 |
 In USA the potential cutback of Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officers from airports in sanctuary cities poses a significant threat to the air cargo industry and global trade.
A recent proposal from Homeland Security leadership, linked to Markwayne Mullin, suggests this move as a means to pressure jurisdictions on immigration enforcement.
The Washington, D.C.-based Airforwarders Association has described these planned cutbacks as a "gut punch," particularly for airports that handle large volumes of international freight.
Their message is clear: reducing cargo processing capacity at major gateways leads to immediate disruptions in time-sensitive supply chains, not a gradual issue.
Brandon Fried, Executive Director of the Airforwarders Association, emphasized the critical role of officers at gateways, stating, “There's no clean substitute for officers on the ground at the gateways. You can't reroute a widebody freighter the way you'd reroute a truck.
“Major airports like LAX, JFK, O'Hare, and SFO are vital due to their established carrier and flight networks, So switching horses midstream isn't really an option on the major lanes.”
To mitigate potential disruptions, the Airforwarders Association advises members to take proactive measures:
File entries through ACE before aircraft land to maximize pre-arrival processing by CBP.
Join the Customs Trade Partnership Against Terrorism (CTPAT) to gain trusted-trader priority during officer shortages.
Move clearable freight in-bond to less congested facilities when feasible.
These steps can help maintain the flow of essential goods and minimize the impact of any changes in CBP operations.
 Brandon adds, “There's also a funding lever people forget. Under the Reimbursable Services Program, airports and stakeholders can pay for CBP overtime directly.
“It leaves a bad taste, since we'd be paying twice for a federal function, but the tool is already on the shelf.
“But mitigation manages the damage.
“It doesn't fix it.
“The fix is not pulling officers out of the country's busiest gateways in the first place.
“You don't make the border more secure or trade more efficient by thinning the line at the airports that move the most freight.
“That's why we've written to the Secretary and the Commissioner, and why we're building a coalition to oppose this move.”
Listen up air cargo folks:
Our industry knows full well that air cargo isn’t a warehouse business.
It’s a keep-moving business.
A shipment delayed at clearance doesn’t just wait patiently. It misses connections. It triggers rebooking. It stacks up in terminals that weren’t built for indefinite storage.
And then every step downstream starts to wobble.
In USA sanctuary cities move billions in global cargo, day after day.
If you squeeze processing there, you’re not pinching the edge of the network.
You’re stepping on the main hose.
And critics are pointing out something that sounds obvious, but matters: where exactly is the freight supposed to go?
Diverting shipments isn’t like rerouting a rideshare.
Other airports don’t just have spare space, staff, and equipment waiting around for a sudden surge.
Plus, even if another airport could take some overflow, you still have the rest of the chain to deal with. Trucking capacity. Warehouse appointments. Delivery windows. Cold chain requirements. Security protocols. Time-critical cargo doesn’t magically become flexible because paperwork got slower.
That’s why the pushback is getting loud—and not just from freight insiders.
Big trade organizations are stepping in: Airlines for America, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the National Retail Federation. Different missions, same message: CBP cargo operations are part of national economic resilience.
Telling it like it is:
The CBP proposal is framed as leverage on immigration policies.
But CBP at airports isn’t only about people.
Cargo operations have their own legal and operational necessity.
The air cargo industry is essentially saying: whatever your policy goal is, don’t break the mechanism that keeps trade moving.
Because the costs don’t stay local. A delay in Newark can ripple to a manufacturer inland.
A backlog at LAX can slow retail restocks across multiple states.
And time-sensitive shipments—pharmaceuticals, critical components, perishables—can’t afford to negotiate with bureaucracy.
So where does that leave us?
In the middle of a high-stakes argument where one side sees a pressure tactic, and the other sees a nationwide supply chain risk.
And the reason people are alarmed is simple: this isn’t a slow-moving policy change.
If staffing drops at these hubs, the disruption shows up fast.
We’ll be watching where the lobbying and the decision-making go from here. But for now, the air cargo message is clear: don’t turn customs staffing into a bargaining chip, because the supply chain doesn’t have an easy detour.
GDA/SSA
|
100%
Green