DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Palus Politicus Border Crossings

I made a comment in another thread about Biden's failure on the southern border.

It made me wonder what the real picture is. When and why did this issue suddenly become one of the hot topic buttons - if not the most important hot button issue. Certainly I remember trump and MAGA being somewhat obsessed with this topic and White Replacement theory during his run up to term 1 ... I've seen the numbers under Biden - but I wondered what the numbers were like in previous administrations ... so I went to ChatGPT to see what actual data there is. The answers sort of surprised me.

Here's some of the information I gathered.

Using fiscal-year data, the broad picture is:

Administration ------- Fiscal years used SW Border Patrol apprehensions / encounters Average per year
George W. Bush ------- FY2001–08 ------------ ~ 8.02 million ------------------------------------- ~ 1.00m
Obama ----------------- FY2009–16 ------------ ~ 3.31 million ------------------------------------- ~ 413k
Trump term 1 --------- FY2017–20 ------------ ~ 1.95 million ------------------------------------- ~ 488k
Biden ------------------ FY2021–24 ------------ ~ 7.46 million ------------------------------------- ~ 1.86m

important context:
Bush actually had extremely high illegal-crossing traffic, particularly early in his presidency. Southwest Border Patrol apprehensions were about 1.24m in FY2001, 1.17m in 2005 and 1.07m in 2006, before declining sharply to 705,000 in 2008. DHS's historical data show those numbers directly.

Obama inherited that downward trend and experienced historically low numbers. Southwest apprehensions fell as low as 327,577 in FY2011, then rose during the Central American migration waves: 479,371 in 2014 and 408,870 in 2016

Trump's first term wasn't uniformly low. FY2017 was extraordinarily low at about 304,000, and FY2018 about 397,000. But FY2019 jumped to 851,508, driven heavily by Central American families. FY2020 fell to about 401,000, although that year was heavily affected by COVID and Title 42

Biden's numbers were on an entirely different scale from Obama or Trump 1. Border Patrol southwest encounters were roughly 1.66m in FY2021, 2.21m in FY2022, 2.06m in FY2023 and 1.53m in FY2024.

BUT .... some nuance.

The Biden/late-Trump numbers contain substantial repeat crossing because of Title 42. Someone expelled rapidly into Mexico could try again and be counted again. CBP estimated that between March 2020 and February 2021, about 38% of encounters involved people who had already been encountered previously. CRS therefore estimated roughly 1.27 million unique individuals for FY2021 versus the headline encounter count of about 1.66 million

Also: Border Patrol was much less effective at detecting/intercepting crossings during the Bush era than it later became. DHS estimates its southwest-border apprehension rate at only about 33–41% during much of 2001–08, versus roughly 72–80% in the later Obama/Trump years. That means Bush's ~1 million annual apprehensions probably represented considerably more attempted illegal crossings than the same number would today.

So what might be the historically fair conclusion?

The data tells a more interesting story than either party's talking points:

Bush: enormous illegal migration problem, especially 2001–06. In absolute attempted crossings, it was undoubtedly much worse than the apprehension statistics appear because Border Patrol caught a smaller percentage.

Obama: by far the lowest sustained southwest-border apprehension levels of these four presidencies. There were serious surges in 2014 and 2016, but nothing approaching Biden-era totals.

Trump 1: very low initially, followed by a major 2019 crisis, then COVID/Title 42 dramatically altered migration and enforcement in 2020.

Biden: unquestionably the largest recorded border-encounter surge of the modern period, particularly 2021–23. The idea that there wasn't an exceptional border surge during Biden's presidency simply isn't consistent with CBP data. But saying "7.5 million illegal immigrants entered America under Biden" is also incorrect: 7.5 million is encounters, not successful entries or unique immigrants who remained in the country.

One other fact worth noting: Biden eventually tightened the border substantially in June 2024. After his asylum restrictions were introduced, Border Patrol encounters fell more than 50%, reaching 83,536 in June, the lowest monthly level since January 2021

AND: Something I saw about Biden jumped out at me related to how many migrants were "released into the USA" - the numbers were much higher than Trump but not recorded for Obama and Bush .... May 2023 and March 2024, 67% of unauthorized migrants encountered at the southwest border were released into the United States to await immigration proceedings. ** that sounds horrific - but additional digging shows: 67% released into USA for processing but → 15% granted asylum + 45% deported + 7% disappeared.

SO --- I would assume the big Biden numbers are going to get the attention and spammed across Social Media platforms without any nuance, certainly that was what I had experienced. But these are only encounters and they now include this 38% of previous people encountered/returned. The processing numbers were much bigger under Biden - people being allowed entry to be processed. I am sure the headline number gets the attention - not the number that were later deported or the number of cases that were legitimate or granted.

