Fact check: How did detention facilities and conditions differ between Obama and Trump immigration enforcement?

1. Summary of the results

Both administrations faced significant challenges and criticism regarding detention facilities, but with notable differences in approach and outcomes:

Key similarities:

• Both administrations used detention centers with steel cages ^[1]
• Both faced accusations of "appalling conditions" in facilities ^[2]
• Both struggled with tracking unaccompanied minors, maintaining similar location rates ^[1]

Key differences:

• Trump implemented a "zero tolerance" policy that criminally prosecuted border crossings and separated families as a deterrent ^{[3] [1]}
• The average daily detention population increased significantly under Trump from 30,000-40,000 to 46,000 ^[2]
• No migrant children died in CBP custody during Obama's final six years, while multiple deaths occurred under Trump ^[2]
• Trump's administration faced particularly harsh criticism, with facilities being described as "inhumane" and compared to "concentration camps" by Democratic lawmakers ^[2]

2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints

Several important contextual elements need consideration:

• While Obama was labeled the "deporter in chief," his administration primarily focused on deporting individuals with criminal records and recent arrivals ^[4]
• Trump's approach was more indiscriminate, targeting a broader range of undocumented immigrants without clear prioritization ^[4]
• The fundamental challenges of processing and tracking immigrant children remained consistent across both administrations ^[1]
• During Obama's term, CBP processed 47,000 unaccompanied children in detention centers in Nogales and Brownsville in 2014 alone ^[1]

3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement

The question itself might suggest a simple comparison is possible, when in reality the situation is more complex:

• Political rhetoric often oversimplifies these differences for partisan purposes ^[5]
• Democratic lawmakers had strong political incentives to criticize Trump's policies more harshly than Obama's similar practices ^[2]
• Immigration advocacy groups benefit from highlighting differences between administrations to push for policy changes
• Both administrations' supporters tend to minimize their own administration's failures while emphasizing the other's shortcomings
• Raw numbers of deportations or detentions don't tell the full story without considering the targeting criteria and broader enforcement strategies ^[4]