Illegal Immigrant Detention Numbers Surge Under Trump Compared to Biden

The United States is experiencing a significant rise in the number of illegal immigrants being detained in federal facilities under President Donald Trump, compared to levels reported during the Biden administration.

Recent data indicates that the population in detention has surged by nearly 50 percent since Trump took office in January, highlighting the administration’s sharp focus on immigration enforcement and mass deportations.

This marks a dramatic shift from Biden-era policies, which had sought to ease restrictions on migrants and expand non-detention alternatives.

According to government data cited by Axios and Newsmax, roughly 60,000 illegal immigrants are now being held in long-term detention facilities nationwide. This represents a steep climb from the approximately 39,000 detainees reported at the close of the Biden administration.

Critics of Trump’s approach say these figures do not even reflect the true scope of the detention system. Amelia Dagen, a staff attorney at the Amica Center for Immigrant Rights, argued that Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has been underreporting.

“It’s evident that the numbers being published by ICE about people held in long-term residential facilities is severely undercounting the number of people who are in ICE custody at any given moment,” she told Axios.

One detention center has emerged as the most contentious example of Trump’s expanded enforcement: a sprawling complex in the Florida Everglades known as “Alligator Alcatraz.”

The facility has faced widespread criticism from Democrats, immigrant rights groups, and environmental activists. Opponents argue that the center not only subjects detainees to harsh conditions but also poses ecological threats.

Last week, U.S. District Judge Kathleen Williams, appointed by former President Obama, ordered the closure of Alligator Alcatraz on environmental grounds.

Florida Governor Ron DeSantis dismissed the ruling and vowed to keep pushing forward with Trump’s immigration agenda. His refusal to back down reflects the broader determination of the administration and its allies to expand detention capacity regardless of public opposition.

The surge in detention numbers is not accidental; it is the result of deliberate policy. Over the last two months, the Trump administration has announced several moves to dramatically increase the capacity of detention facilities.

In June, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth revealed that Indiana’s Camp Atterbury and New Jersey’s Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst would be converted into temporary holding centers for migrants awaiting deportation.

Camp Atterbury, located 40 miles south of Indianapolis, spans 34,000 acres and is run by the Indiana National Guard. Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst, covering 42,000 acres in southern New Jersey, brings together units from all U.S. military branches.

Both sites are being outfitted as “soft-sided holding facilities,” with large tent-like structures and fencing to secure detainees.

In July, the administration went a step further by awarding a $1.2 billion contract to a Virginia-based company to construct what will be the largest detention center in the nation.

Located at Fort Bliss in El Paso, Texas, the new facility is designed to house up to 5,000 migrants. Supporters argue that this expansion is necessary to cope with the influx of migrants, while critics view it as a dangerous escalation of Trump’s hardline policies.

The political backdrop to these developments is complex. Before Trump took office, House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan of Ohio sent letters to Attorney General Merrick Garland and Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, urging them to preserve all records related to the Biden administration’s enforcement of immigration law.

Jordan expressed concerns that the outgoing administration might destroy or alter sensitive information before leaving office.

“This letter serves as a formal request to preserve all existing and future records and materials related to the Biden-Harris Administration’s enforcement of federal immigration law,” Jordan wrote.

He emphasized that federal law requires Cabinet members and appointees to maintain records, and instructed that all reasonable steps be taken to prevent their destruction.

This preservation effort reflects the Republican Party’s determination to draw sharp contrasts between Biden’s policies and Trump’s renewed crackdown, framing the current detention surge as a corrective to what they see as years of lax enforcement.

As Trump entered the White House in January, Biden administration officials had already tried to ease the burden on detention facilities through a last-minute policy rollout.

Sources told the New York Post that Biden’s team discreetly implemented new measures aimed at relaxing enforcement. A key initiative was the launch of an ICE Portal app in December, piloted in New York City. The app allowed migrants to check in with ICE remotely, eliminating the need for in-person visits to offices.

Supporters of the app argued that it reduced burdens for migrants who might otherwise face transportation and scheduling challenges. However, Homeland

Security insiders raised alarms, saying the app was unreliable and prone to glitches. Critics claimed it could make it easier for migrants to slip through the cracks, evading follow-up with federal authorities.

The contrast between Biden’s final push for softer alternatives and Trump’s rapid expansion of detention centers underscores the starkly different approaches to immigration policy that have defined recent administrations.

The escalation in detention under Trump highlights the broader debate over how the U.S. should manage immigration. Proponents of detention expansion argue that it is a necessary deterrent against illegal entry and ensures that migrants appear for deportation proceedings.

They point to the record surge at the southern border as justification for aggressive enforcement.

Opponents, however, argue that the policy is inhumane, costly, and ineffective. They claim that detention centers subject migrants to poor conditions, separate families, and fail to address the root causes of migration.

Human rights advocates have raised concerns about reports of abuse, lack of medical care, and overcrowding in some facilities. Environmentalists, meanwhile, continue to criticize the impact of massive detention complexes like Alligator Alcatraz.

The future of immigration policy remains uncertain. Trump’s surge in detention numbers reflects a broader strategy of deterrence and enforcement that appeals to his political base but sparks outrage among civil liberties and immigrant rights groups.

Legal challenges, like the one that shuttered Alligator Alcatraz, are likely to continue as advocacy groups push back against the expansion of detention infrastructure.

At the same time, Republicans are expected to maintain pressure on Democrats by highlighting the record numbers of detainees and portraying Trump’s actions as necessary responses to a border in crisis.

Whether the Fort Bliss megacenter and other facilities will resolve or exacerbate tensions remains to be seen, but one thing is clear: immigration will remain a defining and divisive issue in American politics for years to come.

For now, the numbers tell the story. With 60,000 people in detention—an increase of 50 percent since Trump took office—the nation is witnessing one of the largest expansions of immigration enforcement infrastructure in modern history.

Whether this approach will achieve its intended goals or lead to deeper divisions is the question confronting both policymakers and the American public.