The United States Department of Homeland Security (DHS) on Wednesday reported that more than 2.5 million undocumented migrants have left the US since the Trump administration took office on January 20, 2025, amid a sharp expansion of immigration enforcement. According to DHS, the total includes over 605,000 formal deportations and approximately 1.9m “self-departures”, referring to migrants who left voluntarily amid intensified enforcement pressure. The department said removals have focused on individuals it describes as criminal offenders, while also encouraging undocumented migrants to leave on their own through a government-run mobile application offering free flights and a $1,000 incentive. The announcement — the administration’s most significant immigration update this year — comes as Washington tightens entry rules, expands travel bans , and increasingly links immigration control to national security and counter-terrorism concerns. While DHS presented the figures as evidence of restored “law and order”, immigration experts caution that the numbers combine distinct categories that were historically reported separately. Formal deportations — court-ordered or administrative removals — are being counted alongside voluntary exits, many of which occur under the implicit threat of detention or arrest. At the same time, the scale of interior enforcement has expanded sharply. Detention facilities operated by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) are holding record numbers of migrants, straining capacity and raising due process concerns as immigration courts continue to face massive case backlogs. Travel bans expanded The DHS announcement coincides with a major expansion of US travel restrictions. On Dec 16, the White House added seven countries — including Syria and Palestinian Authority travel document holders, along with Burkina Faso, Mali, Niger, South Sudan, Laos, and Sierra Leone — to the list of nations whose citizens face full or near-total entry bans. With these additions, 20 countries now face broad US travel restrictions, many of them Muslim-majority or conflict-affected states. The administration argues that weak identity verification systems and limited information-sharing cooperation make proper vetting impossible. Human rights groups counter that nationality-based bans punish entire populations and undermine international norms of individual assessment, while also complicating diplomatic relations and counter-terrorism cooperation. Security and terrorism as policy drivers US officials have increasingly framed immigration enforcement as a national security imperative, particularly following violent incidents involving foreign nationals. The White House cited the arrest of an Afghan suspect in the shooting of two National Guard troops over Thanksgiving weekend as justification for accelerating travel restrictions. But Senator Bernie Sanders,  a prominent progressive voice in US politics, cited last week’s terrorist attack in Sydney to argue against religious hatred, noting that a Muslim father risked his life to stop an attack on Jewish worshippers. In a social media statement, Sanders, who is also Jewish, said religion must not divide humanity and called for an end to antisemitism, Islamophobia and all forms of hate, describing the act as a reminder of shared human values that transcend faith and identity. Recent terrorist attacks have stirred a global debate on immigration — as some underscored the disconnect between individual acts of solidarity and broad-brush security policies. Implications for Pakistanis Pakistan is not included in the current travel ban, but the broader enforcement climate has implications for Pakistani nationals in the United States. Pakistani citizens largely reside in the US on student, work, family-based, or visitor visas, but immigration lawyers report increased scrutiny of visa renewals, status changes, and airport inspections. Visa overstays — including those who entered legally — now face a higher enforcement risk than in previous years. Community organisations say fear of detention has reduced engagement with public institutions, particularly among mixed-status families. While no targeted measures have been announced against Pakistanis, the environment has become less predictable. Economists warn that sudden return migration often leads to underemployment, especially for workers whose experience is tied to US labour markets. Within the US, reduced migrant labour is already being felt in agriculture, construction, and services, with employers reporting shortages and rising costs. Internationally, the US approach has drawn mixed reactions. Some governments acknowledge Washington’s security concerns, while others warn that sweeping bans and mass deportations risk eroding humanitarian commitments and straining bilateral ties. The DHS announcement marks a defining moment in US immigration policy — one that reflects a decisive shift toward enforcement-driven governance anchored in security concerns.