interior immigration enforcement by the numbers
DESCRIPTION
Opinions on the extent to which the U.S. enforces immigration laws vary dramatically. Some contend that enforcement is already extremely tough, while others contend that the government fails to enforce immigration law. Rarely are these claims backed by more than one or two statistics.TRANSCRIPT
Immigration Task Force
Issue Brief: Interior Immigration Enforcement by the Numbers | 1
ISSUE BRIEF:
Interior Immigration
Enforcement by the
Numbers MAY 2013
Opinions on the extent to which the United States enforces immigration laws vary
dramatically. Some contend that enforcement is already extremely tough, while others
contend that the government fails to enforce immigration law. Rarely are these claims
backed by more than one or two statistics.
Based on a long series of Freedom of Information Act requests, the Transactional Record
Access Clearinghouse (TRAC) keeps records of immigration enforcement statistics. Their
numbers paint a more nuanced picture than either side’s advocates but leave major holes
that available data appear unable to fill.
Removals (Deportations)
The common claim that the Obama administration deports unauthorized immigrants in
record numbers is true. Figure 1 reports the total number of removals each fiscal year
between 1980 and 2011. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) defines a removal as
“the compulsory and confirmed movement of an inadmissible or deportable alien out of the
United States based on an order of removal.” These numbers do not include individuals that
were “turned back” at the border—only individuals who went through either an
administrative or judicial removal process.
Issue Brief: Interior Immigration Enforcement by the Numbers | 2
Figure 1. Number of alien removals, FY1980–2011
Source: Department of Homeland Security, Yearbook of Immigration Statistics, 2011.
It is important to note, however, that looking at only the number of deportations can be
misleading. The number of new removals ordered in immigration court has dropped each
year that President Obama has been in office, as has the number of deportation
proceedings.
Figure 2. Number of removals ordered in immigration courts,
FY1998–2013
Source: TRAC.
* FY2013 figures include only October through April.
120,0
05
106,7
39
108,7
28
108,7
28
114,6
30
126,8
83
137,3
05
198,1
37
198,9
49
145,1
44
154,8
97
157,4
32
137,7
56
129,4
58
102,7
27
49,4
62
-
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
250,000
Nu
mb
er o
f C
ases
18,0
13
17,3
79
15,2
16
19,2
11
18,6
96
23,1
05
24,5
92
24,3
36
25,8
29
34,4
27
30,0
39
33,1
89
43,6
71
42,5
42
45,6
74
50,9
24
69,6
80
114,4
32
174,8
13
183,1
14
188,4
67
189,0
26
165,1
68
211,0
98
240,6
65
246,4
31
280,9
74
319,3
82
359,7
95
393,4
57
385,1
00
391,9
53
0
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
250,000
300,000
350,000
400,000
450,0001980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
Nu
mb
er o
f D
ep
orta
tio
ns
Issue Brief: Interior Immigration Enforcement by the Numbers | 3
Figure 3. Number of deportation proceedings in immigration
courts, FY1992–2013
Source: TRAC. * FY2013 figures include only October through April.
Like the total number of deportations, court actions do not tell the whole story. This is
because not all deportations are a result of immigration court cases. Table 1 suggests that a
large and increasing share of deportations occur without ever going to immigration court.
TRAC advances two potential reasons for this, but explains that data are not sufficient to
parse between them:
1. Reinstated orders. Already-deported immigrants who reenter the country illegally do
not get a new deportation order, but they are deported again. In May 2012, 34.7
percent of all deportations were reinstated orders.
2. Administrative removals. Not all types of deportation require a hearing. For example,
immigrants previously convicted of aggravated felonies may be removed
administratively. Removals that never reach court still count as deportations, but do
not appear in statistics about immigration courts.
* Incomplete data. Elsewhere, TRAC has alleged that Immigration and Customs
Enforcement (ICE) does not release sufficient data to resolve some perceived data
inconsistencies.
