By David Shepardson and Ted Hesson
WASHINGTON, April 7 (Reuters) – Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin said on Tuesday that customs officials could stop processing international travelers at major U.S. airports in “sanctuary cities” that have declined to cooperate with the Trump administration’s hardline immigration crackdown, a move that could severely impact U.S. trade and tourism.
The move could effectively halt international air travel and commerce at major airports in Democratic states, and have major ramifications for the FIFA World Cup that is set to start in early June. More than 50 million international travelers arrived at the three major New York airports alone last year.
The U.S. Department of Justice published a list of so-called sanctuary cities and states in October 2025 that included many cities with major international airports, such as Denver, Philadelphia, Chicago, Los Angeles, New York City, Newark, Seattle and San Francisco.
U.S. airports and immigration enforcement have been at the center of a partisan funding fight since mid-February, when Democrats refused to support additional money for President Donald Trump’s immigration crackdown without reforms to scale back aggressive tactics.
Mullin cited the ongoing refusal of Democrats to reach a deal to fund the Department of Homeland Security, including Customs and Border Protection, and said he anticipated speaking with Trump about the idea of pulling customs offices.
“It’s an option,” Mullin told reporters in North Carolina, adding no decision had been made. “If cities are going to sit there and say that they’re not going to enforce immigration policies, then I’ll repeat myself and say it doesn’t make any sense for us to process international travelers through that city.”
Mullin said pulling the customs officers was one of several options under consideration as Congress remains deadlocked over funding for DHS.
“We’re going to start having those conversations. As I said, this is just something I’m thinking. This isn’t something that I’m necessarily going to do,” he said.
Mullin argued that state and city policies and laws limiting immigration enforcement were illegal because they contradicted federal immigration laws.
(Reporting by David Shepardson and Ted Hesson; Editing by Nia Williams)
