Full List of Airports Refusing To Show Kristi Noem’s Shutdown Video
Newsweek is a Trust Project member
A number of airports have refused to play Department for Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Kristi Noem’s video, which blames congressional Democrats for the ongoing federal government shutdown and the recent travel delays.
Newsweek has contacted the press offices of Cleveland Hopkins International Airport and Los Angeles International Airport outside of regular working hours via email for comment.
Why It Matters
After the U.S. government shut down on October 1, the Transport Security Administration (TSA) has been warning travelers about the impacts of the shutdown on staffing levels, as air traffic controllers are expected to continue working during a shutdown without immediate pay, leaving them with a high level of financial uncertainty.
Reduced staffing levels, on top of more staff taking sick leave, has meant many airports are experiencing significant delays as there are not enough air traffic controllers to ensure the safety of air travel at all times.
Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem speaks during a roundtable meeting with President Donald Trump on antifa in the State Dining Room at the White…Read More | Evan Vucci/AP
What To Know
The video, which was first obtained by Fox News, begins with Noem saying it is the TSA’s “top priority” to ensure Americans have “the most pleasant and efficient airport experience as possible while we keep you safe,” after flight delays due to air control staffing shortages have been happening across the country.
Read More
News
Senator Mitch McConnell Hospitalized: Everything We Know
GOP‑Appointed Judge Warns of ‘Chilling Effect’ in Mark Kelly Censure Case
Clue in Nancy Guthrie Case Provides Hint as to When She Went Missing
Noem goes on to say: “However, Democrats in Congress refuse to fund the federal government, and because of this, many of our operations are impacted, and most of our TSA employees are working without pay.”
When approached for comment, DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin repeated what Noem had said in the video and said to Newsweek: “While this creates challenges for our people, our security operations remain largely in impacted at this time. It’s unfortunate our workforce has been put in this position due to political gamesmanship. Our hope is that Democrats will soon recognize the importance of opening the government.”
A spokesperson for the Port of Portland, which operates Portland International Airport, confirmed to Newsweek that the Port of Portland received a TSA request to display Noem’s video message.
Full List of Airports Refusing To Show Noem’s Video
According to multiple reports, the airports not playing the video include those in:
- Buffalo (New York)
- Charlotte (North Carolina)
- Cleveland (Ohio)
- Los Angeles (California)
- Phoenix (Arizona)
- Seattle (Washington)
- Las Vegas (Nevada)
- Portland (Oregon)
“We did not consent to playing the video in its current form, as we believe the Hatch Act clearly prohibits use of public assets for political purposes and messaging,” the spokesperson for the Port of Portland said.
The Hatch Act is a 1939 law which limits political activities of federal employees to “ensure government programs are administered in a nonpartisan fashion.”
They also added that Oregon law states “no public employee can promote or oppose any political committee, party, or affiliation,” and that the Port of Portland believes “consenting to playing this video on Port assets would violate Oregon law.”
A Charlotte Douglas International Airport (CLT) spokesperson also told Newsweek that North Carolina municipal law as well as the airport’s policy for digital content does “not permit the referenced video.”
What People Are Saying
Westchester County (NY) Executive Ken Jenkins said in a statement: “Westchester County has reviewed the request from the Department of Homeland Security to replace the REAL ID video with a Public Service Announcement (PSA) that was released by United States Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem, and our message is clear: it is inappropriate, unacceptable, and inconsistent with the values we expect from our nation’s top public officials. The PSA politicizes the impacts of a federal government shutdown on TSA Operations, and the County finds the tone to be unnecessarily alarmist – particularly as it relates to operations at Westchester County Airport. This video will not be displayed at Westchester County Airport.”
A Charlotte Douglas International Airport (CLT) spokesperson told Newsweek: “Additionally, TSA does not own any monitors at the airport’s checkpoints. The limited digital screens owned by CLT are designated for static content that supports wayfinding, provides essential travel information and promotes CLT’s revenue-generating services.”