AND SO
--- Obama had better numbers than any of them, so how did this become an issue that MAGA believed Democrats were soft on and that there was an 'open border' ??

--- And while Bushes numbers were bad, the reality is undoubtedly they were much worse. Using the numbers above - 1m per year at a say 37% rate vs 1.86m at 76% apprehension rate .... the total numbers of those attempting to cross become Bush (2.7m per year) and Biden (2.44m per year) .... so a bit like the myth that Reagan was for small government, or that Republicans are fiscally responsible, or that the economy does better under Republicans ... this narrative that Republicans have traditionally been stronger on the southern border than the Democrats is one more fake narrative. Not surprising ... but yes, I was actually surprised.

Responding to the bold & underlined specifically here: Biden was campaigning for re-election in the lead up to those June 2024 numbers and was getting dragged in the media/polls before he suddenly decided to do what a large number of Americans wanted and cracked down on illegal immigration. Unfortunately for Biden, it was seen as the political ploy that it quite possibly was and many voters expected him (/his handlers) to go back to what they had been doing if he was re-elected.

More generically, estimates (or "science"/data collection) rely on the accuracy and methodology of the ones doing the estimating (or "science"/data collection.) Depressingly, in the current political/cultural climate, those doing the estimating (or "science"/data collection) all too often have agendas. ChatGPT pulling numbers from somewhere without links and references doesn't move the needle much for me.

I think more than the numbers, the perception of the parties is based on their messaging. One party is seen as looking for excuses to let immigrants in. The other is seen as trying to keep illegals out. Unfortunately, groups tend to worry much more about their in groups than others. And for many people it seems negatives tend to resonate much more deeply, so people can seek personal risk avoidance over positive policy. While many people saw Trump negatively, not all saw him as negative towards them. On the other hand, many people saw Biden as worried more about people that weren't them at their personal expense.

...Why are we still talking about Biden?

Great point on the Biden numbers lowering as a result of efforts made due to an upcoming election.

Questioning the methodology and the data that is available reminds me of how the right-wing media tore into Obama’s phenomenal employment numbers and economic metrics. They were calculated the same way they had been under every other administration, but suddenly, because it was Obama, the numbers and the methodology were “fake.” Funnily enough, when Trump took office and the numbers continued to look good — calculated in exactly the same way — all the right-wing media analysts stopped calling them fake.

You questioning the data — which is collected and recorded in the same way across administrations — is much the same as people questioning the security of elections despite accusations of mass election fraud repeatedly being shot down in the courts and no evidence existing to support claims of widespread fraud. It’s deflection and enablement.

You’ve also entirely — deliberately, it would seem — missed the point and suggested this post is about Biden. It isn’t.

The post is about the data-driven, observable facts on border crossings and encounters, comparing two Republican presidents with two Democratic presidents. One Democrat and one Republican were really bad. One Democrat and one Republican were significantly better. Trump had help because of Covid; Obama did not, and Obama’s numbers are still better than Trump’s.

The conclusion is that it’s another political myth that Democrats simply want an open border and are inherently worse than Republicans on border enforcement.

One democratic president said "come one, come all" and actually campaigned on it.

And then he followed through. He said we should assume everyone showing up is just a poor soul, seeking asylum.

You're so blind that you're actually 100% ignoring the most important fact... when they showed up at Biden's border, they were given a care package and a ride to their favorite city; no questions asked.

It's like if one person robbed a liquor store with a knife and another walked into a coliseum with an AK and opened fire... "Well, they both only committed one crime". That doesn't really tell any kind of story at all, does it? (But if your Minister of Truth was a democrat his only response would be "that's true", so there's that.)


Why do you never mention how many entered the country? Nobody cares how many "encounters" there were.

The Department of Homeland Security plans to transport migrants awaiting immigration proceedings from U.S. cities along the southern border farther into the interior of the country, beginning with Los Angeles in the coming weeks, according to internal documents obtained by NBC News.

The plan would alleviate overcrowding along the border, where record numbers of border crossers have overwhelmed the capacity of shelters in some cities, at times leading Customs and Border Protection, or CBP, to release migrants on the street to fend for themselves.

Typically, migrants who are allowed to stay in the country and make asylum claims are released to shelters run by religious and nongovernmental organizations after they are released from CBP custody. From there, the migrants pay for flights and bus transportation to cities where they go before immigration judges who will rule on their asylum claims.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/im...ants-cities-deeper-us-starting-rcna32530

It seems they paid for it. I suppose he could have left them all in Texas and let Abbot deal with it.

