US Targets 600,000 Deportations by End of 2025, Trump Aide Says

The Trump administration is on pace to carry out more than 600,000 formal deportations by the end of 2025, according to Tom Homan, the president’s “border czar” and a lead architect behind Project 2025’s immigration agenda. Homan, speaking at the Axios Future of Defence Summit on October 22, said, “If you’re in the United States illegally, you’re not off the table. If we find you, we’re going to arrest you.” He framed the push as a direct follow-through on campaign promises to expand removals nationwide, not just at the border, and said the current pace marks a rapid acceleration from earlier in the year.

The administration also claims roughly 2 million people have been “removed or self-deported” in the first 250 days of President Trump’s second term, which began January 20, 2025. Of those, officials say about 1.6 million left on their own, while 400,000 were formally deported during that period. The new target of 600,000 deportations by end of 2025 points to a sharper push through the fall and winter, as Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) aims to move more cases to completion.

Enforcement metrics and public messaging

As ICE detention rises—NBC News’ deportation tracker put the detainee population at 59,207 as of September 25—the administration’s public messaging has focused on crime and national security.

• Homan says about 70% of ICE arrests are people with criminal records.
• He also claims 30–35% are labeled national security threats without criminal convictions.

Those claims have faced scrutiny from analysts who note gaps between public statements and formal reports to Congress. Still, the White House’s topline message is clear: large-scale enforcement is now a central feature of domestic policy.

The current numbers remain below the recent modern record for formal removals—685,000 deportations in fiscal year 2024, per the Migration Policy Institute—but the midyear shift in 2025 suggests a surge that could reshape removals through December. Analysis by VisaVerge.com notes that the focus on “interior enforcement”—arrests away from the border—has widened the pool of people targeted to include longtime residents with U.S. citizen children and people with pending immigration cases.

Policy levers accelerating removals

Since day one of the second term, the administration has signed a wide set of executive actions aimed at tightening the system:

• Declared a national emergency at the southern border
• Blocked most asylum seekers
• Ended “catch and release”
• Suspended refugee admissions
• Designated certain transnational cartels as terrorist groups

The administration supported the Laken Riley Act, which mandates detention for people charged with or convicted of certain crimes, giving ICE new custody tools that feed the deportation pipeline.

A core driver is the expansion of expedited removal—allowing deportation without a full court hearing for groups of noncitizens both at the border and inside the United States. A federal judge ruled the expansion unlawful in July, but that ruling is stayed while appeals continue. The stay has allowed the government to keep using the tool pending higher-court review.

Other major changes:

• ICE lifted the “sensitive locations” guidance, removing constraints that previously discouraged arrests at schools, churches, and courthouses.
• The rollback enables workplace raids and community arrests in places once off-limits.
• A new funding law in September directs about $170 billion toward enforcement, detention, and deportation operations, sharply boosting ICE and Border Patrol capacity.

Military and interagency support has increased:

• More than 7,500 personnel deployed to the border—roughly triple the presence at the start of the year—for logistics and surveillance.
• Federal agencies, including the IRS and Social Security Administration, are now sharing data to help locate undocumented immigrants in the interior—raising privacy and due process concerns among advocacy groups.

Local cooperation is expanding:

• More county jails and police departments run immigration checks and hand people to ICE after arrests for traffic and other offenses.
• In jurisdictions with active 287(g) agreements, immigration screening is embedded in local booking procedures, meaning a minor stop can now trigger an immigration hold and rapid transfer to detention.

Legal fights and community impact

Civil liberties groups, including the ACLU, argue the strategy harms due process and human rights. They point to:

• Family separation
• Restrictions on asylum access
• Reports of warrantless searches and data sweeps

Lawyers report cases of people deported with limited court review as expedited procedures compress timelines. Media accounts describe deportees flown on military aircraft in shackles—reflecting a system moving quickly with little room to contest removal.

Community effects:

• Advocacy hotlines report a surge in calls, especially from mixed-status families.
• Legal service providers see more parents seeking contingency plans for U.S. citizen children and workers asking about rights during ICE operations.
• Fear of arrest near schools and places of worship is keeping some children home and reducing attendance at essential services.

