Avelo Deportation Flights Spark Bill Targeting Jet Fuel Tax Exemptions

Key Takeaways

• The SAFE AIR Act aims to revoke $11-$17 million in jet fuel tax exemptions for airlines lacking due process in deportation flights.
• Avelo Airlines began operating deportation flights for DHS in May 2025, dedicating three Boeing 737 jets primarily from Mesa, Arizona.
• Connecticut officials criticize Avelo’s DHS contract and consider ending state support if due process concerns remain unresolved.

Avelo Deportation Flights Spark New York Bill Targeting Jet Fuel Tax Exemptions

A new bill in New York is making headlines after Avelo Airlines began operating deportation flights for the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS). The State Airport Facilities Enforcing Accountability in Immigration Removals (SAFE AIR) Act, introduced by State Senator Patricia Fahy in late June 2025, aims to remove jet fuel tax exemptions for airlines involved in deportation flights that may violate civil liberties. This move comes as public concern grows over the role of commercial airlines in federal immigration enforcement and the use of state tax incentives to support these operations.

The SAFE AIR Act is currently under review in the New York State Senate’s Committee on Procurement and Contracts. The bill was announced during a virtual press conference hosted by the Coalition to Stop Avelo, with support from Connecticut Attorney General William Tong and several national advocacy groups. The legislation directly responds to Avelo’s recent contract with DHS, which began in May 2025, and has sparked debate among lawmakers, advocacy groups, and the airline industry.

What Is the SAFE AIR Act and Why Was It Introduced?

The SAFE AIR Act is a proposed law in New York that would revoke jet fuel tax exemptions—worth between $11 million and $17 million each year—for airlines found to be transporting people for deportation without a valid judicial warrant or proof that due process was followed. Due process means that the person being deported had access to a lawyer and a hearing before an immigration judge.

Senator Patricia Fahy, who is leading the legislative effort, explained that the bill is meant to ensure airlines do not benefit from taxpayer-funded incentives if they are involved in deportations that do not respect constitutional rights. She said, “We need state oversight to make sure airlines uphold constitutional rights and do not profit from taxpayer-funded incentives when due process is not followed.”

The bill was introduced in May 2025 and is still being considered by the committee. If passed, it would set a new standard for how states can use their own tax policies to influence federal immigration enforcement.

Avelo’s Role in Deportation Flights

Avelo Airlines, a low-cost carrier that started service from Tweed New Haven Airport in 2019, has grown quickly and now serves over 600,000 passengers each year across 31 destinations. In April 2025, Avelo signed a contract with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), a part of DHS, to operate deportation flights. The first such flight took place on May 12, 2025.

Avelo has dedicated at least three of its 20 Boeing 737 jets to these deportation flights, which mainly operate out of Mesa, Arizona. The airline continues to run 30 direct passenger routes from its main base in Connecticut.

Avelo defended its decision, saying the partnership with DHS was necessary for financial reasons, especially as competition in the airline industry increases. The company stated it is committed to “the rule of law” but has not shared details of its contract with ICE, citing business confidentiality.

How the SAFE AIR Act Would Work

The SAFE AIR Act lays out a clear process for state agencies and airlines:

1. Assessment: State agencies must check that any airline involved in deportation flights provides proof of a valid judicial warrant or order and shows that due process was followed for each person transported.
2. Contracting: Agencies are not allowed to enter into or renew contracts with airlines that do not meet these standards.
3. Tax Exemption Review: Airlines found to be in violation would lose their eligibility for the state’s jet fuel tax exemptions.
4. Enforcement: The New York State Attorney General can seek court orders or civil penalties against airlines that do not comply.

This approach uses the state’s power over contracts and tax policy to encourage airlines to respect the rights of people facing deportation.

Connecticut’s Response and Broader Regional Impact

Connecticut lawmakers are also considering changes in response to Avelo’s deportation flights. The state currently gives Avelo an aviation fuel tax exemption and up to $2 million in loss guarantees. Connecticut Attorney General William Tong has publicly criticized Avelo’s partnership with DHS, sending a letter to the airline’s CEO expressing “deep disappointment” and warning that the state may end its support for Avelo if concerns are not addressed.

Connecticut lawmakers have discussed changing state law to stop companies that contract with state agencies from working with federal immigration authorities. This could mean Avelo would lose both its tax exemption and other financial support if it continues to operate deportation flights without ensuring due process for those being deported.

Key Stakeholders and Their Positions

The debate over Avelo’s deportation flights and the SAFE AIR Act involves many different groups:

• Senator Patricia Fahy (NY): Leading the push for the SAFE AIR Act, focusing on protecting constitutional rights and stopping state tax breaks for airlines that do not follow due process.
• Connecticut Attorney General William Tong: Strongly opposed to Avelo’s ICE contract, has threatened to recommend ending state support for the airline.
• U.S. Senators Richard Blumenthal (CT) and Alex Padilla (CA): Have demanded more transparency from Avelo and criticized the airline for not sharing details of its contract with ICE.
• Avelo Airlines: Defends its partnership with DHS as necessary for financial stability and claims it follows the law, but refuses to release contract details.
• Advocacy Groups: Organizing protests and boycotts, arguing that state subsidies should not go to companies profiting from deportation flights.
• Passengers and the General Public: Mixed reactions, with some supporting the protests and others focusing on low fares and convenience.

Why Jet Fuel Tax Exemptions Matter

Jet fuel tax exemptions are a way for states to attract and keep airline service. In New York, these exemptions are worth between $11 million and $17 million each year for airlines. In Connecticut, Avelo benefits from similar tax breaks and financial guarantees.