89,9
44
117,7
88
130,5
88
159,0
82
190,1
14
200,2
15
188,9
38
163,9
96
160,6
83
175,9
04
179,5
97
195,6
69
204,7
17 2
85,9
33
231,6
03
213,8
67
228,7
95
225,4
02
246,9
96
239,0
31
211,1
73
89,8
33
-
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
250,000
300,000
350,000
Nu
mb
er o
f C
ases
Issue Brief: Interior Immigration Enforcement by the Numbers | 4
Table 1. Immigration court orders versus actual deportations,
FY2010–2012
FISCAL YEAR
MONTHLY AVERAGE
COURT
DEPORTATION
ORDERS
ACTUAL
DEPORTATIONS RATIO
2012 (Oct.–May) 11,339 34,321 33%
2011 13,313 33,076 40%
2010 13,764 32,739 42%
Source: TRAC.
Among those deportation cases that do reach immigration court, the share that end in an
allowance to stay in the United States has risen dramatically (Figure 4). This rapid increase
may be due in part to President Obama’s deferred action program, which allows “DREAMers”
(unauthorized immigrants brought to the United States as children) to avoid deportation.
Additionally, if the government is deporting more immigrants administratively, it could
follow that individuals who reach immigration court now tend to have less serious criminal
backgrounds. Data presented later (Figure 6) suggest that this is plausible.
Figure 4. Percent of deportation cases ending in allowance to stay
in the United States, FY1998–2013
Source: TRAC. * FY2013 figures include only October through April.
25.7
30.1
25.6
26
25.1
25.4
25.1
19.5 2
3
27.5
24.3
23.8
29.4
29.8
37.4
45.1
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
Percen
t o
f C
ases
Issue Brief: Interior Immigration Enforcement by the Numbers | 5
Spending
Money provides another measure of the U.S. government’s commitment to interior
enforcement. ICE is the principal DHS office responsible for interior enforcement of U.S.
immigration law. Its budget increased rapidly since 2005, but it has dropped slightly since
the recession began having major budget impacts in FY2009.
Figure 5. ICE budget, FY2005–2013
Source: TRAC (2005–2010), DHS (2011–2012), CRS (2013) Note: 2005–2010 figures represent total expenditures. 2011–2012 represent enacted budget. 2013 represents pre-sequester enacted budget.
Criminal Activity
The extent to which the government deports immigrants accused of crimes (other than
entering or remaining in the United States without authorization) often rises to prominence
in the immigration debate. Since 2008, the share of deportation orders sought in
immigration court due to criminal activity has fallen. As explained above, however, many
immigrants who have been found guilty of aggravated felonies are deported without ever
going to immigration court.
Notably, the data below only represent situations in which ICE cites criminal activity as a
basis for deportation. For some immigrants with criminal histories, ICE may choose to cite
other reasons in its pursuit of deportation. According to TRAC, ICE has stated that it “cannot
reliably identify” the total number of cases in which the immigrant had a criminal history. As
with the issue of deportation proceedings above, the available data are not equipped to
answer all questions.
$3.5
6
$4.2
1
$4.7
3
$5.5
8
$5.9
3
$5.7
4
$5.8
0
$5.8
6
$5.7
4
$0
$1
$2
$3
$4
$5
$6
$7
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
To
tal B
ud
get
(B
illi
on
s o
f D
oll
ars)
Issue Brief: Interior Immigration Enforcement by the Numbers | 6
Figure 6. Deportation orders sought in immigration court based on
alleged criminal activity, January 2008–March 2012
Source: TRAC. * Preliminary counts.
A more detailed version of Figure 6 is available here.
Similarly, the number of criminal prosecutions from Customs and Border Protection (CBP)
and ICE referrals has fallen in recent years. The table below displays the number of criminal
prosecutions over the previous 12 months.
Table 2. Trend in criminal prosecutions from referrals to CBP and
ICE, January 2009–August 2012 (previous 12 months)
CBP ICE TOTAL PERCENT CHANGE OVER
PREVIOUS 12 MONTHS
Jan. 2009 79,495 18,466 97,961
Aug. 2009 79,513 19,034 98,547 0.60%
Aug. 2010 73,100 19,514 92,614 -6.02%
Aug. 2011 69,150 20,989 90,139 -2.67%
Aug. 2012 63,701 17,795 81,496 -9.59%
Source: TRAC.
