The partial shutdown of the United States Department of Homeland Security (DHS) due to a budget dispute may appear at first glance to be a technical budget crisis, but it can actually be interpreted as a reflection of deeper political and institutional conflicts in Washington. The inability to fund certain parts of the federal government has the potential to create ripple effects, particularly in critical areas such as transportation security and border management. In this context, the issue is not merely one of financial resources; it is a crisis that tests the ideological divide over immigration policy and the principle of continuity in public administration amid the power struggle between the executive and legislative branches.
The most tangible and quickly noticeable effect of the shutdown on the public will be delays at airport security checkpoints. The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) operates directly under the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). TSA personnel being forced to work without pay could lead to increased rates of absenteeism, as seen in past shutdowns. This situation could affect not only passenger comfort, but also airline operational planning and the overall functioning of the U.S. economy. Air transportation is a critical infrastructure element for global trade and domestic economic circulation.
Joint statements by travel groups and airlines emphasizing that “passengers and the US economy cannot remain dependent on security personnel working without pay” point to the economic dimension of the crisis.[1] Possible long queues, flight delays, and cancellations at airports could cause serious costs, particularly in the business travel and tourism sectors. This situation could also create an image of symbolic weakness in terms of the US’s claim to be a global financial and trade center. Therefore, the crisis is not just a matter of public employees’ salaries; it is a matter of economic reliability and institutional stability.
On the other hand, the shutdown is rooted in sharp political polarization over immigration policies. Democrats have blocked budget bills by demanding stricter oversight and reforms of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) practices. The transparency and accountability of immigration practices have been a topic of debate, particularly after an operation in Minnesota that resulted in the deaths of two civilians. The Democrats’ demands for stricter rules on mask bans, identification requirements, and search warrants reflect efforts to redefine the jurisdiction of federal law enforcement agencies.
In contrast, the Republican wing and President Donald Trump have distanced themselves from calls for reform, emphasizing the need to protect law enforcement. The statement, “We must always protect our law enforcement,” highlights the administration’s security-focused approach.[2] This situation shows that the immigration issue in the US is no longer just a debate about border control; it has become a matter of balancing state authority, human rights, and public safety.
Another important aspect of the crisis concerns the financial flexibility of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). The $165 billion allocated to DHS under the “One Big Beautiful Law” passed during the Trump administration could theoretically compensate for some shortfalls. Furthermore, the $75 billion in special funding allocated to ICE ensures that this agency is relatively less affected by the shutdown. This situation demonstrates that the effects of the shutdown are not distributed equally among agencies. While units such as the TSA and Coast Guard face direct pay cuts, the relative protection afforded to ICE reveals how political priorities are reflected in the budget.
The situation is particularly noteworthy from a Coast Guard perspective. The possibility that approximately 56,000 personnel may not receive their salaries could lead to the suspension of non-essential duties. A reduction in the capacity of this agency, which is responsible for maritime security, combating drug trafficking, and search and rescue operations, could pose a risk to both the internal security of the United States and its regional maritime dominance. Drug enforcement operations in the Caribbean and Eastern Pacific, in particular, are of strategic importance in the context of the recent increase in military presence.
However, the fact that the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is funded through the end of the year prevents a complete disaster scenario in the air traffic control system. This suggests that the shutdown may have a more limited impact compared to last year’s 43-day full government shutdown. However, the increase in absence rates among TSA personnel could undermine the public perception of a “functional government.”
The fact that Congress will be in recess until February 23 has the potential to delay the resolution of the crisis. If the parties fail to reach a compromise, the shutdown could extend until Trump’s State of the Union address. This scenario could transform the crisis from merely an administrative issue into a symbolic political challenge. The State of the Union address is a platform where the executive branch seeks to convey a message of national unity and stability. A prolonged shutdown could undermine this message.
Finally, the DHS shutdown can be seen as a concrete manifestation of the structural polarization in US politics. This crisis, shaped around immigration policies, demonstrates that the budget process has now become a political pressure mechanism rather than a technical financial tool. The fact that TSA personnel are not receiving their salaries or the potential delays at airports are actually surface symptoms of a deeper governance crisis.
If the parties cannot reach an agreement in the short term, such partial shutdowns may become normalized. This could create a problem of institutional credibility for the US’s claim to global leadership. In contrast, reaching a limited and pragmatic agreement, while not completely resolving the fundamental differences between the parties on immigration policy, would at least demonstrate the will to preserve the continuity of the government’s basic functions.
Therefore, this crisis is not merely a problem limited to airport queues; it can be seen as a turning point in the United States where the balance between immigration, security, and democratic accountability is being redefined. Regardless of how this balance is established, the DHS shutdown serves as an important test of the resilience of the American political system.
[1] Halpert, Madeline. “US Homeland Security Shutdown Could Mean Airport Delays, Travel Groups Say.” BBC News, www.bbc.com/news/articles/cwy8dw5zk7yo, (Access Date: 15.02.2026).
[2] Ibid.
