The Closing of America
We are scoring own goals ahead of the World Cup. Plus, one of the best things I've ever read #6
👌🏾 Every word in this newsletter was written by a human being. We use AI for research help, but not text generation. See tips from my 24-day, 5-country AI training tour of Asia.
🗞️ Every Sunday, from 8:30-9:30 am ET, Neil Parekh and I host the NYT Readalong. Join us live or later on my social feeds or at Digimentors.group/nytreadalong. Now also a podcast on Apple & Spotify
✍️ Submissions are open for the India Philanthropy Alliance’s Youth Essay Competition! [Partner message]
🙏 Thank you to all our new paid subscribers! They and our sponsors help us do more. Here’s how you can support Sree’s Sunday Note, even if you can’t afford to pay.
***
I HAD MISSED THE NEWS. The new Homeland Security Secretary, Markwayne Mullin, is trying to talk himself into making it impossible to enter the country via some of the busiest international transit hubs in the world. Yes, just in time for the World Cup, Mullin is mulling withdrawing Customs and Border Protection officers from airports based in sanctuary cities. That means no international travel to airports like JFK, LAX, SFO, ORD, etc, etc, etc.
After his comments, an anonymous White House official told CNN that the policy wasn’t something Trump was interested in doing. But, with comments like this from the White House—about what could only be called a completely radical policy idea—should serve to remind you that Trump is not interested in doing something right up until he actually does it.
From CNN:
The push is seen internally as more of a personal desire of Mullin’s than one coming from inside the West Wing. One of the officials said Mullin has been “obsessed” with the idea since being sworn in as Homeland Security secretary in March to replace his ousted predecessor, Kristi Noem, bringing it up unprompted during meetings at the White House.
“The President loves having a team that is constantly coming up with new ideas but ultimately any policy decisions will be up to him,” a White House official said.
While Mullin has been widely viewed as a stabilizing force atop DHS after a chaotic year under Noem’s control, and has built up a lot of goodwill with the president, his airport plan could have significant and wide-ranging consequences.
Can you imagine if we suddenly refused to process international passengers and cargo at airports in Los Angeles, San Francisco, Chicago, and New York/New Jersey? The economic shock at these locations alone would be enormous. The five airports in these locations alone process an average of nearly two million international travelers per week. That means Americans coming and going and international travelers doing the same. JFK, LAX, Chicago O’Hare—by themselves—process roughly six million metric tons of cargo annually.
There are 18 sanctuary cities in America. Combined, they represent something like 30% of U.S. GDP—they are the economic engines of the country. They are also a constant target for MAGA folks on all sides. The resentment is key, and it is real. A cabinet-level secretary even floating this idea is completely wild, and we should take it as such.
A few days ago, something close to a million people waiting on their green card decision while in the U.S. found out they will have to leave, go wherever they need to, and complete the process through U.S. Consulates abroad. Then, a couple of days later, DHS walked it back… sorta:
[P]eople who present applications that provide an economic benefit or otherwise are in the national interest will likely be able to continue on their current path while others may be asked to apply abroad depending on individualized circumstances.
The cruelty and inconvenience, for the sake of seemingly nothing more than gratuitous nativism, literally drips off the page. Read the full policy memo for yourself. This is how it reported on at the time, from NBC:
“From now on, an alien who is in the U.S. temporarily and wants a Green Card must return to their home country to apply, except in extraordinary circumstances,” U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services spokesperson Zach Kahler said in a statement. “When aliens apply from their home country, it reduces the need to find and remove those who decide to slip into the shadows and remain in the U.S. illegally after being denied residency.”
It’s all in flux, all the time. The fate of millions left to the whims of a president detached.
Immigrants are parents, caregivers, students, teachers, high-skill tech workers, and so much more. They are members of their community. They also happen to be “foreign,” and that seems to be enough for the Trump administration. The facts, yet again, tell a much different story. The CATO Institute, a libertarian think tank (yes, that CATO Institute), recently published some of the most comprehensive data on immigrants and the economy in America ever published. It is unequivocal: immigrants are crucial to this country.