I think of the two posts mine seems fact based with numbers to support what happened - yours is an emotional knee jerk reaction full of emotive statements that do not resemble fact based reality.

The very fact that of the 67% that were let into the country for processing under Biden - 45% were returned, 7% disappeared and the remaining 15% granted assylum. Your claims and statements do not remotely reflect this. You might think the 22% who stayed (15+7) is too high. No poblem - but that's not your claim or your discussion point.

And once again - no engagement on the broader picture of Obama and Trump and Bush.

So tell me how many entered the country? A number or piece of data that is not recorded and can only guessed at. And once again - go back to Bush - where was the outcry under Bush when apprehensions ran much much lower as a % of people crossing than under Obama/Trump and Bush?

We should embrace their logic and call it BDS.

No matter how long trump is president everything he fails at will still be Biden's fault.

My problem is that the "same way" has always seemed to be a bad way, to me, and both sides have manipulated the numbers in their favor (or are collecting the data in a way that allows for better numbers/ are generally the "optimistic" take) and I find some of the underlying assumptions highly questionable. It's not all really observable facts, the percentages (specifically apprehension rate) are extrapolated "facts" (guesses.)

There's a .pdf here (https://www.migrationpolicy.org/pub...-border-security-and-immigration-control) that goes over many of the considerations and limitations on data collection (and potential different approaches) on the immigration/border security issue. I don't agree with everything in it, but it brings up things I find worth considering.

Biden was mentioned the most in your post and was the one with a forward looking comment. It was the "the big Biden numbers are going to get the attention and spammed across Social Media platforms without any nuance" part that had me commenting why do people care about Biden now(/"still")? He's politically done.

Unfortunately, in politics, perception is too often seen as "reality," and both sides play into the "myth."

You may not see it as "a good way" but it's the same way which gives you an equal playing ground by which to compare.

As per usual you can "question" anything. Even if there are no legitimate facts or reasons to question them other than some self created suspicion.

I don't see anything wrong with being cynical about things that have given you cause to be cynical about. But being cynical about everything all the time sounds more like paranoia.

Is it paranoia when politicians have given cause to doubt everything they say?

If they were consistently honest, truthful, and transparent, I wouldn't doubt them nearly as much. Sadly, truthfulness and transparency are in short supply. Manipulation is how they seem to operate now.

Yet the numbers are gathered and calculated in the same method no matter who is in power. I really don't disagree with your general premise however.

He's trying to have a fact-based discussion where the former (illegal crossings) by definition can't be reliably measured and is usually estimated off of the latter.

And because people have no idea how many crossed the border illegally. Certainly not Republicans. They first claimed it was 10 million with no evidence to support it. Then they claimed it was 15 million. Now some of them even claim it was 20 million. Claims that there are 100 million undocumented immigrants in the U.S. has been made by figures such as former Border Patrol Sector Chief Greg Bovino and Texas political candidate Bo French, who stated the number included 50 million undocumented immigrants alongside other visa holders.

It's as if they're throwing darts at a dart board blindfolded and then say, "Why do you never mention how many entered the country?" as they don't even know the answer to that question themselves.

You posted no facts. You posted fantasy. I think you thought you asked AI but actually asked the family pet. And besides all that, you're looking at a very small snapshot of the entire Biden Border Disaster. You're taking a small window and extrapolating fake numbers to paint a picture that does not exist. Period.



What is this dude even talking about? Any idea??

"May 2023 and March 2024, 67% of unauthorized migrants encountered at the southwest border were released into the United States to await immigration proceedings. ** that sounds horrific - but additional digging shows: 67% released into USA for processing but → 15% granted asylum + 45% deported + 7% disappeared."


The person you are quoting is attempting to argue that while a high percentage of migrants were initially released into the U.S., the vast majority were eventually processed out or denied status over the long term.

However, from a data, mathematical, and logistical standpoint, the "dude" is completely scrambling the timelines and the math. He is treating a process that takes 5 to 10 years in the immigration court backlog as if it already concluded.

Here is exactly what is wrong with his logic and why the numbers do not add up:


1. The Timeline Conflict (The Math is Impossible)

The quote specifically isolates a window from May 2023 to March 2024.

As of today, the immigration court backlog is so massive that the average asylum case takes several years to reach a final judge's decision.

It is mathematically impossible for 15% of that specific group to have already been granted asylum, and for 45% to have already been formally deported by a judge. The vast majority of people who entered in that late-2023 window are still waiting for their very first initial court hearings.


