DHS Is Partially Shut Down. Here’s Which Services Are Still Running and Which Aren’t.

Last updated 3 months ago. Our resources are updated regularly but please keep in mind that links, programs, policies, and contact information do change.

Ten days in, and the DHS shutdown has stopped being theoretical. The gap between what officials predicted before February 14 and what is happening now is large enough to fuel a major political fight. The real consequences are hitting some people much harder than others.

Here is what you need to know, organized by who you are and what you’re trying to do.

TSA: Still Running, But for How Long

The pre-shutdown prediction was airport chaos within days. That hasn’t happened. TSA checkpoints are staffed and processing passengers at near-normal speeds.

The agency briefly announced on February 22 that it would suspend its PreCheck program, the expedited screening service used by approximately 32.7 million active members as of December 31, 2025. It reversed that decision the same day after airline industry leaders and lawmakers pushed back loudly.

Reports suggest TSA PreCheck “remains operational with no change for the traveling public,” though the agency acknowledged it would “evaluate on a case by case basis and adjust operations accordingly” if staffing constraints worsened.

That hedge means the agency is leaving itself room to cut services without warning. TSA is statutorily capped at 45,000 full-time equivalent screening positions, and those screeners are classified as essential personnel, so they cannot be furloughed. They show up and screen passengers. They aren’t getting paid.

During the 2018-2019 shutdown, the rate of workers calling in sick or not showing up spiked to 10 percent just before the shutdown ended — more than three times the normal rate of roughly 3 percent. That was with paychecks delayed. This time, paychecks will stop arriving entirely around March 17 for most affected workers.

The timing is concerning. U.S. Airlines expect to carry 173 million passengers between March 1 and April 30. That is a 4 percent increase over the same period last year. United Airlines alone is anticipating more than 24 million passengers during spring break. The peak travel window runs roughly March 12 through March 22. That falls close to when the first missed paychecks are expected around mid-March.

If similar patterns hold, the mix of reduced staffing and peak passenger volume could produce much longer wait times at major airports.

However, the 2019 analogy has real limits in both directions. Factors that could lead to a worse outcome this time include the fact that paychecks will stop entirely rather than be delayed, as they were in 2019. Factors that could lead to a better outcome include greater worker awareness of the pattern and available financial help through TSA union programs and federal employee loan programs. The shutdown may also resolve before the peak window arrives. The range of outcomes is genuinely uncertain.

As a cautionary step given that uncertainty, industry analysts are recommending that travelers add 60 to 90 minutes to their planned airport arrival time for flights booked after March 1. For now, plan normal travel time. Check back in a week.

Global Entry and Trusted Traveler Programs: Disrupted but Not Dead

Global Entry, the Customs and Border Protection program used by roughly 13 million frequent and international travelers, was suspended on February 22 due to the shutdown. Unlike TSA PreCheck, it was not quickly reinstated. CBP officers who would normally staff enrollment kiosks have been reassigned to handle general arriving passenger volume.

If you had an upcoming appointment to enroll or renew, do not assume it’s still happening. Confirm directly with the trusted traveler program before you show up.

If your Global Entry membership is expiring and you can’t renew it, you’re back in the general customs line at JFK or LAX.

FEMA: Life-Safety Operations Only

FEMA is still responding to active emergencies. Search and rescue teams are operational. Emergency sheltering continues. Damage assessment teams can deploy. But Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem announced on February 22 that FEMA would curtail spending and restrict staff travel, effectively limiting the agency to active emergency response. Long-term disaster recovery work has stopped.

For communities still rebuilding from Midwest ice storms, California floods, or other recent events, that pause has real consequences. Active requests for FEMA Individual Assistance, housing assistance, and other recovery programs are in limbo. New applications aren’t being processed. Existing approved assistance is being held.

FEMA’s Disaster Relief Fund balance increased in early February to approximately $9.6 billion, according to a senior congressional aide. The increase came because the agency recovered money that had been promised for projects but not yet paid out. Historically, FEMA doesn’t restrict long-term recovery spending until the Disaster Relief Fund drops to around $3 billion.

