What categories (criminal vs noncriminal) made up deportations during Obama's presidency?

1. The headline numbers and where they came from

Federal and independent tallies place total removals during Obama’s eight years in office in the millions—commonly cited figures are more than 2 million removals through FY2013 and roughly 2.7–3+ million removals across 2009–2016—numbers that combine interior removals by ICE with border removals and returns handled by CBP, and that vary depending on whether “returns” and expedited border repatriations are included ^{[2] [4] [5]}.

2. What portion were labeled “criminal” by authorities

The administration publicly emphasized removing convicted criminals: the Department of Homeland Security announced that in FY2010 about half of those removed—more than 195,000 people—were convicted criminals, and DHS framed increases in criminal removals as a priority shift compared with the prior administration ^[1]. That statement reflects DHS reporting that interior removals—where criminal convictions are more common—were a significant component of Obama-era enforcement ^[6].

3. How enforcement priorities changed the mix (policy versus practice)

Starting in the Obama years ICE issued guidance to prioritize threats to national security, border security and public safety—ostensibly focusing resources on serious criminals and recent border crossers—while continuing programs such as Secure Communities that funneled local arrest information to federal immigration authorities, a dynamic that increased interior removals of people with criminal records even as the stated policy moved toward prosecutorial discretion ^{[3] [7]}.

4. Why aggregate statistics can mislead about “criminal vs noncriminal”

Counting removals without separating interior removals from border returns obscures the underlying composition: many removals in peak years were carried out by Border Patrol as turns or expedited returns at the border rather than ICE-initiated interior removals, and those groups have very different criminality profiles and policy implications ^{[2] [6]}. Analysts warn that mixing returns and formal removals inflates comparisons and can mask whether people removed had convictions or were processed at the frontier ^[8].

5. Independent analyses and dissenting perspectives

Think tanks and fact-checkers note differences in methodology and historical context—some researchers emphasize that interior removals were particularly high early in Obama’s term (averaging over 200,000 per year), while others highlight that changes in counting in the mid-2000s and the inclusion of border apprehensions affect inter-administration comparisons ^{[6] [8]}. Immigrant‑rights advocates counter that despite a stated focus on criminals, large numbers of noncriminals, families, and long-term residents were still deported, and that administrative priorities did not always prevent interior arrests and removals of nonviolent or civil‑immigration cases ^{[4] [3]}.

6. What can be stated with confidence from the available reporting

The available reporting and government releases show that: (a) large volumes of removals occurred under Obama, including both border returns and interior removals ^{[2] [4]}; (b) DHS publicly reported that roughly half of removals in a cited fiscal year were convicted criminals, signaling a sizable criminal component to removals ^[1]; and (c) policy memos and program continuations—Secure Communities and priority memos—shaped a composition that increased identification and removal of people with criminal convictions while leaving many noncriminal removals in the tally ^{[3] [7]}. Where sources diverge—on totals and on how much of the removals were deep‑interior criminal versus border returns—reflects definitional and counting choices in DHS and subsequent analyses, not a single uncontested narrative ^{[5] [8]}.