era repatriations and expulsions combined amounted to millions of repatriations—numbers that complicate apples‑to‑apples comparison because expulsions, Title 42-era practices, and diplomatic repatriations are counted differently across datasets [12]. Independent fact-checkers also conclude that, despite bigger enforcement budgets and manpower increases, overall deportations under Trump through parts of his early term were lower than under Biden and Obama in comparable stretches [10].
4. Why the metrics diverge: policy choices, counting rules, and political messaging
Differences in enforcement metrics reflect both policy choices—prioritization of interior arrests vs. border processing—and differing counting conventions: "encounters" and expulsions can fall sharply even as ICE interior arrests rise, while removals (formal deportations) lag because expulsions and diplomatic repatriations are tracked separately [11] [12] [5]. Data collection and release practices add opacity: TRAC and others note the Trump team sometimes stopped publishing daily arrest tallies when figures fell, and DHS statements emphasize preliminary and selective comparisons [13] [7] [8]. Analysts and partisan outlets push contrasting narratives—administration statements highlight border lows [1] [3], while TRAC and academic commentators stress that removals have not consistently surpassed Biden-era levels despite big resource injections [9] [8].
5. Bottom line and data limits
The clear pattern is dual: Trump-era policies produced much lower border encounters and a swift ramp‑up in interior arrests and detentions, but measurable formal removals and deportation totals do not uniformly show a sustained increase above Biden-era figures and remain contested among data providers [1] [2] [11] [5] [7] [8] [9]. Reporting limitations—different definitions for expulsions/returns, episodic publication of daily numbers, and aggregation choices—mean definitive, single-number comparisons across administrations are not possible from the available public sources alone [12] [8].