Fact check: How did Obama's immigration enforcement differ from Trump's family separation policy?

1. Summary of the results

The key differences between Obama and Trump's immigration policies were both in approach and implementation:

• Obama's administration prioritized deporting serious criminals, with deportations of terrorists, gang members, and convicted felons increasing from 69% to 94% between 2009-2016 ^[1]
• While both administrations dealt with family immigration cases, their approaches differed significantly:
• Obama did not implement systematic family separations ^[1]
• Trump's "zero tolerance" policy led to widespread family separations, affecting at least 2,300 families before being stopped by executive order ^{[2] [3]}

2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints

Several important contextual elements are often overlooked in this debate:

• The Obama administration did consider family separation as one of three possible options when dealing with families at the border, alongside detention and notice to appear ^[4]
• Some family separations did occur under Obama, but only in specific circumstances such as when parents were caught trafficking drugs ^[2]
• Obama's administration made significant changes to immigration enforcement by:
• Moving away from "voluntary" returns
• Increasing formal removal proceedings
• Focusing on reducing border recidivism ^[1]

3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement

The question itself might suggest a simpler distinction between the two administrations' policies than actually existed:

• It's misleading to suggest there were no family separations under Obama - they did occur, albeit rarely and under specific circumstances ^[2]
• Similarly, it would be incorrect to claim, as Trump did, that Obama had the same family separation policy - the Associated Press fact check explicitly contradicts this claim ^[3]
• The groundwork for family separation policies existed during Obama's tenure, though it wasn't implemented as a systematic policy ^[4]

This complex issue often gets oversimplified in political discourse, with both sides potentially benefiting from particular narratives:

• Democrats benefit from emphasizing the differences between the administrations
• Republicans benefit from suggesting continuity between policies
• Immigration advocacy groups benefit from highlighting the harsh aspects of both administrations' approaches