Insights and Analyses

• Between 2017 and 2019, under the Trump administration, the total number of deportation cases initiated across the state increased significantly from 41,035 to 71,068, respectively. In 2020, due in part to the COVID-19 pandemic, there was a sharp decline in the total number of deportation cases initiated (25,531). Yet, by 2021, there was an uptick to 29,124 deportation cases initiated.

• Due to the COVID-19 pandemic and policies like Title 42, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), along with other agencies, scaled back some of their operations, resulting in a lower number of deportations and individuals that are detained. For example, during FY 2021, ICE recorded 59,011 deportations, a sharp decrease from 185,884 deportations in 2020. In addition, the average daily number of individuals that were detained by ICE decreased to about 19,200 during FY 2021–the lowest number since 1999. Yet by June 2021, the number of new deportation cases filed was on the rise.

• Throughout the state, among all deportation cases initiated between 2001 and 2021, 40% were issued removal orders as of February 2022.

• As of February 2022, across the state, among all deportation cases initiated between 2001 and 2021, 71% of deportation cases that were not represented legally were issued removal orders. By comparison, out of all deportation cases that were represented legally, 16% were issued removal orders.

• Studies have shown that most immigrants placed in removal proceedings actually appear for their court hearings. An analysis by the American Immigration Council (AIC) points out the limited nature of the Executive Office for Immigration Review’s (EOIR) metrics on missed court appearances. The AIC’s analysis reveals that between Fiscal Years (FY) 2008 through 2018, 83% of all non-detained immigrants with a completed or pending removal case attended all their court hearings. Moreover, during that same time frame, 96% of all represented immigrants attended all their court hearings. The analysis further shows that 15% of immigrants who were in removal proceedings due to a missed court appearance, reopened their cases and had their removal orders overturned, suggesting that those who did not appear in court likely faced barriers in doing so.  

• A study examining data from 2012-2015 revealed that 68% of detained immigrants throughout California lacked legal counsel. Moreover, that same study showed that detained immigrants who had access to counsel succeeded more than five times as often than those that were unrepresented.

• Although Black immigrants composed only 5% of the undocumented population and 7% of the non-citizen population in the U.S., they composed nearly 11% of all immigrants in removal proceedings between 2003 and 2015. Additionally, Black immigrants are impacted by both the immigration and criminal legal system, meaning Black immigrants are more likely to be deported on criminal rather than immigration grounds. In Fiscal Year 2013, about 76% of Black immigrants were deported on criminal grounds.

• Research shows that family separation creates long-term developmental impacts for children and families, including psychological, social, and health problems that extend beyond reunification.

• A report examining the impact and implementation of SB-54 among 169 law enforcement agencies (LEAs) throughout California, showed that between January 2018 and May 2018, SB 54 had reduced immigration arrests. Yet the report pointed to the need to ensure full compliance with SB 54 across all localities and implementation of stronger protections that are inclusive of all immigrants. Further, a 2022 report by the ACLU of Northern California examining immigration enforcement locally in the Central Valley, reveals that local law enforcement agencies continue to undermine protections for immigrants set forth in policies like the TRUST, TRUTH, and California Values Act or SB 54. For example, their analysis of TRAC data shows that throughout the Central Valley, in FY 2021, 1,571 immigrants were placed in removal proceedings. By 2014 (when the TRUST Act went into effect) that number doubled to 3,224, and in 2019 (after the Values Act went into effect) that number surged to 7,404. The report also calls for the need for stronger protections such as those outlined in the VISION Act, which would have prevented immigrants from being funneled into immigration detention (in August 2022, despite community support and advocacy, the bill failed to pass through the state senate by only three votes). 

• A 2017 report by the Center for American Progress found that sanctuary counties, or counties that do not collaborate with federal immigration enforcement by holding people past their release date, are safer than non-sanctuary counties, as families can remain together, local economies are strengthened, and crime rates are lower.

• In 2021, the Biden administration established “dedicated dockets” in 11 cities to rapidly process asylum cases. The program tried to distinguish itself from “accelerated dockets” which have been used by the U.S. government to accelerate immigration proceedings while simultaneously severely restricting timelines and creating additional barriers for individuals seeking asylum. According to a report by the UCLA Law Immigrants’ Rights Policy Clinic analyzing TRAC data, these dedicated dockets mirror accelerated dockets that curtail due process for asylum seekers. Their analysis shows that about 70% of people on the L.A. Dedicated Docket do not have access to legal representation. Moreover, as of February 2022, among the 449 completed cases, 99% resulted in removal orders and only 1% in relief.

