Federal
Deportations Climb to Nearly 980,000 Under the Second Trump Administration
The Trump administration carried out an estimated 980,000 deportations during the first 18 months of President Donald Trump’s second term, according to a new Migration Policy Institute analysis by former Department of Homeland Security (DHS) official Marc Rosenblum. The analysis projects approximately 660,000 deportations for fiscal year 2026, a 26 percent increase from the annual average under the Biden administration. Those numbers, however, still fall short of the administration’s goal of 1 million deportations per year, which it said additional funding from Congress would allow it to achieve. More than two-thirds of the 980,000 deportations involved people initially encountered at the border, although deportations following arrests within the United States have steadily increased. The total also includes about 170,000 voluntary departures, with advocates saying some people abandoned their immigration cases to avoid remaining in detention. The findings come as DHS has largely stopped releasing detailed enforcement data, making the administration’s deportation claims difficult to independently verify.
The analysis found that only 20 percent of those deported had a criminal conviction. Among those deported who had lived in the United States for at least two years, 71 percent had never been convicted of a crime, despite the administration’s stated focus on people with serious criminal histories. Recent cases illustrate the broader reach of its enforcement efforts. Luis Arreguin, a father of four who had lived near Fresno since he was five, was detained on his way to work and deported to Mexico within 16 days. ICE said Arreguin had a criminal history and had previously been deported, although he reported no recent interactions with law enforcement, and a public records search found no recent criminal history. Moussa Diawara, a Texas father with no criminal record, was deported to Ghana and days later sent to Mali after local officials forced him onto a flight, despite a U.S. immigration judge’s previous ruling that he would likely face persecution there. Of the 63 people aboard Diawara’s deportation flight to Ghana, 62 percent had no criminal record, 19 percent had traffic violations, and 19 percent had been charged with or convicted of other offenses.
U.S. Plans to Deport Afghans to Pakistan, Raising Fears of Return to Taliban Rule
The Trump administration is preparing to deport Afghans to Pakistan, including relatives of people who worked with U.S. military forces before the fall of Kabul, according to reports from attorneys, advocacy organizations and a federal official familiar with the plans. Afghans in immigration detention have received notice from immigration officers that they could be placed on a flight expected to depart in the coming weeks. The flight has not been publicly announced. AfghanEvac, an organization supporting Afghan allies, said family members of former U.S. military partners were among those notified. Human Rights First warned on October 29 that the planned operation could involve hundreds of Afghans and result in their forced return to Afghanistan through Pakistan.
The proposed transfers raise concerns that Pakistan could send deportees onward to Afghanistan, where people associated with U.S. forces and aid organizations face risks of retaliation under Taliban rule. Pakistan is already forcibly returning large numbers of displaced Afghans, and Human Rights First explained that routing removals through another country would not eliminate the danger of persecution or torture. The organization cited arbitrary detention, executions and retaliatory violence in Afghanistan, alongside severe restrictions on women’s and girls’ access to education, employment and public life. It called for the flights to be stopped and for congressional oversight, warning that the operation could become the first large-scale U.S. deportation flight returning Afghans to Taliban-controlled Afghanistan.
Legal
Justices Decline to Restore Biden-Era Rule Allowing Deportation Case Suspensions
The Supreme Court declined on October 27 to restore a Biden-era regulation allowing immigration judges to temporarily suspend certain deportation proceedings, leaving in place a judgment obtained through an agreement between Texas and the Department of Justice (DOJ). The brief, unsigned order offered no explanation and noted no dissents. The 2024 regulation authorized “administrative closure,” a tool allowing judges to pause cases while individuals pursue immigration relief through U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), including certain crime victims seeking visas and people eligible for permanent residence through a U.S. citizen spouse. Baltimore, New Haven, Connecticut, Columbus, Ohio, and the legal services organization Centro Legal de la Raza had asked the justices to restore the rule while they appealed a lower court’s refusal to let them intervene to defend it. The Supreme Court’s order leaves the restrictions in effect but does not resolve the underlying legal dispute.
The case began June 22, when Texas challenged the regulation, arguing that immigration judges lacked authority to suspend proceedings rather than decide whether a person should be removed. Within hours, DOJ agreed with Texas and asked a federal district judge to invalidate the rule and prohibit a similar regulation in the future. The cities and Centro Legal argue that the agreement allowed the administration to eliminate a regulation without following the usual administrative process for changing agency rules. They also warn that limiting administrative closure could lead to the deportation of residents with pending applications for lawful status and discourage crime victims from cooperating with local law enforcement. The district judge denied their request to intervene for lack of standing, and the Fifth Circuit declined to pause the judgment while their appeal proceeds.
Fifth Circuit Upholds Trump Administration’s Mandatory Detention Policy as Constitutional
On October 23, the full U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ruled that the Trump administration’s policy of detaining people who entered the country unlawfully without access to bond hearings does not violate due process, even when they have lived in the United States for years. The 10-7 decision reversed a three-judge panel’s ruling that the policy was unconstitutional as applied to three men who had each lived in the country for more than a decade. Writing for the majority, Judge Cory Wilson, a Trump appointee, said that because the men had never been lawfully admitted, the Constitution did not entitle them to additional proceedings beyond those Congress provided before detention pending removal. The ruling applies in Texas, Louisiana and Mississippi.
