How do DHS statistics define and separate 'removals', 'returns', and 'expulsions'?
Executive summary
DHS counts three distinct categories under its umbrella term “repatriations”: removals, returns, and expulsions — each with different legal bases, consequences, and counting rules [1] enforcementactionsfy2020v2.pdf" target="blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">[2]. Removals are formal, Title 8 actions tied to a final order and carry administrative or criminal consequences; returns are movements without a removal order and generally carry no administrative penalties; expulsions (notably Title 42 expulsions during the COVID period) are public-health-driven and were counted separately while in effect [3] [1] [4].
1. What DHS calls a “removal”: a final-order, penalty-bearing enforcement action
Removals, in DHS statistics, are the compulsory and confirmed movement of an inadmissible or removable noncitizen from the United States based on a legally issued final order of removal, and a removal carries administrative or criminal consequences for future reentry [3] [5]. DHS components—ICE, CBP and USBP—may all effect removals, but ICE ERO typically reports removals after a final order has been entered and removal operations often require coordination across agencies [6] [4]. Congressional and DHS reporting underscore that removals are the formal legal category that triggers bars to reentry and potential criminal sanctions on unlawful reentry [6] [3].
2. What DHS calls a “return”: movement without a removal order and usually without penalties
A return is the confirmed movement of an inadmissible or deportable noncitizen out of the United States that is not based on an order of removal; returns include voluntary returns, voluntary departures, and withdrawals under docket control, and they generally do not carry the administrative penalties associated with removals [7] [8]. The OHSS (Office of Homeland Security Statistics) clarifies that administrative returns (including crew members and withdrawals) are classified separately from enforcement returns, and that enforcement returns are those resulting from an enforcement encounter [7] [1]. Historically, DHS has sometimes aggregated returns and removals in publicized “deportation” or “repatriation” totals, which can blur legal distinctions in headline numbers [9] [10].
3. What “expulsions” meant in DHS stats during the pandemic (Title 42)
During the Title 42 public-health order (March 2020–May 2023), DHS recorded “expulsions” as removals under public-health authority rather than traditional Title 8 removal proceedings; these expulsions were intended to rapidly turn people away to prevent disease spread and were reported separately in DHS and ICE tallies while the policy was in effect [1] [4] [2]. ICE’s own statistics note that Title 42 expulsions often returned irregular border crossers to countries of last transit or origin and that such expulsions were operationally distinct from standard removal workflows [4]. OHSS and component reporting include Title 42 expulsions in repatriation totals for the period they applied, which complicates year‑to‑year comparability [2].
4. Practical counting choices and aggregation that shape headlines
DHS aggregates removals, returns, and expulsions under the meta-category “repatriations,” and reporting choices—such as whether CBP or ICE counts particular voluntary returns, how “administrative” returns are classified, or whether Title 42 expulsions are included—drive large differences in headline totals [1] [9] [2]. ICE and OHSS use locked-data rules and component-specific reporting systems (e.g., ICE “locking” counts at fiscal-year close) that can defer or reassign events across years, and ICE cautions that its removal numbers may include returns or expulsions depending on the data feed [8] [4]. Analysts have pointed out that combining these categories without disaggregation can create misleading impressions about enforcement “toughness” or which agency performed the action [9] [10].
5. Implications and contested interpretations
Because removals carry legal consequences while returns generally do not, the policy and humanitarian significance of a given “repatriation” hinges on which category it falls into; advocates, policymakers and journalists therefore dispute whether aggregated DHS totals meaningfully reflect enforcement severity or legal accountability [3] [9]. Some researchers recommend transparent, disaggregated series (removals vs. returns vs. expulsions; interior vs. border origin) to avoid conflating legally distinct actions and to permit apples‑to‑apples comparisons across years and administrations [11] [2]. DHS’s own tables and methodological notes provide the definitional scaffolding, but readers must consult component-level footnotes to trace how a single deportation-style headline was constructed [7] [12].