White House considers pulling CBP officers from airports in sanctuary cities

What This is

• The Trump administration is considering withdrawing U.S. Customs and Border Protection officers from international airports in jurisdictions the Justice Department labels “sanctuary cities.”
• Officials frame the idea as a response to local policies that limit cooperation with federal immigration enforcement, which DHS argues hampers its work.
• Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin has publicly reiterated the threat and said planning is underway, while also saying no final decision has been made.
• One flashpoint is Newark, where Mullin threatened to pull CBP officers from Newark Liberty International Airport amid protests and clashes around the Delaney Hall ICE detention center.
• Airlines and the U.S. Travel Association warn that removing CBP staffing could delay or reroute international passenger and cargo processing and threaten international flight operations.
• Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy has pushed back on the proposal, citing the risk of major travel disruptions and broader economic harm.
• The potential targets discussed include major hubs such as JFK, LAX, San Francisco and Newark, with concerns about impacts on World Cup host-city travel if direct international arrivals cannot be processed.
• Legal and operational questions remain about which jurisdictions would be covered and whether the policy could withstand court challenges, with some reporting pointing to prior court blocks of related efforts.

Why This Matters

• Using airport inspection staffing as leverage links immigration disputes to critical transportation infrastructure and federal–local power struggles.
• Even uncertainty over customs staffing can disrupt airline planning, tourism, and time-sensitive cargo supply chains.
• The fight shapes how far states and cities can limit cooperation with immigration enforcement without provoking federal retaliation.
• Legal challenges over who must provide airport border processing could redefine the boundary between policy signaling and lawful administration.