The decision closes an avenue for challenging detention that had remained available after the Fifth Circuit upheld the policy’s statutory basis in February. Despite that earlier ruling, federal district judges in Texas had ordered bond hearings or release for more than 2,000 detainees on constitutional grounds. The administration’s policy treats people who entered without lawful admission as “applicants for admission” subject to mandatory detention, regardless of how long they have lived in the country, departing from decades of practice generally allowing those arrested in the interior to request bond hearings. Nine of the 11 federal appeals courts to address the policy have rejected the administration’s interpretation of immigration law. Earlier in October, the Supreme Court agreed to review whether the policy complies with the Immigration and Nationality Act, a statutory question distinct from the constitutional challenge the Fifth Circuit rejected.
State and Local
Rapid Expansion of 287(g) Agreements Strains Communities
More than 1,850 state and local law enforcement agencies had joined Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s (ICE) 287(g) Task Force Model as of October 1, according to an October 28 analysis. The model, revived by the Trump administration in 2025, allows deputized officers to carry out immigration enforcement during routine policing, including traffic stops, rather than limiting their role to people already in local custody. FWD.us estimates that more than 29,000 officers in 30 states are now deputized, more than twice ICE’s own deportation officer workforce. Arrests involving 287(g) officers increased from just over 1,000 in August 2025 to more than 6,600 in July 2026, following the introduction of federal financial incentives. Participating agencies are eligible for an estimated $2 billion in payments through fiscal year 2026, including reimbursements for personnel and equipment. DHS maintains that the partnerships are a critical tool for addressing crime and unlawful immigration.
The expansion is bringing immigration enforcement into everyday encounters while straining relationships between police and the communities they serve. In Ingram, Texas, police recorded 194 immigration-related incidents by August, a number equivalent to roughly 10 percent of the town’s population, although officials could not say whether every transfer to ICE resulted in deportation. Residents and business owners described family separations, lost workers and delays in flood recovery, while police denied targeting Latinos. In Florida, wildlife officers’ investigation of alleged fishing violations led to immigration detention, illustrating how the program has expanded beyond traditional police and sheriff’s departments. Yet participation remains uneven: more than 30 South Florida municipalities with their own police departments have not joined, despite state pressure, and only about one-third of those in Miami-Dade and Broward counties have signed agreements. Advocates warn that linking routine policing to immigration enforcement discourages residents from reporting crimes or seeking help, undermining the cooperation local agencies need to protect public safety.
Tennessee Law Blocks Driver’s License Renewals for DACA Recipients and Work Permit Holders
Tennessee has stopped accepting employment authorization documents as sufficient proof of eligibility for temporary driver’s licenses, leaving Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) recipients and other immigrants with federal work permits unable to obtain or renew licenses. The Tennessee Department of Safety and Homeland Security attributes the change to a 2025 law requiring applicants to demonstrate a specific period of federally authorized stay. Although the law took effect January 1, attorneys and advocates say denials emerged in recent months, with reports increasing in early October. The department says DACA does not confer lawful immigration status and a work permit alone does not establish the period of authorized stay required by state law. Employment authorization cards remained on the state’s list of acceptable documents as recently as August but had been removed by September.
The change could affect approximately 6,000 DACA recipients in Tennessee, along with other work-authorized immigrants, including some people with pending asylum applications. Attorneys say none of the alternative documents now accepted for temporary licenses are available to DACA recipients and several other affected groups. The National Immigration Law Center disputes the state’s interpretation, arguing that Tennessee law leaves the determination of authorized presence to the federal government. Advocates warn that losing the ability to drive legally threatens residents’ access to work, school and medical care, while driving without a license could expose them to arrest and possible immigration enforcement. Governor Bill Lee said on October 28 that he had only recently learned of the change and was reviewing whether the interaction between state and federal law had created “unintended consequences” and whether changes were needed.
BILLS INTRODUCED AND CONSIDERED
H.R. 10943
To amend the William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008 to direct the Secretary of Health and Human Services to provide counsel for unaccompanied alien children in immigration proceedings, and for other purposes
Sponsored by Rep. Hillary J. Scholten (D-Michigan) (0 cosponsors)
10/29/2026 Introduced by Rep. Scholten
10/29/2026 Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary
LEGISLATIVE FLOOR CALENDAR
The U.S. Senate and House will be in recess until November 9.
SPOTLIGHT ON NATIONAL IMMIGRATION FORUM RESOURCES
The Forum is constantly publishing new policy-focused resources that engage with some of the most topical issues around immigration today. Here are a few that are particularly relevant this week:
Explainer: Proposed OPT Fees Could Limit Opportunities for International Students and American Employers
Explainer: New Rule Shortens Refugees’ Time to Contest Termination of Their Status
Reclassifying ‘Applicants for Admission’: How the Second Trump Administration is Reshaping Mandatory Detention
*As of publication (10/30/26 at 2:30 PM EST)
This Bulletin is not intended to be comprehensive. Please contact Nicci Mattey, Senior Policy & Advocacy Associate at the Forum, with questions, comments, and suggestions for additional items to be included. Nicci can be reached at nmattey@forumtogether.org. Thank you.