Fact check: What were the changes to immigration enforcement priorities under Trump's policies in 2017?

1. Summary of the results

The Trump administration implemented dramatic changes to immigration enforcement priorities in 2017 through key executive orders and policy shifts. On January 25, 2017, Trump signed the "Border Security and Immigration Enforcement Improvements" executive order, which fundamentally redefined enforcement priorities to "secure the southern border of the United States, prevent further illegal immigration, and repatriate illegal aliens swiftly, consistently, and humanely" ^[1].

The most significant change was the expansion of enforcement priorities to nearly all removable aliens, abandoning the previous approach of prioritizing cases based on severity levels ^{[2] [3]}. Under these new policies, nearly any non-citizen who had ever been convicted or charged with a criminal offense became a priority for removal ^[3]. The administration prioritized all undocumented immigrants for removal, not just those with serious criminal records ^[4].

Key operational changes included:

• Increased use of state and local police to enforce immigration law ^[4]
• Hiring additional ICE agents to expand enforcement capacity ^[4]
• Punishing 'sanctuary' jurisdictions that limited cooperation with federal immigration authorities ^[4]
• Increasing immigration prosecutions across the board ^[4]
• Reviving the Secure Communities program for enhanced information sharing ^[4]
• Pressuring countries to accept their nationals for deportation ^[4]
• Expanding the use of expedited removal procedures ^[5]

The administration implemented over 400 immigration-related actions targeting border and interior enforcement, visa processing, and asylum policies ^[6]. These changes represented a dismantling and reconstruction of many elements of the U.S. immigration system through executive orders, departmental policy guidance, and hundreds of technical adjustments ^[7].

2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints

The original question lacks important context about the humanitarian and social impacts of these policy changes. The enforcement expansion created a heightened level of fear and uncertainty for immigrants beyond just those with criminal records ^[5]. Humanitarian protections were severely diminished, the U.S.-Mexico border became more closed off, and legal immigration became out of reach for many ^[8].

The policies had significant impacts on educational institutions, affecting immigrant, international, and refugee students, as well as staff and faculty and their families ^[6]. Immigration enforcement appeared more random under the new priorities, creating uncertainty for entire communities ^[8].

Different stakeholders benefited from these policy changes:

• Immigration enforcement agencies and contractors gained expanded authority and resources
• Private detention companies likely benefited from increased detention needs
• Political supporters who favored stricter immigration enforcement saw their priorities implemented

Alternative viewpoints include:

• Immigration advocacy organizations like the American Immigration Council argued these changes were harmful and counterproductive ^{[3] [7] [4]}
• Educational institutions expressed concerns about impacts on their communities ^[6]
• Local jurisdictions that disagreed with expanded enforcement faced federal pressure ^[4]

3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement

The original question itself appears neutral and factual, simply asking for information about documented policy changes. However, the question could be incomplete in that it doesn't acknowledge the broader context of these changes or their wide-ranging impacts beyond enforcement priorities.

The question focuses narrowly on "enforcement priorities" without recognizing that the 2017 changes represented a fundamental restructuring of the entire immigration system ^{[8] [7]}. This framing might understate the scope and significance of the policy shifts that occurred.

Additionally, the question doesn't acknowledge that these changes were part of a larger pattern of over 400 immigration-related actions implemented throughout the Trump presidency ^[6], which could lead to an incomplete understanding of the 2017 changes as isolated policy adjustments rather than part of a comprehensive overhaul.