2. He is Conflating "Instant Deportations" with "Court Deportations"

The person is likely taking a broad, historic statistic (like "ultimately, 45% of asylum cases are denied and result in a removal order") and incorrectly applying it to this specific 10-month window.

If 67% of people were released into the interior, that means they are inside the U.S. You cannot have 67% released into the country, and then have 45% of that same group deported within a few months. The physical and legal infrastructure to deport hundreds of thousands of released interior migrants in less than a year simply did not exist.


3. The "7% Disappeared" Estimate is Way Too Low

The claim that only 7% "disappeared" (meaning failed to show up to court) severely understates the tracking breakdown during that specific May 2023–March 2024 window.

This was the exact peak era of the "Parole + ATD" quick-releases and "Notices to Report" discussed earlier.

Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and Government Accountability Office (GAO) audits revealed that during high-surge periods, up to 30% to 40% of migrants released on quick-parole failed to check in with ICE or vanished before their formal Notice to Appear (NTA) was even filed in court.


What He Was Trying to Say (And Got Wrong)

He was likely trying to repeat an old immigration data talking point used by advocates: “Don’t panic about the 67% initial release rate, because once they go through the whole court system, 45% will be ordered deported, 15% will get asylum, and only a few will skip town.”

But by pinning those final outcome percentages to a specific, recent 10-month window, he made the argument completely nonsensical. He described a multi-year judicial pipeline as if it happened overnight.



If you want, I can pull up the actual TRAC Immigration Court data to show you the real breakdown of what percentage of cases from 2023 are still stuck in limbo versus how many have actually been decided. Would you like to see that?

Sounds great, lets do it...


The actual data from the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC) at Syracuse University blows the "67% released, 45% deported, 15% asylum" argument completely out of the water.

The real data shows that the overwhelming majority of migrants who entered during that 2023–2024 window are still inside the U.S. with their cases completely unresolved.


1. The Real Baseline: The Overwhelming Backlog

The core reality of the U.S. immigration court system is gridlock. The historical progression of active, pending cases highlights this crisis:

End of 2022: ~2.0 million pending cases

End of 2023: ~2.8 million pending cases

End of 2024: ~3.7 million pending cases

Current Backlog: Over 3.1 million active pending cases.

The system is so flooded that individual immigration judges are forced to manage an average of 4,500 active cases each. For a migrant released into the interior between May 2023 and March 2024, their case didn't finish—it was simply added to the bottom of this massive pile.


2. What Actually Happened to 2023–2024 Cases?

Because the backlog forces wait times to stretch across multiple years, TRAC tracking shows the true status of the people who entered in that exact window:~80% to 85% are Still Pending: The vast majority of people released in that 10-month window have not received a final asylum grant or a deportation order. They are legally living and working in the U.S. interior, waiting for court dates that are frequently scheduled years into the future.

The "Deportation" Deception: The 45% deportation claim is an entirely fabricated timeline.

In a typical year, immigration judges only manage to issue formal removal or voluntary departure orders in about 35% of the small fraction of cases they actually manage to complete.

The Sinking Asylum Grant Rate: The 15% asylum grant claim is also inaccurate. While asylum grant rates previously peaked above 50% in mid-2023, a combination of rocket-dockets, rule changes, and court restructuring caused approvals to crater. By late 2024, the grant rate dropped to 35%, and recent TRAC tracking reveals that monthly asylum denial rates have skyrocketed.


3. The "7% Disappeared" Fallacy

The assertion that only 7% vanished is contradicted by compliance tracking. During the chaotic May 2023 border surge, the administration leaned heavily on the rapid "Parole with Conditions" and "Notice to Report" (NTR) pipelines.

Under these protocols, migrants were released without an official court date and simply told to report to an ICE office within 60 days. Government audits revealed that up to 30% to 40% of migrants failed to check in within that mandatory window, completely detaching from federal monitoring before their cases even officially entered the court data system.

Summary: The person you quoted took a snapshot of a 10-month window of intense border releases and assigned a fictional set of final legal outcomes to it. The real TRAC data proves the exact opposite: the vast majority of those migrants are still here, their cases are completely unresolved, and they are buried inside a 3.1-million-case judicial backlog.

He forgot to include facts for the fact-based discussion. At least any of the ones that matter.

So how many did cross the border illegally? Give us this exact figure you want someone else to give you which Republicans have claimed was 10 million, 15 million and 20 million?

Thanks for trying to come up with something real - while addressing one aspect of the post.

You picked one point out of many. And you have countered it what looks like to be some good discussion points. I'll have to read them more thoroughly and give you some specific responses.... Or maybe I can pick one sentance that I disagree with and just attack that? Which is what you've done?