• Implemented in 2019 under the Trump administration, Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP) significantly changed asylum processes at the U.S. southern border. Referred to as MPP 1.0 under the Trump administration, MPPs forced certain asylum seekers to remain in Mexico as they requested asylum, and ultimately until their case was decided, creating additional barriers and dangers for individuals seeking safety. Amidst the COVID-19 pandemic, MPP hearings were suspended periodically creating further challenges for asylum seekers. For example, harsh living conditions in shelters and restrictions related to the COVID-19 pandemic, forced many migrants to make the decision to return to their home countries and children were separated from their families, as they crossed the border alone. As Biden took office, legal battles over the program's termination resulted in the program’s suspension and reinstatement in 2021 (referred to as MPP 2.0 due to changes to the program). Nevertheless, data suggests that under MPP 1.0, a majority of immigrants did not have access to legal representation and obtaining relief under this program was nearly impossible (a pattern likely to continue under MPP 2.0). An analysis of TRAC data on MPP deportation proceedings through October 2021 showed that about 8% of migrants under MPP 1.0 had access to legal representation. In addition, by December 2020, only 521 of the 42,012 MPP cases that had been completed under MPP 1.0, were granted relief. As of August 11, 2022 after several legal battles over the program’s termination, MPPs were terminated. Nevertheless, MPPs will have long-lasting impacts for the many immigrants who were enrolled.

The RepresentLA program provides free competent legal representation to diverse immigrant communities in Los Angeles County — that otherwise would not be represented — helping them navigate complex immigration processes.

Research shows that legally represented immigrants are likely to fare better at every stage of the court process, yet challenges to obtaining legal representation exist. This is especially true for vulnerable immigrant populations who may face additional barriers to accessing resources. As such, RepresentLA was designed to assist some of the most vulnerable immigrant populations, including unaccompanied minors, victims of domestic violence, immigrants seeking asylum, immigrants in detention, and LGBTQ+ immigrants. Established in 2017, RepresentLA, formerly known as the Los Angeles Justice Fund (LAJF), is a public-private partnership, created in response to the harmful policy priorities enacted under the first Trump administration, between the County of Los Angeles, the City of Los Angeles, the Weingart Foundation, and the California Community Foundation (CCF). The program was designed with the objective of protecting Angeleno families from the impacts of deportation by providing access to counsel. Although there were some lessons to be learned during the pilot phase of the fund, LAJF played a critical role in ensuring that these immigrant communities were able to navigate a complex court system with adequate support and resources; protected families from separation; and strengthened the capacity of removal defense services in the City and County of L.A.

However, one limitation of LAJF’s design was that the requirements to access the pilot program excluded certain immigrants due to residency requirements and prior criminal backgrounds – an exclusion that disproportionately impacts Black immigrants. In 2021, after much advocacy from numerous stakeholders, including Grantmakers Concerned with Immigrants and Refugees (GCIR), the County passed a motion to build upon LAJF’s foundation and initial success to form RepresentLA, thus sunsetting the LAJF pilot program. This new iteration, based on GCIR’s four-pillar framework, included a “merits-blind” approach to providing representation by removing criminal background requirements. In May 2022, the City voted to do the same and included other recommendations and in November 2023, the City voted to remove the restriction on City funds to also include merit-blind removal defense. Another one of the program’s key focus areas includes representing vulnerable immigrant communities who experience significant barriers in accessing legal services, including immigrants experiencing homelessness, asylum seekers, survivors of labor trafficking and workplace exploitation, as well as Black, Indigenous, and LGBTQ+ immigrants. Since RepresentLA’s launch in April 2022, the program has provided legal representation in removal defense, affirmative representation, and other areas to over 5,000 immigrants at risk of removal, as of November 2024.

Beginning as the LAJF two-year pilot with an initial expiration date set in 2019, as of June 2025, RepresentLA is expected to continue to be part of both the City and County of Los Angeles’ budgets  through 2026. To learn more about RepresentLA, click here. To read ERI’s reports on the bridge funding phases of LAJF, click here. Read the Nonprofit Finance Fund’s report about lessons and recommendations from the LAJF’s pilot phase here. Read the Vera Institute of Justice’s Year 2 evaluation of the program here.

Photo credit: California Immigrant Policy Center

The California Values Act, established to protect the rights of undocumented and immigrant residents, is being targeted by the Trump Administration through the withholding of federal dollars and by employing aggressive immigration enforcement activities to stoke fear and undermine the state’s pro-immigrant policies.

