A Brookings study of May 2026 finds that the surge in ICE enforcement reduced employment reduced the number of expected jobs by 688,000.  The period studied was the first half of 2025.  This a shortage from expected for all would be job occupants – not distinguishing between citizens, authorized and unauthorized foreign born.  The analysis indicates the relatively lower employment was due in part to arrests and in part due to fear of arrest, which the “shock and awe” approach was designed to do.

(The total is from employment data, not surveys.)

Since the number applies only to the first half of 2025, it is certain that the total losses have been much higher. Because of the pandemic and the Biden-caused surge in employment during his administration, I think it is safer to use the increase of total employment in 2019 as a reference. In that year it was about 1.8 million. Assuming that all-2025 effect was a relative loss was a high as 1.5 million-plus, that means that the loss approximated one years’ normal gain in employment. Using another assumption that 75% of the loss is for unauthorized workers, which stood at about 8 million in 2019, that implies that, in order of magnitude, one tenth of unauthorized workers left employment.  This is a conjecture, and only for 2025.

“We find that employment trajectories in surge and non-surge cities were closely aligned before enforcement began. They diverged precisely when ICE arrests intensified. The gap widened over time, and the knock-on effects extended far beyond those directly targeted. In surge cities, employment fell most in immigrant-intensive sectors, but job losses spread further.”

“We isolate the surge from other forces: tariffs, inflation, and AI, operating simultaneously on the broader economy. The findings are stark: Job losses in surge cities far exceeded the number of people arrested, and the damage extended well beyond the workers who were directly targeted. The pattern of excess job loss is consistent with fear-driven labor withdrawal, business disruption, and weaker local demand.”