What was the impact of Title 42 on the number of expulsions during 2020–2023?
Executive summary
Title 42 transformed a rarely used public‑health statute into the United States’ dominant border‑control tool from March 2020 through May 11, 2023, producing roughly 2–3 million expulsions during that span depending on the dataset and cutoffs used [1] [2] [3]. Those expulsions represented a large and fluctuating share of Border Patrol and CBP encounters—peaking at 57 percent of encounters in May 2021 and still accounting for about one‑third of encounters in April 2023—while doing little to permanently deter repeat crossings [2] [4] [3].
1. Title 42’s scale: millions of expulsions in three years
Federal reporting and major policy analysts agree that Title 42 produced expulsions on an unprecedented scale: CBP designates the policy period as March 21, 2020 to May 11, 2023 [1] [4], and Migration Policy estimates nearly 3 million expulsions during that period with CBP averaging more than 75,900 expulsions per month across the policy’s life [2]. KFF’s breakdown shows over 2.5 million single‑adult expulsions plus hundreds of thousands more for family units and thousands of unaccompanied minors, underscoring that the policy was applied broadly [3]. Different organizations report different tallies—advocates and legal groups cite figures like 1.7 million or 2.3 million for particular subperiods—reflecting differences in time windows and methodology, not a dispute that expulsions were numerically massive [5] [6].
2. How expulsions changed the composition of Border Patrol encounters
Title 42 shifted how encounters were processed: in months when the rule was enforced a large share of contacts were immediately expelled rather than processed under Title 8 immigration law. Usage peaked in May 2021 when 113,800 expulsions constituted 57 percent of national encounters, and in April 2023 expulsions still accounted for 87,200 of 276,000 encounters—about 32 percent—showing the policy’s persistent centrality to border operations until termination [2] [4].
3. Repeat encounters, incentives, and questions about deterrence
Analysts and data point to a key nuance: many expulsions were of individuals who attempted multiple crossings, meaning the raw expulsion count overstates the number of distinct people affected and undermines claims that Title 42 created lasting deterrence [3]. KFF explicitly notes that repeat attempts were common and that quick expulsions under Title 42 carried no traditional immigration penalties, contributing to churn at the border [3]. Migration Policy also concluded the order was “largely ineffective in deterring irregular migration,” despite its scale [2].
4. Operational dependencies and geographic patterns
The policy’s practicability depended on logistical realities and bilateral cooperation: expulsions were far easier for migrants Mexico would accept, and U.S. authorities relied heavily on Mexico’s willingness to receive certain nationalities—otherwise expensive air removals limited expulsions for many countries [7]. This created uneven application across nationalities and shaped who was actually returned under Title 42 [7].
5. Human costs, legal controversy, and the end of the policy
Beyond numbers, researchers link Title 42 to human‑security effects: studies of southern Arizona describe shifts in where remains were recovered and disproportionate impacts on certain nationalities during the Title 42 era, tying expulsions and impeding asylum access to increased risk [8]. The policy was also the subject of sustained legal and medical criticism—medical professionals publicly challenged the public‑health rationale and courts intermittently blocked and then allowed enforcement before the national emergency’s end terminated the policy on May 11, 2023 [9] [10] [1].
6. Bottom line: Title 42’s measurable impact on expulsions, and what the data imply
Quantitatively, Title 42 produced millions of expulsions—CBP’s dashboards cover a policy period (Mar 2020–May 11, 2023) during which analysts report roughly 2–3 million expulsions, with monthly averages and peaks that made expulsions a defining feature of U.S. border enforcement [1] [2] [3]. Qualitatively, the policy converted single‑encounter enforcement into rapid summary expulsions, generated repeat migrations rather than durable deterrence, depended on diplomatic and logistical constraints, and provoked significant legal and humanitarian pushback [3] [7] [8] [9]. Precise counts vary across sources because of differing timeframes and counting methods; those methodological choices explain most apparent contradictions in published totals [6] [5].