Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Tracking Mass Deportation by the Numbers, Not Smoke and Mirrors

Opinion

Border Patrol in Texas
"Our communities fear that the police and deportation agents are one and the same," the authors write.
John Moore/Getty Images

“Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.”

The not-so-ethereal Wizard infamously demands this in the 1939 classic film The Wizard of Oz, directed by Victor Fleming and based on the 1900 novel by Frank Baum.


In this climactic cinema moment, Dorothy and her companions realize that the Wizard is not all that he seems when, despite the smoke, mirrors, giant floating green head, and pyrotechnics, Toto pulls back the green curtain with his teeth to expose a very regular human at a complex switchboard of gadgets.

Recently, this spectacle seems familiar.

Following promises of mass deportations of illegal immigrants by Immigration & Customs Enforcement, the White House apparently is flooding social media platforms with disinformation.

Recent media reports that the U.S. government has been falsely creating the appearance of current enhanced immigration enforcement with thousands of archived press releases about ICE arrests --some decades old-- were given new time stamps: January 24, 2025.

This algorithmic funny business sends them to the top of browsers when people Google “ICE raids,” leading to terror and disinformation in immigrant communities.

As a political scientist teaching a university course on U.S.-Mexico Border Politics, I understand that historically and currently, most efforts to “control” migration have contained elements of illusion and statistical sleight of hand.

The truth can still be illuminated by studying history, exploring non-partisan sources of data and facts, double-checking information, and refusing to spread disinformation and fear.

During the campaign for “Mexican Repatriation” during the Great Depression in the 1930s under President Franklin D. Roosevelt, due to economic desperation in the U.S., strong anti-Mexican sentiment existed among many Americans. Added to the labor needs in Mexico, the U.S. and Mexican governments agreed to a pressure campaign to “return” Mexicans living in the U.S. to Mexico.

While the U.S. government estimated the number of Mexicans removed to be in the millions and touted this number in the media, University of California-Los Angeles historian Kelly Lytle Hernandez argues the number is more accurately around 400,000 people. This means the vast majority of Mexicans resisted removal despite enormous pressure.

Decades later, “Operation Wetback” in 1954 (the official title itself a slur against Mexicans) was a mass deportation effort after the end of World War II when returning U.S. GIs created less of a demand for labor to sustain the U.S. food chain.

The U.S. government claimed to have removed over a million unauthorized Mexican workers. However, Hernandez estimates that the number was closer to 300,000. She observes that after the U.S. government declared the operation a success, they changed tactics by reducing border enforcers to two-man patrols to demonstrate a precipitous drop in apprehensions.

The numbers the U.S. government keeps about immigration enforcement in more recent decades reveal numbers that do not comport with the “invasion” narrative. Considering that some people cross the U.S.-Mexico border to move to Mexico, there was net zero immigration between the U.S. and Mexico between 2005-2010, and around 130,000 Mexican nationals living in the U.S. between 2009-2014, according to Pew Research Center.

Claiming “border chaos” does not always correspond with a chaotic border. When President Donald Trump first took office in 2017 after running on an explicitly anti-Mexican, anti-immigrant message, unauthorized border crossings were at a low point. Some argued this was precisely because of Trump’s tough rhetoric, but 2017 also appears to be part of a two-decade trend.

Reliable data are available, but they require attention to detail. In a thorough video breakdown, USA Facts describes how Customs and Border Patrol (CPB) collects and shares data related to authorized and unauthorized annual immigration.

“Unauthorized immigrants,” according to the government, include those who crossed into the U.S. illegally and were apprehended, visa overstayers but also people seeking asylum, those pre-approved for temporary protective status due to humanitarian crises, and Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) recipients.

A portion of those in the “unauthorized” category have been or are being processed for legal residence --at least temporarily. Due to large refugee and asylum flows from places like Ukraine and Venezuela, people from places other than Mexico were the majority of unauthorized immigrants for many years over the last decade. Additionally, families traveling together tripled between 2020 and 2024.

Certainly, the problem is not just rhetorical disinformation. These tactics harm real people. Historically and today, the demand for foreign labor and the intense push factors that lead people to make the difficult decision to leave their homeland reproduce a situation of a large population living in the shadows without documentation or authorization.

Unauthorized immigrants are subject to unlivable wages, exploitation, blackmail, crime victimization, and poor health and safety. Deportation efforts, including workplace raids or neighborhood sweeps by ICE, terrorize immigrant communities. A Pew Research Center survey from 2022 shows that almost 40% percent of U.S. Latinos said they were worried a family member would be deported.

Detainees and deportees continue to face dehumanizing conditions at the hands of the state. Deportations crush dreams and tear families apart. Still, past efforts at mass deportation have never successfully removed this population. Despite many changes to policy, the Department of Homeland Security estimates of the total unauthorized immigrant population have remained flat since 2010.

While it is not possible for everyone to take a 15-week college course on U.S. immigration policy, it is advisable to seek primary and non-partisan sources of data, research immigration history, and double-check information before sharing it on social media to help anyone be better informed about immigration realities.