The administration’s stated reasoning deserves a fair hearing before judging it. Noem cited the government shutdown and lack of appropriations as the reason for conserving resources, stating DHS must “take emergency measures to preserve limited funds and personnel.” A secretary does have legitimate authority to set reserve levels higher than past practice.

The strongest version of the administration’s argument would note that a $9.6 billion headline balance may not fully reflect the agency’s actual cash on hand. A portion of that balance consists of funds already committed to ongoing recovery projects but not yet paid out, meaning the usable balance could be lower. Winter storm response costs can also be hard to predict in advance. A secretary who errs toward caution before a major weather event is not obviously acting outside her authority.

That said, independent FEMA analysts and the agency’s own past practice suggest the stated reasoning is hard to support at this fund level. The threshold at which FEMA has historically shifted to Immediate Needs Funding exists precisely to separate genuine resource limits from optional policy choices. While approximately $3 billion has been cited as a reference point in recent practice, this figure has varied across the ten documented instances of INF implementation from 2001–2024 and is not a formally codified threshold. Even accounting for committed-but-unpaid funds, the gap between $9.6 billion and that historical trigger is wide. The current pause appears to reflect a political decision. It is not a financial one imposed by fund balance alone.

If you have an active FEMA recovery case from a past disaster, contact your local FEMA Disaster Recovery Center directly. The national assistance programs are paused even though FEMA itself remains technically open. For background on what typically freezes first when DHS funding lapses, our earlier piece on which border and immigration operations freeze first covers how it works.

ICE and CBP: Fully Operational, By Design

Immigration and Customs Enforcement is not affected by this shutdown. Not in any practical sense. The agency received $75 billion in a lump-sum, multi-year budget through the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, a 2025 spending measure that gave immigration enforcement a funding source independent of the annual spending bills that fund most of the government. CBP received $64 billion through the same mechanism. ICE agents continue enforcement operations. Detention facilities remain staffed. Deportation flights continue.

Democrats shut down DHS to force reforms on ICE. But ICE doesn’t need DHS’s annual appropriations to operate. So the shutdown is hurting TSA screeners who aren’t getting paid, FEMA disaster survivors who can’t access recovery funds, and Coast Guard personnel working without paychecks. Meanwhile, the agency Democrats are trying to pressure keeps running without interruption. Republicans argue that Democrats made a deliberate choice to start the shutdown with full knowledge of this structure. The resulting harm to unrelated workers and agencies, they say, is a consequence of that choice.

Democrats offer a different account of how the harm was produced. Their argument is that Republicans deliberately set up ICE and CBP funding through reconciliation specifically to remove those agencies from the normal appropriations process, and therefore from the normal pressure tool available to the minority. On that reading, the harm to TSA screeners and Coast Guard personnel is a result of the Republican decision to build a funding structure where any Democratic pressure would fall on unrelated agencies rather than on the agencies at issue. Democrats did not choose to harm TSA workers, the argument goes. They chose to use the only pressure tool available after Republicans had blocked the direct one.

The Cato Institute has written critically about the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, and analysts across the spectrum have argued that Republicans’ decision to fund ICE and CBP through reconciliation changed how shutdown negotiations work politically. It also raises a question neither party wants to answer: what stops a future Congress from using the same method to shield any agency it wants from annual appropriations pressure? Both parties have competing blame arguments. Democrats chose to pull the trigger; Republicans built the gun that way. These are live political disputes. Readers will assess them differently depending on how they weigh structural choices against immediate ones.

For a detailed look at how ICE’s multiyear appropriations structure works and what it means for enforcement operations during a funding lapse, see our earlier coverage of what immigration enforcement looks like without DHS funding.

Coast Guard: Working Without Pay

The Coast Guard continues all essential operations: search and rescue, maritime security, law enforcement. Active-duty and reserve personnel are working. They are not being paid. Training activities have been curtailed.

Its members cannot legally strike or refuse duty. They show up regardless. But unlike ICE, the Coast Guard has no multiyear budget protection. It takes the full financial hit of the shutdown while continuing to carry out every mission it was assigned.

One Coast Guard civilian employee, quoted by federal workplace reporter Eric Katz, put it plainly: “I did not dig out from the last shutdown before this one began.” The employee had taken a no-interest loan from Coast Guard Mutual Assistance during last year’s 43-day funding lapse. Multiple payments were still outstanding. “I’m struggling. I’m not going to paint a picture that I’m OK financially.”

