How does DHS define and report 'removals' versus 'returns,' and how has that definition changed across administrations?
Executive summary
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) separates “repatriations” into three labeled outcomes—removals, returns, and expulsions—and treats removals as formal orders that carry administrative or criminal consequences while returns are departures not based on an order of removal (and therefore generally carry no such penalties) [1] [2] [3]. Those categories are reported in Homeland Security’s statistics but are compiled from multiple agency systems and have been reshaped by law, agency practice, and short‑term authorities like Title 42, resulting in shifting tallies across administrations [1] [4] [5].
1. Definitions on paper: what DHS means by “removal” and “return”
DHS defines a removal as the “compulsory and confirmed movement” of an inadmissible or deportable noncitizen out of the United States based on an order of removal and notes that a removed individual may face administrative or criminal consequences on subsequent reentry [2] [3]. By contrast, a return is a “confirmed movement” out of the United States not based on an order of removal—this category includes voluntary departures, voluntary returns, withdrawals of applications for admission, and crew members without entry visas—and DHS further distinguishes enforcement returns from administrative returns [1] [2].
2. How DHS constructs the published counts
DHS’s Office of Homeland Security Statistics (OHSS) aggregates repatriation numbers from agency administrative records—ICE, U.S. Border Patrol (USBP), and Office of Field Operations (OFO)—drawing data from the Enforcement Integrated Database and source systems such as BPETS and ICE’s IIDS/DSSDM; the OHSS cautions these are constructed estimates and subject to revision as source records change [1]. CBP operational records do not always include explicit repatriation labels, so OHSS must infer removals versus returns using dispositions, citizenship, and detention histories, a process the agency flags as imperfect [1].
3. Subcategories that matter: administrative returns, enforcement returns, expulsions
OHSS separates returns into administrative returns (OFO actions such as crew member departures or administrative withdrawals) and enforcement returns (returns that are not crew or administrative withdrawals), and for 2020–2023 it also treated Title 42 expulsions—public‑health expulsions exercised under CDC guidance—as a separate repatriation type [1] [2]. These subcategories change what gets counted as a “deportation” in broader public discourse: OHSS aggregates removals, returns, and expulsions into a single repatriation total while analysts sometimes report only removals [1] [6].
4. How definitions and reporting practices changed across administrations
The statutory and administrative architecture shifted with the Homeland Security Act of 2002, which moved much INA enforcement responsibility to DHS and created the data ecosystems OHSS now mines [4]. Agency counting practices also evolved: ICE revised its administrative arrest counting to align ERO reporting in 2016, affecting year‑to‑year comparability [3]. Operational choices under successive administrations—greater use of returns vs. formal removals, expanded use of expedited processes, and temporary tools like Title 42 expulsions—have changed the composition of repatriation totals even when the DHS definitions remain formally consistent [4] [7] [5].
5. The practical effect: numbers move when policy and tactics change
Because returns are quicker, cost‑efficient, and avoid formal orders, administrations that emphasize border interdiction or expedited procedures produce higher return counts relative to removals; for example, a defining trend under the Biden administration was an increase in enforcement returns relative to formal removals, shifting the mix of what gets labeled a “deportation” in aggregate DHS tallies [7]. Title 42 expulsions added another large, temporary bucket from March 2020 to May 2023 that further complicates comparisons across years [1] [5].
6. Limits, ambiguities, and political uses of the figures
OHSS’s reliance on multiple agency systems and inference rules means the removals/returns split can be opaque—CBP’s records don’t always label repatriation types explicitly, and OHSS warns of revisions and definitional impacts on counts [1]. Analysts and political actors can therefore select different combinations—removals only, removals plus returns, or total repatriations—to make contrasting claims about enforcement intensity; academic and policy sources caution that “deportation” is a non‑legal shorthand that can mask these institutional distinctions [6] [8].
7. Bottom line
Legally and operationally, DHS distinguishes removals (formal orders with penalties) from returns (non‑order departures without the same penalties) and reports both—along with expulsions—via OHSS using reconstructed agency records [1] [2] [3]. Changes across administrations have not so much redefined the statutory categories as altered how often each pathway is used and how temporary authorities (like Title 42) and internal counting rules affect the headline numbers policymakers and the media cite [4] [7] [1].