If the SAFE AIR Act passes, airlines that do not meet the due process standards for deportation flights would lose these valuable exemptions. This would make it more expensive for them to operate in the state and could influence their decisions about working with federal immigration authorities.

Legal and Policy Implications

Legal experts say the SAFE AIR Act is a new way for states to use their own powers to influence federal immigration enforcement. By tying state contracts and tax benefits to due process standards, New York is trying to make sure that airlines respect the rights of people facing deportation.

The bill also gives the state attorney general the power to go to court or seek civil penalties against airlines that do not comply. This adds another layer of enforcement beyond just losing tax exemptions.

Advocacy groups see the bill as a way to stop state subsidies from supporting deportation flights. They argue that taxpayer money should not help companies profit from actions that may violate civil liberties.

Industry analysts point out that airlines have long operated charter flights for government agencies, including deportation flights. They say financial pressures may force airlines to take these contracts, especially as competition grows and profit margins shrink.

How the SAFE AIR Act Could Affect Different Groups

For Airlines:
Airlines found to be involved in deportation flights without proper judicial oversight would lose their jet fuel tax exemptions in New York and possibly Connecticut. This could cost them millions of dollars each year and make it less attractive to work with federal immigration authorities.

For State Agencies:
The bill would stop any state agency, department, or local government from entering into or renewing contracts with airlines that do not meet the due process standards for deportation flights. This could affect how states choose airline partners for official travel or other services.

For People Facing Deportation:
The legislation aims to make sure that anyone being deported from New York has access to a lawyer and a hearing before an immigration judge. This is meant to protect constitutional rights and prevent wrongful deportations.

For Passengers and the Public:
Some passengers may support the protests and boycotts, while others may be more concerned about keeping low fares and convenient flights. The debate highlights the complex relationship between airline business decisions, state policy, and public opinion.

Background: Avelo’s Growth and the ICE Contract

Avelo Airlines has grown quickly since it began service from Tweed New Haven Airport in 2019. The airline now serves over 600,000 passengers each year and operates 31 destinations. Its contract with ICE is the first known private-sector agreement between the agency and a commercial airline, which has brought extra attention and scrutiny.

States like New York and Connecticut have used aviation fuel tax exemptions to attract airlines and keep flights affordable for residents. But Avelo’s contract with ICE has led lawmakers to reconsider whether these incentives should continue for airlines involved in deportation flights that may not respect due process.

National and Local Advocacy Efforts

Advocacy groups at both the national and local levels have organized protests, boycotts, and public campaigns against Avelo’s deportation flights. The Coalition to Stop Avelo has played a leading role, hosting press conferences and urging lawmakers to take action.

These groups argue that state subsidies should not support companies that profit from deportation flights, especially if there are concerns about civil liberties and due process. They are calling for more transparency from airlines and for states to use their own powers to influence immigration enforcement.

Multiple Perspectives: A Closer Look

What Happens Next?

The SAFE AIR Act is still being considered by the New York State Senate’s Committee on Procurement and Contracts. If it passes, it could set an example for other states looking to use their own tax and contract powers to influence federal immigration enforcement.

Connecticut lawmakers and the attorney general are also considering further action, including ending state support for Avelo if the airline does not address concerns about due process and transparency.

Other states and cities may follow New York and Connecticut’s lead, especially as advocacy groups continue to organize and public pressure grows.

Practical Steps for Stakeholders

• Airlines: Should review their contracts with federal agencies and make sure they can prove due process was followed for any deportation flights.
• State Agencies: Need to check that any airline they work with meets the due process standards set out in the SAFE AIR Act.
• Advocacy Groups: Can continue to organize and push for more transparency and accountability from airlines and state governments.
• Individuals Facing Deportation: Should seek legal help and make sure they understand their rights to a hearing and legal counsel.

Where to Find More Information

For the latest updates on the SAFE AIR Act and related legislation, you can visit the New York State Senate’s official website (please note: this is a sample link; check the official site for the most current bill number and status). For information on Connecticut’s response, see the Connecticut Attorney General’s official site.

Analysis from VisaVerge.com suggests that the SAFE AIR Act could become a model for other states, especially as public concern about the intersection of immigration enforcement and state subsidies grows.

Conclusion: What This Means for Immigration Policy

The debate over Avelo, the SAFE AIR Act, and jet fuel tax exemptions highlights the growing role of state governments in shaping immigration policy. By tying tax incentives and contracts to due process standards, states like New York and Connecticut are trying to make sure that constitutional rights are respected, even as federal immigration enforcement continues.

This issue is likely to remain in the spotlight as lawmakers, advocacy groups, airlines, and the public continue to debate the best way to balance business interests, public safety, and civil liberties. For now, the SAFE AIR Act represents a new approach to holding airlines accountable and ensuring that state resources are used in ways that reflect public values and legal standards.

Learn Today

SAFE AIR Act → A New York bill to remove jet fuel tax exemptions from airlines violating deportation due process standards.
Due Process → Legal requirement ensuring individuals deported have access to a lawyer and immigration court hearing.
Jet Fuel Tax Exemptions → State tax breaks that lower operating costs for airlines, worth millions annually in New York.
Deportation Flights → Airline flights contracted by immigration authorities to transport individuals facing removal from the U.S.
Judicial Warrant → A court order authorizing an action, here required to lawfully deport individuals.

This Article in a Nutshell

The SAFE AIR Act challenges airlines like Avelo using state tax breaks for deportation flights lacking due process. This New York bill seeks accountability amid growing public concern over federal immigration enforcement partnerships with commercial carriers.
— By VisaVerge.com