Craig Carter, president of the Federal Managers Association, which represents managers, supervisors, and executives in the federal government, stated: “Federal employees at the Department of Homeland Security are once again working without pay and must endure uncertainty on their budgets for the fiscal year. This is an unacceptable way to treat these dedicated feds.”

USCIS and Visa Processing: Depends on What You’re Applying For

United States Citizenship and Immigration Services continues to accept and process applications funded by the fees applicants pay when they apply. Work-based green card applications, family-based applications, and asylum applications with fees are moving. Possible delays due to staffing limits apply, but processing hasn’t stopped. For background on the broader DHS shutdown and Democratic counteroffers, CBS News has tracked the ongoing negotiations.

Immigrant visa processing at U.S. Consulates abroad is a different story. It has effectively stopped for most cases except genuine emergencies. Non-immigrant visa interviews at some locations continue. But applicants can’t receive their visas without security checks from DHS systems that aren’t being updated during the shutdown. The backlog growing right now will take months to clear once funding is restored.

If you are waiting on a visitor, business, or immigrant visa decision: you are affected. No new decisions are being issued. Interviews for previously pending cases may be delayed. There is no reliable timeline for when this resumes.

E-Verify: Still Running

Early in the shutdown, there was confusion about whether E-Verify, the system employers are legally required to use to confirm work authorization, would go offline. At least one employer-focused legal source has reported E-Verify offline during the shutdown. Employers should verify current system status before assuming normal operations can continue.

Your Situation: A Direct Guide

Flying before March 12: You are currently unaffected. TSA PreCheck and Global Entry status during the shutdown has shifted rapidly, so check for updates before you travel. Standard security lines are moving at normal speeds. Plan your normal airport arrival time.

Flying during mid-March spring break periods: Monitor the situation closely. Spring break dates vary widely by school district and region, but if the shutdown is still ongoing when TSA agents begin missing paychecks around March 17, this is when disruption becomes visible regardless of your exact travel dates. Add buffer time. Check TSA’s status updates before you leave for the airport.

Have a Global Entry or TSA PreCheck enrollment appointment: Call ahead. Some enrollment centers have suspended new appointments. Do not assume yours is still scheduled.

Waiting on FEMA recovery assistance for a past disaster: Your case is in limbo. Long-term recovery funding has been paused. Contact your local FEMA Disaster Recovery Center directly to understand your specific case status.

Have a pending USCIS fee-funded application: Processing continues but expect delays. Your application is moving, more slowly.

Waiting on a U.S. Visa decision: You are affected. Processing has slowed significantly or stopped. No reliable timeline for resumption.

An employer using E-Verify: Verify current system status before assuming normal operations can continue. At least one source has reported E-Verify offline during the shutdown.

A DHS employee working without pay: Your health insurance and retirement benefits continue. You will receive back pay once the shutdown ends. Contact your agency union immediately for resources and guidance.

A furloughed DHS employee: You will receive back pay for the full furlough period once funding is restored. You cannot be required to work. If your employer is pressuring you to do so, consult your union representative.

The Deadlock, Explained Plainly

The dispute blocking a deal is not about money. Both sides have made that clear. Democrats are demanding that ICE agents obtain judicial warrants before forcibly entering private homes to arrest people for immigration violations. Judicial warrants are court orders signed by a federal judge or magistrate who has reviewed the evidence and agreed there’s sufficient reason to act.

The White House has declared this a “red line,” arguing it would unconstitutionally limit the president’s power to enforce immigration law. A detailed account of the White House’s red lines in DHS funding talks was reported by Politico as the shutdown approached.

The legal question is settled in some respects and genuinely disputed in others. It is worth telling the two apart. Emmanuel Mauleón is an Associate Professor of Law at the University of Minnesota. He specializes in the Fourth Amendment, which governs when government agents can search your home or property. He has stated that “there has been no U.S. Supreme Court case ever that has found that an administrative warrant meets the legal standard required” for home entry. David Schultz, a law professor at the University of St. Thomas, has argued that requiring judicial warrants is a foundational principle of American law. He stated directly: “There is no debate on this one among legal scholars that an internal agency warrant, one not approved by a judge, gives agents no legal authority to enter a home.”