A Niagara Frontier Transportation Authority (NFTA) spokesperson told Newsweek: “The NFTA’s long standing policy and codified regulations pertaining to public service advertising prohibit politically partisan messaging in its facilities. Therefore, we are not airing this video on airport-controlled screens.”
A spokesperson for Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport told Newsweek: “Consistent with airport policy, Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport declined to post the video. The policy does not permit political content.”
What Happens Next
Newsweek asked the DHS if it will be taking any action now that a number of airports have refused to play the video, but in the department’s response, it did not provide information in relation to this question.
Update 10/14/25, 8:59 a.m. ET: This article has been updated with comments from DHS and Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport.
Update 10/14/25, 10:19 a.m. ET: This article has been updated with a heading showing the full list of airports.
New details on stowaway who allegedly snuck onto NYC Delta flight to Paris
Delta Air Lines refused to transport stowaway to the US, Paris airport official says
The woman, who is a legal resident of the U.S., did not have valid documents to enter France, where she had previously applied for asylum.
NEW YORK — French officials tell ABC News that the woman who allegedly snuck onto a Delta Airlines international flight is a Russian national who did not have valid travel documents to enter the country.
The woman, who is a legal resident of the United States, did not have valid documents to enter France, where she had previously applied for asylum.
She was scheduled to be on a flight to the U.S. on Saturday afternoon but French authorities removed her from the aircraft after she started screaming, according to an official.
“We are going to try to send her back again with a French escort,” the official said.
The woman was expected to be accompanied by six US marshals on Tuesday’s flight back to New York, authorities said.
Then, she was due to leave France on a flight at 2:30 p.m. local time (8:30 a.m. ET) Tuesday, a Paris airport official told CNN.
She was onboard the plane when Delta refused to fly her, a Paris airport official has told CNN.
She was taken off the flight and put back into police custody and will remain in France temporarily.
The 57-year-old woman got past multiple security checkpoints at New York’s John F. Kennedy International Airport and boarded a plane to Paris last week.
Delta Flight 264 took off from JFK Airport and landed at Charles de Gaulle Airport in Paris the next day with the stowaway, authorities said.
New video shows personnel attempting to restrain the unruly passenger on November 30.
In the video the woman can be heard saying she does not want to return to the United States, that she has “asylum against the United States,” and mentioning the Geneva Conventions.
“She kept on saying ‘I do not want to go back to the USA. Only a judge can make me go back to the USA,'” said Gary Treichler, who was on the flight with his family.
Police boarded the plane at the Paris airport, according to a video from a passenger that was shared on social media. “This is the captain. We’re just waiting for the police to come on board,” the pilot can be heard saying.
Daniel Velez, a spokesperson for the Transportation Security Administration, said “an individual without a boarding pass” was screened at Kennedy and was not carrying any prohibited items.
“TSA takes any incidents that occur at any of our checkpoints nationwide seriously,” Velez said. “TSA will independently review the circumstances of this incident at our travel document checker station at JFK.”
The French National Police said Friday, “A passenger of Russian nationality was smuggled onto a flight from NY (JFK) to Roissy-Charles de Gaulle.”
The passenger “was refused entry to France for lack of a valid travel document (visa), and was placed in a waiting area for the time needed to return her to the United States as she held a valid US residence permit,” the National Police said in a statement.
A Delta spokesperson said in a statement, “Nothing is of greater importance than matters of safety and security. That’s why Delta is conducting an exhaustive investigation of what may have occurred and will work collaboratively with other aviation stakeholders and law enforcement to that end.”
A spokesperson for the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, which operates Kennedy Airport, declined to comment.
Federal investigators are looking into how the woman breached several security points at JFK and slipped onto the plane without a boarding pass.
Inspectors from TSA are also preparing a civil case against the stowaway after reviewing airport security video from inside John F. Kennedy International Airport, agency spokesperson Alexa Lopez told CNN.