As for how many entered the country illegally - your question. I am guessing you are agreeing that this is an impossible number to know and if you want to cast aside the data on encounters and the only factual piece of information we have, then it would be possible for someone to argue that just as many entered under Trump as Biden or Bush or Obama ... because we simply don't know. Is that the point you were making? (Do I need purple?)

Since all you did was ask AI to respond to my one line - I pumped your response into AI myself to return the favor:

His basic criticism of your 15/45/7 numbers is fair; these are the places where his response itself goes off the rails.

His “80–85% are still pending” figure appears unsupported. He specifically claims that “TRAC tracking” shows 80–85% of the May 2023–March 2024 released cohort remained pending. I cannot find that TRAC analysis. TRAC does show a massive overall backlog—3.716 million cases by September 2024—but that's the entire immigration-court population, not this particular cohort.

So he's apparently doing the same thing he's criticizing you for: taking a statistic about one population and applying it to another.

His “30–40% failed to check in/vanished” claim is not supported by the cited government evidence. The relevant GAO investigation found that approximately 75% of the family members released under the 2021 Notice-to-Report process had reported to ICE as required by the measurement date. That leaves about 25%, not 30–40%, and crucially this was a specific 2021 family-unit program, not the May 2023–March 2024 cohort he's discussing.

There is older GAO data showing about a quarter of people unenrolled from ICE's ATD monitoring program during 2015–20 had absconded. But again, that's an entirely different population and period.

So I would challenge him directly to produce the claimed DHS/GAO 30–40% audit. I can't find it.

He claims to know the eventual status of a cohort for which the government itself has serious tracking limitations. This is probably the biggest conceptual problem. A new 2026 GAO investigation found that ICE does not readily have information identifying people paroled at the southwest border and was not monitoring them as required.

That makes confident statements such as “TRAC shows 80–85% of these exact people are still pending” particularly questionable. The federal government's own watchdog says there are significant deficiencies connecting CBP parole data with subsequent ICE monitoring.

The solid facts are actually simpler.

Your 67% number is legitimate. MPI, using DHS data, reports that 67% of unauthorized migrants encountered at the southwest border from May 2023 through March 2024 were released into the United States to await immigration-court proceedings. MPI also says it would be years before many of their asylum claims were adjudicated because of the enormous backlog.

Your 15% asylum / 45% deported / 7% disappeared breakdown is not something we can substantiate. That's the mistake in your post—which originated with my earlier answer.

But his replacement numbers aren't substantiated either. In particular, I would not accept:

80–85% of that specific cohort still pending

or

30–40% of that cohort failed to report/vanished

without sources demonstrating that they refer specifically to that population.

There is also a useful piece of data that demonstrates why this is complicated: in FY2024 immigration courts completed about 911,000 cases, while receiving about 1.799 million new cases. Of completed cases, about 38% resulted in removal orders or voluntary departure.

But you cannot take that 38% and say 38% of Biden's border releases were deported—just as you cannot take the 3.7m backlog and infer that 80–85% of the May 2023–March 2024 cohort remained pending.

In summary:

He's right that my 15/45/7 breakdown isn't supported, and I'll happily correct it(That's the mistake in your post—which originated with my earlier answer). But his AI then invents certainty in the other direction. I can't find the TRAC data supporting his claim that 80–85% of that specific cohort remains pending, nor the DHS/GAO audit supposedly showing 30–40% of that cohort “vanished.” The actual government data don't allow us to cleanly follow that specific 67% from release through final disposition—which is precisely why neither of us should be assigning made-up final percentages to them.

YOU picked the sentence for me, duh!

You RE-stated your fake facts and complained that I didn't address them.

Can't make it up.


And just so we're clear, "your AI" is saying it can't find the TRAC data and that makes mine wrong? 🤣

Are you sure you're not using a Magic 8 Ball?

Here's the link to the TRAC data: https://tracreports.org/tracatwork/detail/A5750.html

And I'll do the math for you, in case you don't have access to a calculator either... record-setting 500,000 cases processed at the time / 3.6 million backlog / that means 86.12% have not been processed. "My AI" felt bad for you and underestimated.


And yes, we can fairly accurately estimate how many have entered the country. To do that, we'll have to cover all the ways Sleepy Joe ushered them in, and there are plenty.

I'm not going to tackle that at the moment because I don't have an hour+ to dig through: Illegal crossing, crossing he magically made temporarily legal with "It's an app, man!", crossing at the northern border (which decimate any previous administration), the crazy amount of people that were flown-in to bypass the border directly, and the record setting "got aways".

Priceless, coming from you.

They are , Arent you listening?

j/c:

The revisionist history on this is astounding.