Also, people travel, and travel industry groups had a collective shock when Mullin dropped his idea into the ether. They spend money when they do it. They travel for business, they do business, they grow businesses. It’s all just another own goal from an administration that seems laser-focused on fully destroying America’s standing in the world on every single front.
More practically, blue state economic activity funds what little social safety net we still have in America. This is a fact. It’s not “my view” or a “liberal position”—it’s just the position. Here’s a map that show which states pay for the others. You can find the interactive version at Newsweek.
Here’s the thing, that’s what being a country is all about! I am more than happy that my federal tax dollars can help someone afford food in Arkansas, or get clean drinking water in Missouri. These are good things. Immigrants are putting more in than anyone else.
Need more? Here’s more from the CATO Institute:
Illegal immigrants reduce crime rates by committing fewer crimes. More than a dozen studies have found that immigration, including illegal immigration, is associated with less crime. Illegal immigrants were half as likely to have committed an offense serious enough for them to be incarcerated in the United States in 2023.
Maybe you are a self-styled right-leaning voter who is concerned about the national debt and and deficits. Guess what! Immigrants are a net positive on that front too!
Again, from CATO:
Immigrant taxes exceeded the cost of immigrant expenditures, such that removing immigrants would have increased US debt. But as noted earlier, removing the US immigrant population would not only deprive the government of tax revenue, it would also deprive the country of workers and shrink the US economy. This is not a trivial matter. Immigrants’ share of total earned income grew from 8 percent to 17 percent from 1994 to 2023.
Moreover, immigrants’ contribution to the economy is disproportionate to their share of the population, meaning that losing them would shrink the economy even more than losing a random group of Americans. GDP would shrink drastically without immigrants—by at least $4.8 trillion in 2023—so the negative effect on government finances from fewer immigrants is manifested in more debt and a much smaller economy.
Watching ICE and CBP actions in Chicago and Minneapolis, and the protests over conditions in Delaney Hall, in New Jersey, it is all galvanizing. I think the old red-blue dichotomy of American politics is evolving into a MAGA vs. everyone else environment.
This is a country. Federal officials, elected or appointed, work for all of us. We simply cannot forget this. The fundamental erosion of the most basic concept of representative democracy is really the core of the rot that Trump has nurtured, expanded, and made routine. It’s coming for our immigrant brothers, sisters, aunties and uncles.
— Sree / Twitter | IG | LinkedIn | FB | YouTube | Spread | TikTok
41% of 2026 is already over. What will you do with the remaining 39%? LMK and I’ll see you made it all the way down here.
One of the Best Things I’ve Ever Read #6
We’re aiming to create the best reading/viewing/listening list possible. It’s quite simple—we are crowdsourcing the writing that has stuck with you, that one piece you read last month, last year, or 20 years ago, that has stuck in your brain. This week, it’s an excellent addition from my friend and former Met Museum colleague Christopher Gorman.
Title: “What Were Bob Dylan and John Lennon Really Saying in the Back of That Limo?” [gift link]
By: Jim Windolf, The New York Times (April 5, 2026)
From Christopher:
The article traces how Bob Dylan and The Beatles pushed each other to evolve throughout their mid-1960s rivalry. Although there was clear mutual respect between Dylan and the band, there were also moments of awkward confrontation — including, as the story notes, an infamous conversation between John Lennon and Dylan in the back seat of a limousine.
Songs from this period that may reflect their influence on one another include “Subterranean Homesick Blues,” “Norwegian Wood,” “I’m a Loser,” “Fourth Time Around,” and “You’ve Got to Hide Your Love Away.”
Christopher Gorman is a New Yorker, museum professional, husband, father, son, brother, friend, and colleague.
If you have a story to share, please do!
Have an idea for anything we’re up to? Let’s collaborate! sree.sreenivasan1@gmail.com
