I'm downvoting because the addendum is clearly separate from the article content rather than derivative of it, and because it's arguably objectively correct: many abuses in immigration and other areas of law enforcement did indeed take place under the previous administration, but trends in enforcement and litigation have reversed. I'd also point out that the strict immigration enforcement under Obama was meant as a concession to immigration restrictionists who demanded a 'secure border' before they would consider any reform or revision of immigration, and was thus conducted in spite of rather than in pursuance of the Democratic party's policies in an effort at bipartisanship, which has turned out to be singularly lacking in reciprocation. Despite the relative heavy-handedness of enforcement under the Obama administration and a subsequent (but not necessarily consequent, due to economic factors) transition to negative net migration, immigration restrictionists simply doubled down on their demands and started asking for a physical wall.