The administration’s defense has come primarily from DHS General Counsel Jimmy Percival. He argues that people who have already been ordered deported “have already seen a judge, had a chance to make their case and received a fair legal hearing, and been ordered removed,” meaning agency-issued warrants should be enough to carry out arrests. Percival is a partisan actor, but the core legal argument he is making draws on a line of legal thinking that some independent scholars take seriously.

The Supreme Court’s 1999 decision in Reno v. American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee recognized wide executive discretion in immigration enforcement. The Court’s plenary power doctrine has historically given Congress and the executive branch wider room in the immigration context than in ordinary criminal law. Some legal scholars argue that the Fourth Amendment’s warrant requirement, developed mainly in the criminal law context, does not apply cleanly to civil immigration enforcement of final removal orders. In those cases, the individual has already received a formal order of removal through a separate court process. On this view, the specific question of whether a civil administrative warrant is enough for home entry to carry out a final removal order is not clearly settled by existing Supreme Court precedent. The Court has not squarely addressed it in the immigration context.

That said, the bulk of independent constitutional scholarship does not favor the administration’s position. The Fourth Amendment’s protection of the home is among the most consistently upheld in the Court’s legal history. The civil/criminal distinction has not historically been seen as removing the warrant requirement for home entry. Courts have applied it in administrative search contexts as well.

The broad consensus among scholars who have written on this specific question is that an administrative warrant does not meet the constitutional requirement for forced home entry, regardless of the underlying immigration status of the occupant. The administration’s argument is not without merit, but it is a minority position in the independent legal literature. For a deeper look at the legal principles behind this dispute, including the May 2025 Lyons memo that changed the rules on when agents need a resident’s permission to enter a home, see our coverage of why Congress’s attempt to force warrant requirements failed.

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries has stated clearly that ICE reform is not one item among many for Democrats: “If that doesn’t happen, the DHS funding bill will not move forward.” The Democratic package also includes body camera requirements, restrictions on roving patrols (agents who move through neighborhoods rather than working fixed locations), limits on operations near schools and churches, and requirements that ICE agents identify themselves. Senate Majority Leader John Thune told reporters there was “some room for give and take” but that the White House’s last offer was “a good faith one,” saying they were “attempting, in every way, to try and land this thing so we can get DHS funded.” That signals the administration is not moving significantly.

Congress returned from recess on February 23. Negotiators are, by multiple accounts, still far apart on the core question. The White House stated after Democrats submitted a counterproposal on February 17 that “the parties are still far apart.”

What Ends This

Previous shutdowns, including the 35-day 2018-2019 closure, which was later surpassed by last year’s 43-day funding lapse, typically ended when one party decided the public backlash from continuing the shutdown was worse than the backlash from backing down. The financial strain on DHS employees facing delayed or stopped paychecks is one factor that has historically accelerated pressure toward a resolution.

That tipping point usually came when visible public disruption made the shutdown impossible to ignore — national parks closing, passport offices shutting down, food safety inspections halting — widespread enough that voters from both parties felt them.

This shutdown is narrower. TSA checkpoints remain open. Border crossings remain open. Most Americans have no idea it’s happening. That changes the political math. The pressure that would normally build toward a deal is building more slowly.

There are three ways this ends. One: a legislative deal, which requires one side to move significantly on the warrant question. Neither side is currently signaling willingness to do that. Two: a court ruling that settles the Fourth Amendment question. That would take months and might not give either side a clear win. Three: the spring break disruption becomes bad enough that the political cost of the shutdown finally exceeds the political cost of compromise. That third outcome depends entirely on whether no-show rates climb the way past patterns suggest they will once paychecks stop arriving.

The State of the Union is scheduled for February 24. Some Democrats have announced they will boycott it, citing broader opposition to the president’s agenda rather than the shutdown specifically. Whether that produces any negotiating movement, or simply hardens each side’s position, is what the next two weeks will determine.

Our articles make government information more accessible. Please consult a qualified professional for financial, legal, or health advice specific to your circumstances.