Fact check: What due process did Obama use in deporting illegal immigrants during his term

1. Summary of the results

The Obama administration's deportation system prioritized speed over fairness, with a significant lack of traditional due process protections ^[1]. During Obama's presidency, more than 3 million people were deported, making it one of the most aggressive deportation periods in U.S. history ^[2].

The most striking finding is that 75% to 83% of deportees never saw a judge or had the opportunity to plead their case before being expelled from the United States ^{[1] [2]}. This was accomplished through expedited removal procedures and reinstatement of removal processes that bypassed traditional immigration court hearings ^[2].

The administration used a system of formal removals and returns, focusing primarily on removing noncitizens with criminal records and recent unauthorized border crossers ^[3]. However, the enforcement priorities evolved over time, shifting from worksite enforcement operations to border security and removal of criminals and recent arrivals ^[3].

2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints

The original question fails to acknowledge that Obama's deportation policies were heavily criticized by immigrant rights advocates, with Janet Murguía calling him the "deporter-in-chief" ^[4]. This criticism came from within his own political coalition, highlighting the controversial nature of his enforcement approach.

Civil liberties organizations, particularly the ACLU, strongly opposed the Obama administration's deportation system, arguing it violated constitutional traditions of individualized due process ^[1]. They documented specific cases like Nydia, who was deported without a hearing despite having asylum in the United States ^[5].

The question also omits Obama's attempts at immigration reform through executive action. In 2014, Obama announced the expansion of DACA and introduction of DAPA programs to provide relief for certain undocumented immigrants ^[6]. However, these actions were blocked by the U.S. Supreme Court, limiting his ability to provide comprehensive immigration relief ^[7].

Immigration enforcement agencies and border security advocates would benefit from highlighting Obama's aggressive deportation record, as it demonstrates that Democratic administrations can also prioritize enforcement. Conversely, immigrant rights organizations and Democratic politicians benefit from emphasizing the due process violations and family separations that occurred during this period.

3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement

The original question contains an implicit assumption that Obama used proper "due process" in deportations, when the evidence shows the opposite. The phrasing "What due process did Obama use" suggests there was adequate due process, rather than asking whether due process was provided at all.

The question fails to acknowledge the systematic denial of due process rights that characterized Obama's deportation system ^[1]. By framing the question around "what" due process was used rather than "whether" due process was provided, it obscures the fundamental constitutional concerns raised by civil liberties organizations.

The question also doesn't reflect the mixed legacy Obama left on immigration - simultaneously being both an aggressive enforcer who deported millions and an advocate for certain immigrant protections through programs like DACA ^[4]. This complexity is lost in the simple framing of the original question.