Polling shows a divided country:

• Majorities oppose the suspension of asylum, while many voters support stronger border controls.
• Opinions on local police cooperation vary sharply by region and party, mapping onto broader political trends ahead of the 2026 races.

Senior officials argue their policy mix—larger detention space, faster removal tools, and richer data—will produce durable results despite controversy.

Who’s shaping the playbook

The roster of architects behind the enforcement push includes:

• Tom Homan — Border czar, former acting ICE director
• Russell Vought — Former OMB head; involved with Project 2025 strategy
• Stephen Miller — Longtime hardline adviser influencing directives and messaging
• Kristi Noem — DHS Secretary promoting the agenda
• Tricia McLaughlin — DHS Assistant Secretary defending the approach publicly

Despite added staff and money, operational limits remain:

• Deportations depend on travel documents from other governments, bed space in detention, and court capacity.
• The Migration Policy Institute notes these hurdles—and active litigation—make it hard to reach a flat one-million-per-year removal target.
• Nevertheless, the government’s projections for deportations by end of 2025 are central to its political case.

Practical guidance for people at risk

Key touchpoints in the process are shifting: ICE officers are visiting homes, jobs, and probation offices more often, and long-standing discretion policies are ending. For anyone at risk, prompt legal help is vital.

• Filing a Form G-28 to enter an attorney’s appearance ensures the government serves case notices on counsel. The form is available through U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services at Form G-28.
• For short-term relief, ICE considers administrative stays of removal via Form I-246, Application for a Stay of Deportation or Removal, filed at local field offices; instructions are posted at Form I-246. While not often granted, a stay can pause a deportation to address medical needs, care for dependents, or pursue court motions.
• Attorneys monitor whether a Notice to Appear (NTA) has been properly issued and served, since defects can affect jurisdiction.

For family members locating detained loved ones, use ICE’s systems and hotlines:

• The agency’s ICE Enforcement and Removal Operations page outlines detention, bond, and removal procedures, and provides links to the detainee locator and field office contacts at ICE Enforcement and Removal Operations.
• Knowing a person’s A-number, full name, and country of birth speeds searches and helps lawyers file motions on tight deadlines.

Important: If someone is arrested, secure legal representation quickly. Avoid relying on unlicensed “notarios.” Carry written emergency plans for childcare and medical needs, keep key documents safe, and consult a licensed attorney before signing papers.

Litigation and possible outcomes

Legal challenges continue to shape enforcement boundaries:

• The stay on the expedited removal ruling allows continued use of that tool while appeals proceed.
• If higher courts strike parts of the expansion, ICE may need to route more cases through immigration court, pressuring judges and lengthening timelines.
• If the government prevails, removals could accelerate further through the winter.

Some constitutional scholars warn that ignoring adverse court orders could trigger a constitutional crisis, though there’s no public sign the administration plans to cross that line.

Operational and societal effects

On the ground, the outlook for undocumented immigrants is stark:

• Risk is higher than in recent years regardless of criminal history, length of residence, or family ties.
• Workplace raids, traffic stops that lead to holds, and home arrests have increased in major metro areas.
• Community organizations advise carrying written contingency plans, keeping important documents accessible, and consulting licensed attorneys.

Employers and local governments are also adjusting:

• Some cities renew legal aid funding, while others share more data with federal partners.
• Employers face tighter audits and possible labor gaps when ICE operations lead to multiple arrests.
• School districts and health providers report confusion about enforcement in the absence of “sensitive locations” protections.

The political moment ahead

As the calendar heads toward year’s end, the White House cites the projected 600,000 benchmark as proof the approach is working. Critics call the strategy sweeping and harmful, arguing it breaks families apart and strips away humanitarian protections.

The fight now moves between:

1. Courtrooms — ongoing litigation over expedited removal and related policies
2. Congress — potential legislative responses or funding debates
3. Communities — local practices, public opinion, and political pressure

Project 2025’s blueprint has provided a roadmap for the administration. The key question for 2026: Will courts, Congress, and public opinion reshape that map—or confirm it? The results of this enforcement wave will be felt most where people live and work: at kitchen tables, in classrooms, and on job sites.