The third priority, similar to its predecessor, applied to undocumented immigrants who had been issued a final order of removal, but did not prioritize fugitives or those engaged in fraud. In effect, the priority of misdemeanants was lessened from priority 1 to priority 2, recent unlawful entrance was kept at priority 2, and the priority of those who abused the visa program was increased from priority 3 to priority 2. This difference is evident through the revised second priority, which targeted undocumented immigrants convicted of three misdemeanor offenses or a “significant” misdemeanor, those who recently unlawfully entered the United States, and those who abused the visa programs. Rather, it applied only to those convicted with an aggravated felony or felony (level 1 and 2 offenders). While the first priority stayed largely the same in prioritizing undocumented immigrants engaged in or suspected of terrorism or espionage and those who participated in organized criminal gang activity, it no longer included those convicted of a misdemeanor (or a level 3 offender). These guidelines redefined the prioritization of undocumented immigrants as 1) threats to national security, border security, and public safety 2) misdemeanants and new immigration violators and 3) other immigration violators. unlawfully after removal, didn’t heed a final order of removal, or engaged in visa or identification fraud.īuilding upon this framework, then-Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Jeh Johnson issued new enforcement priorities that applied DHS-wide. The third priority consisted of undocumented immigrants who obstructed immigration controls, including those who re-entered the U.S. The second priority consisted of undocumented immigrants who recently unlawfully entered the United States.

Within this priority category, ICE would draw distinctions based on the severity of convictions: level 1 offenders were convicted of aggravated felonies, level 2 offenders were convicted of any felony, and level 3 offenders were convicted of a misdemeanor. The first priority consisted of undocumented immigrants who posed a threat to national security or public safety, including those engaged in or suspected of terrorism or espionage, those convicted of a crime or possessing outstanding criminal warrants, or those who participated in organized criminal gang activity. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Director John Morton, the Obama administration created three categories of undocumented immigrants that would be prioritized for arrest and deportation. during that time, the administration sought to channel limited resources towards more urgent threats.

Noting that ICE could only remove an estimated 400,000 undocumented immigrants a year at most, representing less than 4% of the undocumented population in the U.S. Obama administration: focus on threats and recent entrantsĬiting the limited resources available for immigration enforcement and the impossibility of deporting 11 million undocumented people, the Obama administration sought to prioritize the use of the agency’s enforcement personnel, detention space, and removal assets. Below are detailed summaries of each administration’s priorities: To this point, the Biden administration is – at least on an interim basis – returning to an Obama-like framework, in similarly utilizing limited resources to prioritize threats to national security, threats to public safety, and recent illegal entrants. Departing from this approach, the Trump administration sought to consider all undocumented immigrants high priorities for removal, expanding the categories so broadly as to render the priorities meaningless. To this end, the Obama administration created immigration enforcement priorities to channel limited resources towards individuals it deemed to be high priorities, including threats to national security, threats to public safety, and recent illegal entrants. These varying frameworks, known as immigration enforcement priorities, describe how the federal immigration enforcement apparatus deploys limited resources to arrest and/or remove non-citizens.

Over the past decade, the Obama, Trump, and Biden administrations have prioritized different categories of persons in carrying out immigration enforcement functions. For updated information on these priorities from the Biden administration, please click here. 10/27/21 update: On September 30, DHS released Guidelines for the Enforcement of Civil Immigration Law, new immigration enforcement priorities that emphasize the use of prosecutorial discretion to seek targeted enforcement.

Trump immigration policy