In ICE detention centers, the majority of immigrants have a criminal conviction. Table 3
displays the top-ten most serious convictions for those with a criminal conviction, and the
source table displays the most serious conviction for all those who were in in ICE detention
centers as of October 2011.
17.4
8%
15.0
0%
15.0
7%
15.5
2%
15.9
1%
15.8
9%
16.2
8%
17.3
0%
17.4
9%
16.1
8%
15.3
0%
16.0
0%
15.4
1%
15.3
7%
14.4
1%
14.3
5%
14.4
7%
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
14%
16%
18%
20%
Percen
t o
f C
ases
Issue Brief: Interior Immigration Enforcement by the Numbers | 7
Table 3. Most serious charge for ICE detainees by frequency,
October 2011
NUMBER PERCENT
Total 32,298
No Criminal Conviction Recorded 13,185 40.8%
Criminal Conviction Recorded 19,113 59.2%
RANK MOST SERIOUS CHARGE FOR THOSE
WITH CRIMINAL CONVICTION(S) NUMBER PERCENT
1 Driving Under Influence, Liquor 2,580 13.5%
2 Traffic Offense 1,344 7.0%
3 Marijuana, Possession 1,038 5.4%
4 Cocaine, Possession 979 5.1%
5 Dangerous Drugs 909 4.8%
6 Assault 888 4.6%
7 Larceny 735 3.8%
8 Cocaine, Sell 556 2.9%
9
Illegal Entry (INA SEC.101(a)(43)(O),
8USC1325 only) 528 2.8%
10 Robbery 488 2.6%
Source: TRAC.
Court Backlog
S. 744, the current immigration proposal, mandates the appointment of additional
immigration judges. This could help clear the large and growing backlog in immigration
courts. This backlog could be part of ICE’s motivation for bypassing immigration courts at a
higher rate (presuming, as data suggest, that the agency is actually doing so).
Between 1998 and 2013, the backlog of cases in immigration courts increased by more than
150 percent. The increase may be partly attributable to Operation Streamline, which began
in December 2005 in the Del Rio Border Patrol Sector. The operation requires that “all
prosecutable aliens, regardless of nationality, apprehended within the geographic
boundaries be prosecuted.” Since that time, Border Patrol has initiated several similar
operations across the southwest border, and the number of pending cases has nearly
doubled.
Issue Brief: Interior Immigration Enforcement by the Numbers | 8
Figure 7. Number of pending cases in immigration courts,
FY1998–2013
Source: TRAC. * FY2013 figures as of April 2013.
During the same period, the average processing time for immigration courts increased by
nearly 175 percent.
Figure 8. Immigration court processing time for all types of
charges
Source: TRAC. * FY2013 figures include only October through April.
129,5
05
123,0
61
125,7
34
149,3
38
166,0
61
169,5
98
167,5
43
184,2
11
168,8
27
174,9
35
186,1
08
223,8
09
262,7
99
297,5
51
325,0
44
330,5
33
-
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
250,000
300,000
350,000
Nu
mb
er o
f C
ases
184 2
25
238
234
250 282
283
228
228
243
231
234 2
83 311
404
504
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
Nu
mb
er o
f D
ays
Issue Brief: Interior Immigration Enforcement by the Numbers | 9
An Incomplete Picture
As noted above, deportations and ICE funding have hit record numbers in recent years. On
its face, this suggests that immigration enforcement has increased as well. However, court
activity around deportations has fallen, and unauthorized immigrants who reach
immigration court now stand a much better chance of being allowed to stay in the United
States.
Unfortunately, ICE has not released data that fully explain how these trends fit together.
Data suggest that the Obama administration’s use of immigration courts in deportation
proceedings is declining. However, it is unclear how much of this is due to the deportation of
previously deported individuals, to the increased use of administrative proceedings, or to
some other factors. In turn, this makes it difficult to determine how heavily ICE emphasizes
the deportation of criminals. TRAC, which has endeavored to make these data public for
years, has issued strongly worded rebukes of the quality and quantity of data that ICE
maintains and provides.
It is certain that the Obama administration has deported unauthorized immigrants in record
numbers and that immigration courts have become much more likely to allow immigrants to
stay in the United States. The largest take away, though, may be that the available
information makes interior enforcement difficult to assess.