“The TSA will open civil cases against passengers when there’s evidence that procedures may have been violated,” Lopez said. The TSA cannot bring criminal charges, though it can refer them to the Justice Department.
Delta has not said how the woman was able to board the plane once she made it past the TSA checkpoint.
CNN contributed to this report.
Can Border Agents Search Your Electronic Devices? It’s Complicated.
We’ve been getting a lot of questions about when border agents can legally conduct searches of travelers’ electronic devices at international airports and other ports of entry. Unfortunately, the answer isn’t simple.
Esha Bhandari, Director, ACLU Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project
Nathan Freed Wessler, Deputy Director, ACLU Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project
Noa Yachot, Former Senior Editor, ACLU
Share This Page
The government has long claimed that Fourth Amendment protections prohibiting warrantless searches don’t apply at the border. The American Civil Liberties Union takes issue with this position generally, especially when it comes to electronic devices like smartphones and laptops. Our smartphones store detailed accounts of our conversations, professional lives, whereabouts, and web-browsing habits. They paint a far more detailed picture of our private lives than, say, a piece of luggage.
The Supreme Court recognized this reality when it ruled in 2014 that the Constitution requires the police to obtain a warrant to search the smartphone of someone under arrest. As the ACLU has argued in various court filings, there’s no reason the Constitution’s safeguards against unwarranted searches shouldn’t also apply when we travel internationally given the ubiquity of these devices, and their ever-growing capacity to track the minutiae of our private lives.
Unfortunately, the government doesn’t agree, and the law on the matter is far from settled. Because of the high-stakes implications of these kinds of searches, and amidst evidence suggesting they’re on the rise, it’s important to understand the landscape so that you can make decisions that are right for you ahead of your travels.
What happens if border agents demand I turn over my device?
The government claims the authority to search all electronic devices at the border, no matter your legal status in the country or whether they have any reason to suspect that you’ve committed a crime. You can state that you don’t consent to such a search, but unfortunately this likely won’t prevent Customs and Border Protection (CBP) from taking your phone.
If you’ve given CBP agents the password to your device (or if you don’t have one), they might conduct what’s often called a “basic search” on the spot. They might also download the full contents of your device and save a copy of your data. Since 2018, they are not required to return your device before you leave the airport or other port of entry, and they might choose to send it off for a more thorough “advanced” or “forensic” search. Barring “extenuating circumstances,” they claim the authority to hold onto your device for five days — though “extenuating circumstances” is an undefined term in this context, and this period can be extended by seven-day increments. We’ve received reports of phones being held for weeks or even months.
As a result of this policy, even the most universally recognized private information — like communications with your lawyers — are insufficiently protected at the border. If you possess information that is protected by attorney-client privilege, you should tell the CBP agent you’re interacting with. Although CBP policy imposes some limitations, it still permits government employees to search the phone.
Journalists carrying sensitive information about their work or sources are also insufficiently protected. The CBP directive states that “work related information carried by journalists shall be handled in accordance with any applicable federal law and CBP policy” — but it’s unclear what this means. Journalists who feel their rights have been violated at the border should let us know, and those who have upcoming travel should consult with their organizations’ general counsel offices or press associations.
If you leave the airport or other border checkpoint without your device, make sure you get a receipt, which should include information about your device and contact information allowing you to follow up. If, after the forensic search is conducted, there is no probable cause to believe the device contains evidence of a crime, the government says it will destroy any information it copied within 21 days. Yet there’s a caveat here, too. CBP might retain the notes it took during the search of your device or any questioning while you were at the border.
Do I have to enter a password to unlock my device?
Your legal status in the country may inform what you decide to do if you’re asked for a password to unlock your device.
