How do estimates of illegal immigration during Trump’s first term compare to the prior Obama administration?

Checked on January 16, 2026
Disclaimer: Factually can make mistakes. Please verify important information or breaking news. Learn more.

Executive summary

Estimates and official counts show that the Obama administration oversaw higher annual removals at its peak and greater cumulative deportations across two terms than did President Trump’s first term, while Trump shifted enforcement priorities toward broader interior enforcement that produced different arrest patterns but not a clear reduction in the overall undocumented population [1] [2] [3] [4]. Comparisons are complicated by changing metrics, shifting enforcement priorities, and pandemic-era disruptions that alter year-to-year figures [5].

1. Quantifying removals: Obama’s peak exceeded Trump’s first term totals

By several accounts, Barack Obama’s administration deported more people in total and reached higher annual peaks than Trump’s first term; analyses cite roughly 5.3 million removals or repatriations over Obama’s two terms with a high year in 2013 of about 400,000 removals, while one tally puts removals during Trump’s first term at roughly 2,001,280 people [1] [2]. Multiple fact-checkers and policy analyses have relied on Department of Homeland Security yearbooks and congressional reports to conclude that, on a per‑month or per‑year basis, Obama’s peak deportation rates outpaced the Trump interior-enforcement years [2] [6].

2. Enforcement posture: priorities changed, so did who was targeted

The Obama administration formally prioritized threats to national security, public safety, and recent entrants so as to channel limited removal capacity to higher‑risk cases; the Trump administration abandoned that tiered approach and broadened “priorities” to encompass essentially all undocumented immigrants, a move that produced criticism for stretching resources and increasing arrests of individuals without criminal convictions [4]. LEITF reporting notes that under Trump an estimated one in ten people arrested in FY2017 had no criminal conviction or charge, illustrating a shift from targeted removals to wider interior enforcement [4].

3. Arrests versus removals: different signals, different outcomes

Interior arrests and headline-making operations increased visibility of enforcement under Trump, but higher arrest counts did not straightforwardly translate into higher removals or a smaller undocumented population; Cato Institute analysis argues the undocumented population remained about the same during Trump’s first term, and other reporting notes that removals in some Trump years never reached the annual levels seen under Obama [3] [2]. Studies and later reporting also emphasize that arrests can spike (and were reported higher in some months), yet deportations and legal removals depend on detention capacity, court outcomes, and diplomatic logistics—limits that constrained rapid reductions even under more aggressive enforcement [7] [3].

4. Data caveats: metrics changed, and pandemic effects obscure comparisons

Direct apples‑to‑apples comparisons are hindered by changing data practices and extraordinary events: CBP and DHS reporting formats evolved, and the COVID‑19 pandemic and Title 42 expulsions altered how “encounters” and removals were recorded, so some analysts caution against simplistic counts across administrations without methodological adjustments [5] [8]. Fact‑checking outlets have also noted that combining different categories (encounters, expulsions, returns, removals) can produce misleading totals unless carefully normalized to the same definitions [5].

5. Politics and messaging: numbers as policy tools

Both supporters and critics of each administration have used different statistics to build narratives—Trump camp rhetoric promising mass deportations contrasted with evidence that he did not deport more people per year than Obama’s peak, while proponents point to expanded arrests and policy changes as proof of tougher enforcement [1] [9] [6]. Analysts and advocacy groups have incentives to emphasize either the human impacts of interior sweeps (criticizing resource use and noncriminal arrests) or the need for stricter border control (highlighting expulsions and removals), so the choice of metric often reflects an implicit agenda [4] [9].

6. Bottom line: Trump’s first term enforced differently but did not produce a clear, sustained decline in undocumented population compared with Obama

Summing up the reporting: Obama recorded higher cumulative and peak removals across his two terms and higher single‑year high marks than Trump’s first term, while Trump changed enforcement priorities to widen interior actions—raising arrests but not demonstrably shrinking the undocumented population, with removals in many Trump years below Obama’s peak and subject to legal, logistical, and pandemic constraints [1] [2] [3] [4]. Any definitive judgment requires care about which metric is used—removals, returns, encounters, arrests, or population estimates—and acknowledgment of data limitations noted by DHS and independent analysts [5].

Want to dive deeper?
How did DHS definitions of removals, returns, and encounters change between 2009 and 2021?
What role did Title 42 and COVID‑era expulsions play in immigration statistics during 2020–2021?
How have local sanctuary policies affected interior deportation rates under different administrations?