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.