In early April, shortly after Markwayne Mullin took over the Department of Homeland Security, he floated an idea on Fox News that wasn’t taken seriously; it sounded, in fact, like a proposal from someone very new on the job: Mullin threatened to cut federal screening of international passengers and cargo at airports in cities with “sanctuary” policies, which limit cooperation with Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Such a move would trigger flight cancellations to airports in New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, and other major cities and force airlines to reroute to other destinations. Mullin’s proposal seemed more like a wild swing than a real plan.
The new secretary is pushing forward anyway. Last Wednesday, Mullin convened a small group of airline and travel-industry executives at DHS headquarters in Washington and told them he may reduce Customs and Border Protection staffing at major airports that serve sanctuary jurisdictions. Mullin told the executives the locations could include Portland International Airport, in Oregon; New York City–area airports such as John F. Kennedy International Airport and Newark Liberty International Airport; and Washington Dulles International Airport, according to two people with knowledge of the discussion who were not authorized to speak publicly. Mullin did not indicate when DHS would begin the pullback, but it would likely occur sometime after the United States finishes hosting the World Cup in July, the two people told me.
Travel executives are alarmed, and have told DHS that international travelers and cargo cannot be easily routed elsewhere, these people said. The disruption would cause chaos in major U.S. airports and inflict significant economic damage beyond the cities Mullin is seeking to pressure, executives have told the department. “The message was this is a real proposal that is being considered by the administration,” one of the people with knowledge of the meeting told me, calling the potential impact on the airline industry “devastating.”
When Mullin first mentioned the idea during theinterviewon Fox News, he described it as a creative way to pressure the cities to comply with ICE. The Trump administration wants access to city and county jails so ICE officers can take custody of potential deportees before they are released. “If they’re a sanctuary city and they’re receiving international flights, and we’re asking them to partner with us at the airport, but once they walk out of the airport, they’re not going to enforce immigration policy—maybe we need to have a really hard look at that,” Mullin said. “I’m going to have to be forced to make hard decisions.”
Mullin’s proposal appears to reflect a thin grasp of global-travel logistics, as well as an inflated sense of the government’s ability to impose economic pain on specific cities, according to industry executives and former DHS officials I spoke with. The U.S. airports where international travelers and cargo first arrive are often not their final destination. A German business traveler flying into JFK may be en route to a meeting in Cincinnati. A Korean family landing at Los Angeles International Airport could be headed for Disney World. The proportion of economic pain imposed on sanctuary cities might be relatively small compared with the wider ripple effects on the U.S. travel industry.
“If you thought the economy was bad with Trump’s war driving prices at the pump up … just wait until international travel is halted at some of the busiest airports in the world,” California Governor Gavin Newsom’s press accountpostedto X after Mullin first mentioned the proposal. “Talk about a stupid idea.”
DHS declined to respond to questions about Mullin’s meeting with the travel executives, instead pointing me to his interview with Fox News six weeks ago. One senior administration official told me no decision on the airport plan has been made, but DHS is looking at several ways to gain more leverage over sanctuary cities. Those options could include curbing federal benefits programs for legal immigrants through U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, such as green-card processing or citizenship naturalizations. The official, who spoke on condition of anonymity to describe the internal discussions, said those options remain preliminary.
Mullin and otheradministration officials have been looking for new ways to revive the mass-deportation campaign President Trump promised in 2024. The administration last year tried pressuring sanctuary cities—including Los Angeles, Chicago, and Minneapolis—by flooding their streets with thousands of Border Patrol agents and ICE officers. That phase of the campaigncame to an end, at least for now, after the killing of two protesters in Minneapolis, Renee Good and Alex Pretti.
Since then the administration has been trying to shift attention away from ICE; Mullin told lawmakers during his confirmation hearing in March that he didn’t want DHS in the headlines every day. Greg Bovino, the brash Border Patrol commander who led the roving crackdown, wasremovedfrom the job and has now retired. Trump ousted his first DHS secretary this term, Kristi Noem, in March and replaced her with Mullin. Tom Homan, the White House border czar, has been mentoring Mullin on ICE operations and immigration politics. From the moment Trump sent Homan to defuse public anger in Minneapolis, the border czar has sought to shift blame to sanctuary policies and insisted that cooperation with ICE is urgent for public safety.
Homan has not been able to shield himself, or Mullin, from attacks by immigration hard-liners on the right—including Bovino—who say the administration has backed off the president’s mass-deportation promises. ICE statistics show arrests and deportations aredown slightlysince January. Homan has blamed the 76-day DHS-funding shutdown this spring. Both he and Mullin say ICE is taking a smarter, more targeted approach that prioritizes violent criminals and public-safety threats over mass roundups.
Source: Drudge Report
