Newsweek Contributors Debate: Are Trump's Deportations Effective?

President Donald Trump's immigration enforcement methods have come under legal scrutiny, with the "Alligator Alcatraz" facility in Florida in particular facing legal challenges.

Have Trump's immigration policies been a successful deterrent? Or draconian violations of migrant rights? Newsweek contributors Paul du Quenoy and Matt Robison debate:

Paul du Quenoy:

President Trump ran for reelection promising to close the southern border and repatriate the millions of illegal immigrants who are criminals simply by virtue of having entered our country illegally. Since he returned to office in January, the border has been closed. A reinforced ICE and other law enforcement agencies have deported more people than the last administration despite resistance from leftist local governments and activist judges. Detention centers like Florida's "Alligator Alcatraz" are fully legal; the recent federal court ruling against that facility rests entirely on supposed violations of environmental laws. All told, the U.S. has 1.6 million fewer illegal immigrants now than it did in January, with positive effects on crime, homelessness, social services dependency, native-born employment rates, and border security sure to follow.

Matt Robison:

Surprise: I agree with you, at least on one part—President Trump's measures have been somewhat effective. Why "somewhat?" Because the number you cited comes from Pew Research, which pointed to President Biden's restrictions on asylum, which dramatically decreased border crossings, as a top reason for the decline. And here's a stunner: Biden actually deported more people in 2024 than Trump is currently on track for. What Trump has definitely done more effectively is to create photo ops of ICE raids, Stalinist renditions of migrants to foreign gulags to be tortured and sexually assaulted, and of course, the performatively abusive "Alligator Alcatraz." So, if Biden was both more responsible for stopping the immigrant flow and more effective at deporting migrants already here, is Trump's draconian approach justifiable? Is a country where masked 18 year-olds snatch people off the streets really what Constitutional conservatives want to stand for?

du Quenoy:

The 1.6 million illegal immigrants who have departed the country this year includes large numbers whom the Trump administration incentivized to leave (i.e. "self-deport"). Biden gave no such incentive. That, combined with formal deportations, means President Trump has already surpassed Biden's 2024 deportations. With $100 billion in ICE funding, those numbers are expected to ramp up even further.

Robison:

Facts first: according to Trump's own public figures, Trump will deport about 500,000 people this year. Biden deported 685,000. Where we agree: like most Americans, I want much more controlled immigration. The difference is how. I'm on board with the Marco Rubio of ten years ago: strong borders, a closely monitored guest worker plan to support American farmers, and an orderly plan to deal with people already here. What most Americans oppose are Trump's kind of "incentives," like deporting American citizen kids with cancer to punish their parents.

du Quenoy:

Predictive deportation statistics are not "fact," nor do they account for either the incentivized self-deportations, which Democrats never pursued, or the massive policy obstruction Trump has faced from the courts, radical Left local governments, or the media. The truth is that the electorate voted for mass removals of illegal immigrants—and it is getting them.

Robison:

One can find the same information in other sources, as well as the fact that President Obama oversaw way more deportations than Trump. I can't agree that threatening people with torture in foreign gulags to "incentivize" them into leaving while deporting American cancer kids—all of which clearly isn't working as well as Obama's deportation approach—makes Trump more effective. If your end goal is removal of illegal immigrants, then wasn't Obama's program—which resulted in more deportations—clearly better?

du Quenoy:

The removal of 1.6 million individuals unlawfully present in the country in a seven-month period despite opposition from the courts, local governments, and almost every civic institution is a major achievement, full stop. As for the incentives, a free plane ticket home and a $1,000 check hardly rise to "torture." With increased budgets and a rising number of favorable court rulings, the removals will accelerate, giving the American people what they voted for and deserve.

Robison:

Since both Obama and Biden achieved more deportations, it seems they were able to overcome any such obstacles. Perhaps it was their focus on getting the job done rather than being provocative for Fox viewers? The idea that fewer people are here because of "a free plane ticket" is laughable. Fewer people are here because Biden clamped down on asylum last summer and Trump has achieved a level of deportation that is lower than Biden's, though still high. And yes, sending people to a Salvadoran gulag to be sexually assaulted constitutes torture.

du Quenoy:

Critics may laugh all they want, but the sobering statistics indicate a massive decline in the number of illegal aliens due to the legal, effective, and justified policies of the Trump administration. To the extent Democratic presidencies enacted similar deportation policies, they faced no partisan opposition from radical Left judges, local governments, and civic institutions—including the media, higher education, and the federal bureaucracy—that a majority of Americans no longer trust. Trump's policies are a tremendous improvement over the Biden administration's de facto open border. The latter allowed tens or hundreds of thousands of illegal aliens with criminal records to swarm the country in just four years. Removing that presence will take time and resources, but after seven months of decisive action, the overwhelmingly anti-illegal immigration electorate has much to be pleased about and look forward to.

Robison:

Look, there are clearly many areas where you and I—and most Americans—agree. We are on the same page both that strong borders are important, and also that Presidents Obama, Biden, and Trump all made border control a priority. The numbers clearly show that the most successful was President Obama, whose deportations and border enforcement actions both dwarf Trump's. So the area where we clearly disagree, where the parties disagree—and what this whole debate is about—is Trump's extreme measures: "Alligator Alcatraz," having masked teenagers snatch people off the streets, and sending people off to be abused at overseas prisons. The fact that Obama was way more successful than Trump at removing illegal immigrants without doing these un-American things shows how unjustified and ineffective they are. And most Americans agree that they are against our values, our faiths, and what this country stands for.

Paul du Quenoy is President of the Palm Beach Freedom Institute.

Matt Robison is a writer, podcast host, and former congressional staffer.

The views expressed in this article are the writers' own.