In a recent interview, Department of Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin proposed the idea of removing U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officers from airports in sanctuary cities. This suggestion has sparked significant backlash, particularly from California Governor Gavin Newsom, who expressed concerns about the potential disruption to international travel in some of the country’s busiest hubs.
The Proposal and Its Implications
Mullin, who assumed the role of DHS Secretary on March 23, discussed the controversial proposal during an interview on Fox News’ “Special Report” on April 6, 2026. In his comments, Mullin stated that his department was considering limiting or withdrawing CBP officers from airports located in cities that have sanctuary policies.
These are cities where local law enforcement agencies have restrictions on cooperating with federal immigration authorities.
Mullin argued that sanctuary cities with international airports should not be processing customs into the city if they refuse to enforce federal immigration policies. His statement raised several important questions about the relationship between local and federal authorities, especially in the context of immigration enforcement.
Mullin elaborated, saying, “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.”
The DHS Secretary reiterated his stance the following day, when he spoke with reporters in North Carolina, emphasizing his belief that cities that do not cooperate with federal immigration policies should not expect the federal government to continue processing international travelers through their airports. He also mentioned that he planned to discuss the matter with former President Donald Trump.
Impact on Major U.S. Airports
Two of the busiest airports in the United States, Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) and San Francisco International Airport (SFO), are located in what the federal government considers sanctuary cities.
In 2025, these airports collectively processed more than 120 million passengers, with SFO accounting for over 50 million and LAX for more than 73 million. These figures underscore the critical role these airports play in the global movement of people and goods.
If the DHS were to move forward with this policy, it could severely impact international travel at some of the most significant U.S. travel hubs. Both LAX and SFO are essential points of entry for international flights, and pulling CBP officers could create logistical challenges and delays, affecting millions of travelers.
Governor Newsom’s Reaction
Governor Gavin Newsom was quick to respond to Mullin’s suggestion, dismissing it as a “stupid idea.” Through a post on X (formerly Twitter), Newsom’s office criticized the potential consequences of such a policy, claiming it would significantly harm the economy and travel. The statement read, “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.”
Newsom’s reaction highlights the broader concern that removing CBP officers from major airports could have unintended consequences, not only for the local economy but also for the broader U.S. economy, which relies heavily on international trade and tourism.
A Continuation of Trump-Era Policies
Mullin’s proposal is part of a broader strategy by the Trump administration to withhold federal funding from sanctuary cities and jurisdictions that do not comply with federal immigration enforcement.
In January 2026, President Donald Trump doubled down on his plan to withhold funds from cities and counties, including major Californian cities such as Los Angeles and San Francisco. However, the administration’s efforts to punish sanctuary cities have faced legal challenges.
In 2025, a U.S. District Judge in San Francisco issued an injunction blocking the Trump administration’s attempt to withhold federal funds from sanctuary jurisdictions, including 16 cities and counties in California. Despite the legal setback, the Trump administration continues to prioritize partnerships with cities that comply with federal immigration policies.
Table Summary
| Topic | Details |
|---|---|
| DHS Secretary | Markwayne Mullin |
| Sanctuary Cities | Cities that limit cooperation between local law enforcement and federal immigration authorities |
| Key Airports Affected | Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) and San Francisco International Airport (SFO) |
| Passenger Traffic (2025) | SFO: 50 million, LAX: 73 million |
| Governor’s Response | California Gov. Gavin Newsom calls the proposal a “stupid idea” |
| Trump Administration’s Stance | Withholds federal funds from sanctuary cities |
| Legal Challenges | U.S. District Judge in San Francisco blocked the administration’s plan in 2025 |
| Potential Impact | Disruptions in international travel and economic consequences for major U.S. airports |
The proposal by Markwayne Mullin to remove Customs and Border Protection officers from airports in sanctuary cities has ignited a fierce debate over immigration policy and the relationship between local and federal governments.
While supporters of the idea argue that sanctuary cities should not receive federal support for immigration enforcement if they refuse to cooperate, critics, including Governor Newsom, warn of significant disruptions to international travel and the economy.
As the situation evolves, it remains to be seen whether Mullin’s proposal will gain traction within the Department of Homeland Security or if it will face further legal challenges.
