Where the protest under Obama deportation worse than now?

1. Historical scale: Obama’s removals and why activists turned out

The Obama administration presided over removal totals that exceeded prior administrations and prompted repeated mass protests and civil disobedience, including arrests of faith leaders who decried “record deportations,” and congressional rebukes after large holiday-season raids targeting Central American families ^{[1] [6] [2]}. Migration Policy Institute reporting framed Obama’s record as “higher removals than preceding administrations” while arguing the administration increasingly prioritized criminal and recent arrivals rather than blanket expulsions — a distinction that did not blunt activist fury ^[1].

2. Tactics and grievances under Obama: speed, targeting, and due process complaints

Critics from the left emphasized systemic problems beyond raw totals: the ACLU and others argued the Obama system prioritized speed over individualized due process, funneling many people through expedited removals and creating scenes of terror in immigrant communities that spurred protests ^[7]. Media coverage at the time sometimes presented enforcement with a softer tone — a fact seized on later to argue inconsistent coverage — but the policy outcomes themselves produced sustained organizing and high-profile demonstrations ^{[8] [9]}.

3. The current moment: escalation of tactics and public backlash

Reporting from the Trump years and into the recent period documents a qualitative escalation: ICE and Border Patrol operations became more visible and militarized in sanctuary cities, agents appeared masked at workplaces and courthouses, and images of family separations and street clashes intensified public outrage, prompting new waves of protest and law-and-order responses including National Guard deployments ^[3]. Analysts note arrests and detentions surged in the recent 12 months even while DHS data publication changed, complicating direct numerical comparisons ^[5].

4. Comparing “worse”: numbers versus visibility and violence

If “worse” is measured by raw removals, Obama’s tenure recorded higher cumulative removals than previous administrations and activists criticized record numbers then ^{[1] [6]}. If “worse” is measured by the visibility of confrontations, militarized tactics, and images of children and violent clashes that galvanize public outrage, the more recent period has produced scenes and incidents — including deaths tied to enforcement operations and more aggressive rhetoric from top officials — that many observers and former officials say were not present at the same scale under Obama ^{[3] [4]}.

5. Narratives, media framing, and competing agendas

Part of the difference in perceived severity comes from competing narratives: immigrant-rights groups emphasize legal and humanitarian harms and highlight Obama-era speed and scale ^{[7] [6]}, while enforcement proponents point to criminal removals and argue past administrations deported without the dramatic media moments seen recently ^[3]. Media outlets’ shifting editorial stances and selective resurfacing of older clips have amplified perceptions of inconsistent coverage and political agendas on both sides ^[8].

6. Bottom line: context matters; “worse” depends on the metric

The available reporting shows the Obama era produced higher aggregate removals that drove large protests and legal challenges, while the more recent era has featured more visible, militarized operations and high-profile confrontations that many find more alarming in tone and consequence ^{[1] [3] [4]}. A definitive answer requires choosing a metric — raw totals point to Obama’s eras as worse; public visibility, confrontations and acute scenes of family separation point to the recent period as worse — and the sources supplied document both realities without resolving which should carry greater moral or political weight ^{[5] [7]}.