Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin said Monday that the Trump administration is considering pulling Customs and Border Protection officers from major airports in sanctuary cities, a move that would effectively halt international travel through those facilities.
In his first interview since confirmation, Mullin told Fox News that sanctuary city policies may violate federal law and suggested the administration is examining whether cities limiting cooperation with immigration authorities should continue processing international arrivals.
"I believe sanctuary cities is not lawful," Mullin said. "I don't think they're able to do that, and so we're gonna take a hard look at this."
Mullin specifically pointed to international airports as a potential pressure point, asking whether sanctuary cities should continue processing Customs if they refuse to enforce immigration policy beyond the airport terminal.
"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 gonna enforce immigration policy, maybe we need to have a really hard look at that because we need to focus on cities that want to work with us," Mullin said.
The potential policy change comes amid ongoing political battles over immigration enforcement, including a partial government shutdown driven by Democratic demands to dramatically reform Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
"Right now, a number of the Democrats are wanting to defund Customs and Border Patrol. Well, who processes those individuals when they walk off a plane? And so I'm gonna have to be forced to make hard decisions," Mullin added.
What the Right Is Saying
Conservative supporters of the administration say sanctuary city policies undermine federal immigration law and embolden illegal immigration. They argue that cities receiving federal resources should be required to cooperate with federal enforcement.
Mullin's position has support among Republicans who say the administration is using lawful administrative tools to address what they view as unlawful state and local obstruction of federal law. They note that the executive branch has broad authority over border and customs enforcement.
House Republicans have backed Trump's immigration agenda, including increased funding for ICE and Border Patrol. Many conservative commentators say cities that refuse to cooperate with federal authorities should not receive the benefit of international travel infrastructure funded by taxpayers nationwide.
What the Left Is Saying
Democratic lawmakers and immigrant rights advocates have long defended sanctuary city policies as constitutional exercises of local authority. They argue that limiting cooperation with federal immigration enforcement does not violate federal law and that cities have the right to allocate local resources according to community needs.
Progressive groups contend that pulling Customs officers would harm all travelers, not just immigrants, and would punish cities for political disagreements with the federal government. They note that sanctuary policies are designed to build trust between local police and immigrant communities, making everyone safer.
Critics from the left also argue that targeting airports in Democratic-leaning cities represents political retaliation rather than legitimate immigration enforcement, and they have called for Congress to pass comprehensive immigration reform instead of administrative crackdowns.
What the Numbers Show
Sanctuary city policies exist in more than 100 jurisdictions across the United States, including major cities such as New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, and Philadelphia. These policies generally limit local law enforcement cooperation with federal immigration authorities.
International airports in sanctuary cities handle millions of passengers annually. For example, O'Hare International Airport in Chicago processed more than 38 million passengers in 2024, while Los Angeles International Airport processed over 44 million.
The Department of Homeland Security has not announced a timeline for any potential Customs officer reallocation. The administration has previously targeted sanctuary cities by flooding them with ICE officers and Border Patrol agents, including operations in Chicago.
The Bottom Line
The potential policy change remains under consideration and would face legal challenges if implemented. Sanctuary city officials have historically successfully defended their policies in court, though the Trump administration may argue different legal grounds for airport-specific enforcement.
If implemented, such a policy would represent a significant escalation in the administration's pressure campaign against sanctuary jurisdictions. The affected cities would likely challenge any such order in federal court, setting up a potential constitutional showdown over the balance of federal and state authority in immigration enforcement.
What to watch: Whether DHS formally proposes any changes, how affected airports and cities respond, and whether Congress addresses the underlying policy disagreements in upcoming appropriations debates.