During the first Trump administration, many localities passed “sanctuary” laws to protect their residents from excessive immigration enforcement activities, and were engaged in legal fights to defend these policies from federal challenges. However, in the second Trump administration, these jurisdictions have once again become targets for litigation, as well as now being targeted for aggressive and wide-ranging immigration enforcement activities, similar to the smaller-scale raids that took place during the first administration. California was the first state to become one of these “sanctuary” jurisdictions, having passed SB 54, or the California Values Act, in 2017 as a result of ongoing grassroots advocacy efforts. SB 54 prohibits state and local law enforcement agencies from using resources for immigration enforcement purposes and requires state facilities, including courts, to implement policies outlining their commitment to protect Californians regardless of status, ensuring that these places are accessible to all. The California Values act includes prohibitions on immigration holds, arrests on civil immigration warrants, inquiries about an individual’s immigration status, sharing personal information with ICE, and notifying ICE of release dates. Furthermore, this law requires state facilities, including courts, to implement policies outlining their commitment to protect Californians regardless of status, ensuring that these places are accessible to all. In recent years dozens of local jurisdictions like Alameda, Berkeley, Coachella, Los Angeles, San Francisco, and others have also passed similar ordinances. A report by Asian Americans Advancing Justice – Asian Law Caucus, University of Oxford, and Border Criminologies found that within the first five months of implementation there was an immediate reduction in immigration arrests in local jails. Some advocates have felt that while it helps protect immigrants, because the policy includes exemptions for those who have criminal records, the California Values Act excludes some immigrant families, causing “confusion and poor implementation”.

At the same time, there has also been resistance to the state’s sanctuary law, both from local governments and local law enforcement agencies, even from those in “sanctuary cities.” For example, Huntington Beach filed a federal lawsuit over SB 54 in 2018, which failed, and then again in 2025 after the city council declared the city a “non-sanctuary” city. Additionally, some local law enforcement agencies have been accused of violating SB 54. Reports from coalitions in Orange County and San Diego County assessing SB 54 implementation both found that some local law enforcement agencies were utilizing loopholes and exemptions to continuing to work with ICE and to otherwise not fully comply with SB 54. In 2025, immigrant advocates have called for San Diego County Sheriff Kelly Martinez to be held accountable for violating SB 54 with an ICE transfer in 2023. In February 2025, Amador County Sheriff Gary Redman went on record saying he intends to break SB 54. In Los Angeles, the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) reported honoring zero of the 631 ICE detainer requests that it had received in 2023, as well as zero of the 430 ICE detainer requests that it received in 2024. However, during the June 2025 ICE raids, the LAPD was under scrutiny for collaborating with ICE. While LAPD denies collaborating with ICE earlier in the month, city leaders are concerned that LAPD is often at the scene of ICE arrests. Though not aiding in immigration arrests, local law enforcement agencies throughout the state are often engaging in “scene security” activities that are perceived as providing cover for immigration enforcement activities, and some local groups are calling on local law enforcement to provide stronger protections for residents from these raids. Additionally, in June 2025, the Los Angeles Sheriff’s Department began sending inmates to ICE, which it has not done since early 2020, using the exceptions in the state’s sanctuary law for those cases that involve criminal offenses.

Currently, California remains one of the main targets of Trump’s January 2025 executive order, which called for stopping funding for jurisdictions with “sanctuary” policies. While California fought to preserve SB 54 in the courts, in early June 2025, President Trump sent federal immigration officials from ICE and CBP to California, detaining thousands of immigrants throughout the state, sometimes en masse, at their jobs, on the streets, in their homes, businesses, health clinics, and even after their immigration court hearings. This aggressive show of force created an unprecedented environment of fear and terror throughout the state as families were torn apart and many taken by force, often without any warrants or due process. In response, crowds showed up at federal buildings and city centers to protest against these ICE and CBP raids. The federal government further escalated tensions by deploying the National Guard in Los Angeles in response to protests against ICE raids, without the permission of Governor Newsom. In July, a U.S. District judge issued a temporary restraining order against the federal government, requiring ICE and CBP to stop the sweeping immigration raids across Southern California that included detaining people off the streets without warrants and denying them access to basic needs and access. Despite this order, as of July 2025, immigration enforcement has continued to detain residents across the state as the federal administration takes aim at California and other jurisdictions across the country with pro-immigrant laws.

To learn more about the impact and limitations of SB 54, read Asian Americans Advancing Justice – Asian Law Caucus, University of Oxford Centre for Criminology, and Border Criminologies’ report here. Read the report discussing Orange County law enforcement’s relationship with ICE here. To learn more about the ICE Out of CA campaign, click here.

Photo credit: Peg Hunter