For those who are understandably scared, it is important for them to know their rights and learn the lessons of history. Everyone needs to resist the sensationalism of immigration optics and pay attention to the truth, not the man behind the curtain.

Isabel Skinner is an assistant professor in the School of Politics and International Affairs at the University of Illinois Springfield and a Public Voices Fellow with The OpEd Project.


Read More

Pro-Trump protestors
Trump supporters who attempted to overturn the 2020 election results are now seeking influential election oversight roles in battleground states.
Andrew Lichtenstein/Getty Images

Loving Someone Who Thinks the Election Was Stolen

He’s the kind of man you’d want as a neighbor in a storm.

Big guy. Strong hands. The person you’d call if your car slid into a ditch. He lives rural, works hard, supports a wife and young son, and helps care for his aging mom. Life has not been easy, but he shows up anyway.

Keep ReadingShow less
Project 2025 Drives Trump’s State Dept Overhaul

U.S. President Donald Trump in the Oval Office of the White House on December 15, 2025 in Washington, DC.

(Photo by Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)

Project 2025 Drives Trump’s State Dept Overhaul

In May 2025, I wrote about the Trump administration’s early State Department reforms aligned with Project 2025, including calls for budget cuts, mission closures, and policy realignments. At the time, the most controversial move was an executive order targeting the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), shutting it down and freezing all federal foreign aid. This decision reflected Project 2025’s recommendation to scale back and "deradicalize" USAID by eliminating programs deemed overly politicized or inconsistent with conservative values. The report specifically criticized USAID for funding progressive initiatives, such as policies addressing systemic racism and central economic planning, arguing that U.S. foreign aid had become a "massive and open-ended global entitlement program" benefiting left-leaning organizations. The process connecting the report’s ideological critiques to this executive action involved a strategic alignment between key administration officials and Project 2025 architects, who lobbied for immediate policy adjustments. This coalition effectively linked the critique to policy by framing it as a necessary step toward realigning foreign aid with national interests and conservative principles.

Back then, I predicted even more sweeping changes to the State Department. Since May, several major developments have indeed reshaped the department:

Keep ReadingShow less
SNAP Isn’t a Negotiating Tool. It’s a Lifeline.
apples and bananas in brown cardboard box
Photo by Maria Lin Kim on Unsplash

SNAP Isn’t a Negotiating Tool. It’s a Lifeline.

Millions of families just survived the longest shutdown in U.S. history. Now they’re bracing again as politicians turn food assistance into a bargaining chip.

Food assistance should not be subject to politics, yet the Trump administration is now requiring over 20 Democratic-led states to share sensitive SNAP recipient data—including Social Security and immigration details—or risk losing funding. Officials call it "program integrity," but the effect is clear: millions of low-income families may once again have their access to food threatened by political disputes.

Keep ReadingShow less
Democrats’ Redistricting Gains Face New Court Battles Ahead of 2026 Elections
us a flag on white concrete building

Democrats’ Redistricting Gains Face New Court Battles Ahead of 2026 Elections

Earlier this year, I reported on Democrats’ redistricting wins in 2025, highlighting gains in states like California and North Carolina. As of December 18, the landscape has shifted again, with new maps finalized, ongoing court battles, and looming implications for the 2026 midterms.

Here are some key developments since mid‑2025:

  • California: Voters approved Proposition 50 in November, allowing legislature‑drawn maps that eliminated three safe Republican seats and made two more competitive. Democrats in vulnerable districts were redrawn into friendlier territory.
  • Virginia: On December 15, Democrats in the House of Delegates pushed a constitutional amendment on redistricting during a special session. Republicans denounced the move as unconstitutional, setting up a legal and political fight ahead of the 2026 elections.
  • Other states in play:
    • Ohio, Texas, Utah, Missouri, North Carolina: New maps are already in effect, reshaping battlegrounds.
    • Florida and Maryland: Legislatures have begun steps toward redistricting, though maps are not yet finalized.
    • New York: Court challenges may force changes to existing maps before 2026.
    • National picture: According to VoteHub’s tracker, the current district breakdown stands at 189 Democratic‑leaning, 205 Republican‑leaning, and 41 highly competitive seats.

Implications for 2026

  • Democrats’ wins in California and North Carolina strengthen their position, but legal challenges in Virginia and New York could blunt momentum.
  • Republicans remain favored in Texas and Ohio, where maps were redrawn to secure GOP advantages.
  • The unusually high number of mid‑decade redistricting efforts — not seen at this scale since the 1800s — underscores how both parties are aggressively shaping the battlefield for 2026.
So, here's the BIG PICTURE: The December snapshot shows Democrats still benefiting from redistricting in key states, but the fight is far from settled. With courts weighing in and legislatures maneuvering, the balance of power heading into the 2026 House elections remains fluid. What began as clear Democratic wins earlier in 2025 has evolved into a multi‑front contest over maps, legality, and political control.

Hugo Balta is the executive editor of the Fulcrum and the publisher of the Latino News Network