How did Title 42 expulsions affect border encounter and removal statistics during 2020–2023, and how do analysts treat them when counting 'deportations'?
Executive summary
Title 42, invoked March 21, 2020 and terminated May 11, 2023, transformed how U.S. authorities recorded and resolved border encounters by creating a parallel category—“expulsions” under a public‑health order—that accounted for a large share of encounters but did not always translate into traditional removals or court‑ordered deportations [1] [2]. Between March 2020 and May 2023, roughly 2.7–3.0 million expulsions were recorded at the Southwest border, reshaping encounter totals, increasing repeat crossings, and complicating how analysts count and compare “deportations” across periods [3] [4] [5].
1. Title 42’s imprint on encounter totals: a new dominant category
Federal encounter metrics were altered because CBP began reporting three event types—Title 8 apprehensions, Title 8 inadmissibles, and Title 42 expulsions—together; from March FY2020 onward encounters therefore include expulsions carried out under Title 42 [6] [2]. During the life of the order, asylum seekers and other migrants arriving without authorization were expelled nearly 3 million times according to migration policy analysis, and CBP/OHSS data show that a very large share of Southwest Border (SWB) encounters during the pandemic period ended in Title 42 expulsions—about half in some characterizations and roughly 29 percent across a ten‑year enforcement lifecycle snapshot [3] [5].
2. Statistical effects beyond raw counts: repeat crossings, nationalities, and downstream measures
Title 42’s operational design—swift expulsion with limited penalties—encouraged repeat attempts, boosting encounter counts without proportional increases in distinct individuals processed through immigration courts, and analysts documented an increase in repeat crossers and a shift in nationality mix during the pandemic period [7] [8] [9]. Because expulsions often returned people to Mexico or last transit countries rather than completing formal removals to a country of origin, DHS noted a drop in its repatriations early in the pandemic partly attributable to encounters that would previously have produced returns or removals but were instead resolved under Title 42 [10].
3. How analysts and agencies treat Title 42 when counting “deportations”
Analysts diverge. CBP encounter figures explicitly include Title 42 expulsions, so comparisons that rely on “encounters” will reflect the policy’s scale directly [2]. However, many enforcement and academic measures of “removals,” “repatriations,” or formal deportations remain conceptually and operationally tied to Title 8 processes (expedited removal, ICE removals, or court orders), leading some analysts and DHS reports to separate Title 42 expulsions from removals or returns when discussing deportation totals and enforcement intensity [11] [10]. OHSS and ICE reporting illustrate the split: enforcement lifecycle accounting shows Title 42 as a distinct outcome category alongside Title 8 returns and removals, and DHS distinguishes “repatriations” (removals/returns) from the public‑health expulsions that CBP executed under Title 42 [5] [12].
4. Interpreting trends—why the distinction matters for policy and public debate
Counting expulsions as “deportations” inflates removal‑style totals if the goal is to measure formal, legally adjudicated deportations; conversely, excluding Title 42 from deportation tallies understates how often the government physically prevented entry and returned people during 2020–23, since expulsions were operationally effective at limiting interior processing and asylum screening [3] [2]. The immediate aftermath of Title 42’s end also underscores this analytical pitfall: the number of daily encounters fell sharply in the week after the order was lifted from roughly 10,000 per day to about 4,100–5,000 per day in some reporting, a dynamic that reflects behavioral, enforcement‑capacity, and counting changes rather than a simple policy success or failure [13] [11]. Stakeholders therefore must be explicit about metrics—encounters, expulsions, removals, repatriations, or formal deportations—because Title 42 created a parallel, high‑volume pathway that both altered raw encounter totals and complicated apples‑to‑apples comparisons of “deportation” activity across pre‑, during‑, and post‑pandemic periods [5] [3].