Fact check: Did Obama ignore due process in his deportations?

1. Summary of the results

The evidence strongly indicates that due process was frequently bypassed during Obama's presidency. Multiple sources confirm that 75-83% of deportations were nonjudicial, meaning individuals did not see a judge before being deported ^{[1] [2]}. In concrete numbers, this meant that in 2012 alone, approximately 313,000 out of 419,000 deportations occurred without judicial review ^[2].

2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints

Several important contextual elements were missing from the original question:

• The Obama administration's approach evolved over time. While in 2009, around 150,000 undocumented people with no criminal record were deported, this number decreased significantly to 10,336 by 2013 ^[3].
• The administration implemented "rocket docket" courts that, while technically providing some form of legal process, often denied immigrants proper legal representation ^[4].
• By 2013, 44% of removals fell under the "expedited removal" category, showing how the process became increasingly streamlined during Obama's presidency ^[5].
• Many of those deported were long-term U.S. residents who were expelled after minor offenses, with no opportunity to present their case ^[2].

3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement

The original question oversimplifies a complex issue. Here are important considerations:

• The high deportation numbers were partly a political calculation by the Obama administration to appear tough on immigration - a strategy that ultimately backfired and led to Obama being labeled as "deporter-in-chief" ^[3].
• The administration's approach prioritized speed and efficiency over individual case consideration, with only one quarter of people facing expulsion getting to present their case before an immigration judge ^[1].
• The focus on "due process" alone misses the broader context of how the deportation system became increasingly mechanized and streamlined during this period ^[5].
• Those benefiting from this system included private detention facilities and companies contracted for deportation services, while immigrant rights organizations and legal advocacy groups opposed these practices.