If you’re a citizen, you can’t be denied entry into the country if you refuse to comply with a request to unlock your device or to provide a password. But you might be detained for longer or have your device seized and not returned to you for weeks or months. The same should be true for those who have previously been admitted to the United States as lawful permanent residents and have maintained their status — their green cards can’t be revoked without a hearing before an immigration judge. If you are not a citizen and are concerned about having your devices searched, you should consult with an immigration lawyer about your particular circumstances before traveling.
Visa holders and tourists from visa waiver countries, however, run the risk of being denied entry if they refuse to provide a password, and they should consider that risk before deciding how to proceed.
Whether you’re a citizen or not, though, we always recommend that you enter the password yourself rather than divulging it to a CBP agent. They still might demand that you share it, but it’s a precaution worth trying to take. If you do hand over your password, it’s likely to end up in a government database, so change it as soon as you have the chance and make sure you no longer use that password for any other account.
What can I do to prepare?
Here are a few precautions you can take in preparation for your trip to ensure things go as smoothly as possible:
- Travel with as little data and as few devices as possible. The less you’re carrying, the less there is to search. Consider using a travel-only smartphone or laptop that doesn’t contain private or sensitive information. You could also ship your devices to yourself in advance. (Be aware that CBP claims the authority to search international packages so it is best to encrypt any devices that you ship.) Keep in mind that a forensic search of your device will unearth deleted items, metadata, and other files.
- Encrypt devices with strong and unique passwords and shut them down when crossing the border. A good resource on how to do so can be found here.
- Store sensitive data in end-to-end encrypted cloud-storage account and remove any sensitive data from your device. Disable any apps that connect to cloud-based accounts where you store sensitive communications or files, and don’t keep a copy of cloud-stored data in your physical possession. In July 2017, CBP publicly stated it is against policy for border agents to search cloud-stored data on electronic devices. This means that any search of an electronic device at the border should not extend to data that is only accessible via the internet — such as email or social media messages and posts that are stored on remote servers. Keep in mind that if there are copies of cloud-stored data cached on the device (for example, recent emails), border agents will be able to see that information.
- Upload sensitive photos on your camera to your password-protected laptop or a cloud-storage account. Digital cameras don’t offer encrypted storage, so you should consider backing up your photos and deleting them from your camera and reformatting the camera’s memory card.
- Keep devices off. If you must turn them on, ensure that they are in airplane mode, with both wifi and bluetooth disabled, before crossing a border checkpoint. CBP stated in July 2017 that its policy does not permit searches of cloud-stored data that is accessible from electronic devices through the internet. Keeping your devices in airplane mode will help ensure compliance with this policy.
- Let officers know if you have privileged material on your device. The 2018 CBP Directive on border device searches requires certain procedures to be followed before border officers can search attorney-client or attorney work product materials. If you have any privileged or sensitive material on your device, tell the border officers before they begin any search.
Until the Supreme Court weighs in on the constitutional limits of the government’s powers at the border, questions about the government’s authority to conduct these kinds of searches aren’t likely to be settled. Lower courts have issued conflicting rulings on whether individualized suspicion should be a condition for such a search. The Ninth Circuit, which covers several western states, for example, requires at least reasonable suspicion that the device contains digital contraband for a “forensic” search of a seized device, but has not imposed an individualized suspicion requirement for “cursory” on-the-spot searches. The Fourth Circuit, which covers several mid-Atlantic states, requires reasonable suspicion that the phone contains evidence of a border-related offense for a forensic search. The Eleventh Circuit, which covers three southeastern states, imposes no limits at all.
It is crucial that more courts weigh in, given that device searches at the border seem to be on the rise. CBP reports that in 2023, more than 41,000 electronic devices were searched, a huge jump from the 8,503 devices that were searched in 2015. With border officials increasingly exercising authorities that haven’t been sufficiently considered by the courts, the urgency for clear protections mounts. In the meantime, travelers should take the precautions they feel are right for them.
This resource offers a basic snapshot of possible scenarios relating specifically to electronic device searches. For a fuller picture of the many other civil liberties issues that often arise at the border, click here.
