What sources provide official statistics on illegal border crossings and how are they measured?
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive summary
Official U.S. statistics on “illegal border crossings” come primarily from U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) dashboards and monthly releases (which report “encounters” that combine Border Patrol apprehensions, Office of Field Operations inadmissibles, and expulsions) and from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) summaries; complementary port-level inbound counts are published by the Bureau of Transportation Statistics (BTS) using CBP port-of-entry data (CBP encounter definitions: [1]; CBP nationwide encounters and dashboards: [2]; BTS port-level inbound counts: [3]). Analysts disagree about what those headline counts measure and what they omit — for example, CBP encounters count events not unique people and exclude many “gotaways” except where estimated or separately discussed [1] [2] [4].
1. What the official numbers actually are — and who publishes them
CBP is the primary official publisher of operational migration statistics: monthly “encounters” dashboards for the Southwest land border, nationwide encounters, and sector breakdowns are available on CBP’s Stats and Summaries and data portal [1] [2]. DHS also issues summaries and “fact sheets” that highlight trends and policy impacts using CBP data [5]. The Bureau of Transportation Statistics (BTS) publishes port-level inbound crossing data collected at CBP ports of entry — counts of vehicles, passengers, pedestrians and other inbound modes — which are a different, narrower official series [3] [6].
2. How CBP measures “illegal crossings” — the encounter construct
CBP’s encounter series combines multiple event types: U.S. Border Patrol Title 8 apprehensions (between ports), Office of Field Operations Title 8 inadmissibles (at ports), and expulsions under Title 42 when in effect; these are summed in CBP’s encounter dashboards [1] [2]. DHS and CBP releases frequently present “apprehensions” for southwest border sectors separately — but their published “encounter” totals are event counts, not a headcount of unique individuals [1] [2].
3. Limits and hidden gaps in the official measures
CBP encounter counts can double- or triple-count an individual who is apprehended, expelled, and then reapprehended; they also do not inherently include most “gotaways” — migrants who successfully evaded capture — except as separate estimates that DHS/CBP sometimes mention [1] [5] [4]. BTS port-of-entry inbound counts measure legal crossings at official stations and therefore do not reflect irregular or between‑port activity [3] [7]. Reporting cautions on CBP dashboards note that data are extracted from live systems and subject to revision and definitional change [1] [2].
4. How different agencies and statements frame trends — competing narratives
DHS and CBP releases emphasize steep declines in encounters and historic lows under recent policy changes, citing percent drops and monthly totals — for example, DHS claimed a >60% decline in southwest-border between‑port encounters from May–Dec 2024 and large drops in “gotaways” and releases [5]. Independent analysts and research groups (Migration Policy Institute cited) attribute declines partly to enforcement by Mexico and policy tweaks like the Secure the Border rule and CBP One appointments, signaling causal complexity beyond U.S. enforcement alone [4]. BTS and DOT series focus on port traffic metrics and do not support claims about irregular crossings between ports [3] [7].
5. Practical implications for journalists and researchers
When using “illegal crossing” statistics, always say whether the figure is CBP “encounters,” USBP apprehensions, OFO inadmissibles, expulsions, or BTS inbound port counts, and cite the dashboard or release [1] [2] [3]. Note explicitly if counts are event-based (not unique persons) and whether “gotaways” are included or separately estimated [1] [5] [4]. Use sector-level data and final fiscal‑year totals for longer-term trends because monthly preliminary figures can be revised [1].
6. What current reporting does not settle
Available sources do not mention a single definitive measure of unique individuals who crossed irregularly in any given period; official series are event- or port-based and require interpretation and triangulation [1] [2] [3]. Also not found in current reporting is an authoritative public count of all “gotaways” nationwide in regular dashboard tables — DHS and analysts sometimes reference estimates or declines but the primary encounter dashboards emphasize apprehensions and expulsions [5] [4].
Bottom line: CBP encounter dashboards and monthly CBP/DHS releases are the statutory, official sources for operational border statistics; BTS provides port-of-entry inbound counts. Each source uses different measurement units (events, apprehensions, inbound legal crossings) and carries explicit caveats — journalists must state which series they cite and flag the well-documented limitations about repeat counts, evaded crossings, and definitional changes [1] [2] [3].