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: What role did ICE play in deportations under Trump compared to Obama?
Executive Summary
The key finding is that ICE under the Trump administration increased removals and significantly shifted enforcement toward people without criminal records, but those increases do not match claims of the “largest in history” and require context about baselines and totals from prior administrations. Available analyses show notable rises in detentions and administrative arrests during Trump’s second term and through 2025, including large numbers of people without criminal histories, while ICE’s own reporting highlights enforcement activity without providing direct Obama-era comparisons [1] [2] [3]. This review extracts core claims, contrasts perspectives, and flags what the sources omit.
1. The central claim: Trump-era deportations rose, but not to unprecedented levels
Multiple analyses assert that deportations and ICE enforcement actions increased under Trump compared with some recent years, with reporting noting nearly 170,000 people deported so far in 2025 and commentators contrasting that with roughly three million deportations across Obama’s two terms [1]. ICE’s Fiscal Year 2024 Annual Report documents tens of thousands of administrative and at‑large arrests—figures ICE emphasizes to illustrate its operational tempo—but the report does not situate those numbers against Obama-era annual totals or immigration policy changes, leaving the “largest in history” label unsupported by direct ICE comparison [3]. Numbers matter, but context is missing.
2. A striking shift: detaining people with no criminal history skyrocketed
Two independent analyses highlight an explosive increase in detentions of people with no criminal history, reporting a 1,271% increase since the start of Trump’s second term and noting that non‑criminals now constitute the largest group in ICE detention [2] [4]. ICE’s reporting lists administrative arrests and at‑large arrests but does not break out the non‑criminal cohort in a way that reconciles with the media analyses, which rely on government data interpreted to show the shift in enforcement priorities away from the stated focus on “criminal aliens” [3]. This discrepancy between stated priorities and enforcement patterns is the clearest factual divergence.
3. ICE’s own framing: enforcement capacity without comparative history
ICE’s Fiscal Year 2024 Annual Report emphasizes its combination of legal authorities and intelligence‑driven law enforcement capabilities, and it tallies 113,431 administrative arrests and 33,243 at‑large arrests for that fiscal year to demonstrate activity levels [3]. The report is authoritative about agency outputs but omits direct historical comparisons to prior administrations, which limits its ability to answer whether deportation volume or target composition is unprecedented. Analysts therefore juxtapose ICE counts against multi‑year trends to draw conclusions about increases, a method that can show shifts but depends on selection of baseline years and definitions.
4. Divergent narratives: policy rhetoric versus enforcement reality
The Trump administration publicly framed enforcement as prioritizing criminal aliens, yet reporting indicates enforcement practices increasingly targeted people without criminal histories, contradicting that rhetoric [2]. Analysts quantify this contradiction with sharp percentage increases in non‑criminal detentions and point to administrative data showing that immigrants with no criminal record have become the largest detained group [4]. ICE’s report does not directly address this apparent mismatch, which suggests a gap between policy statements and operational outcomes that observers interpret as a deliberate broadening of enforcement scope.
5. Interpreting the “three million” and “largest in history” comparisons
One analysis contrasts nearly 170,000 deportations in 2025 with about three million removals across the Obama presidency, implying that while removals under Trump rose, claims of record‑breaking totals are overstated [1]. This comparison illustrates how aggregate multi‑year figures can dwarf single‑year spikes and how rhetorical claims about historic scale require careful temporal framing. Aggregating across years versus focusing on shorter spikes produces different impressions, and the sources show that critics and defenders of Trump’s policies pick baselines that support their narratives.
6. What the sources agree on and what remains uncertain
All sources agree that ICE activity increased and that the composition of detainees shifted toward non‑criminals, but they diverge on the interpretation of scale and intent [1] [2] [3] [4]. The primary uncertainty stems from the lack of direct, side‑by‑side historical reporting in ICE’s official documents and from definitional choices in media analyses. Absent a standardized cross‑administration dataset in the cited materials, definitive claims about “largest ever” removals remain unproven by the presented evidence.
7. Missing context and potential agendas to watch
The reporting relies on government data and agency reports but often omits broader factors that shape deportation counts—such as changes in border encounters, legal pathways, prosecutorial discretion, and administrative priorities—which would affect year‑to‑year comparisons [1] [3]. Media analyses emphasizing the surge in non‑criminal detentions may aim to critique policy shifts, while ICE’s report seeks to justify operational scope; both perspectives carry implicit agendas. A full assessment requires harmonized datasets and transparent methodological notes that are not present in the supplied materials.