Avelo’s Deal with IC

Avelo Airlines extended its contract with the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) for deportation flight services with ICE in April 2025. Avelo added three of its Boeing 737-800s to service operations with an operating base at Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport in Arizona. The domestic and international flights, initiated on May 12, 2025, were a total departure from its core commercial passenger business by Avelo.

• Avelo CEO Andrew Levy stated in the firm’s justification that the contract would give economic certainty and help preserve jobs for more than 1,100 crew members. He added that the airline has conducted similar flights before under the Biden administration and that their involvement was a response to a federal appeal.

Public and Political Backlash

Protests then spread outside of Connecticut. They erupted in cities like Houston, Salem, Burbank, and Wilmington and were bolstered by a national campaign known as Stop Avelo. The organisation, whose founder is activist Matthew Boulay, called for a national protest on May 31, for public subsidies to cease to Avelo, and for CEO Andrew Levy to be removed from airline board positions.

Legal Challenges and Legislative Actions

Avelo’s actions have also encountered legal challenges and legislative action. A New Hampshire state legislator named Seth Miller sued to defend his protest campaign against Avelo, which included billboards calling for passengers to boycott the airline. The carrier sued the firm for trademark infringement, but Miller claimed he was exercising free speech.

• In New York, Democratic lawmakers introduced the “State Airport Facilities Enforcing Accountability in Immigration Removals” bill. The bill would bar state contracts and tax breaks for airlines cooperating with ICE without offering due process of the courts. The bill arises from increasing alarm at using commercial flights as part of federal deportation policy and the increasing utilisation of economic incentives as a corporate compliance tool.

Connecticut Attorney General William Tong also warned Avelo that engaging in deportation flights would threaten state tax credits and other local incentives.

Safety and Ethical Concerns

Flight attendants and the union have addressed dire safety issues with the deportation flights. The Association of Flight Attendants-CWA stated that carrying restrained passengers would jeopardise emergency evacuations and slow down reaction to medical problems or in-flight fires on board. They called on Avelo to end its contract with ICE since the peril for passengers and flight crew is a concern.

Economic Implications and Community Impact

Avelo’s move to run deportation flights is also economically motivated, i.e., in the areas where Avelo has its operations. In California’s Sonoma County, officials condemned Avelo for shuttering its operations facility at Charles M. Schulz-Sonoma County Airport to bid on the ICE contract. Board Chairman Lynda Hopkins condemned it, saying the airline liked helping the “deportation industrial complex” more than the local tourism economy.

The Big Picture: Corporate Social Responsibility and Immigration Policy

Avelo Airlines’ involvement in deportation flights has been the subject of wider national controversy over immigration policy, government contracting out to the private sector, and corporate conscience on the part of those federal government contractors offering services to federal agencies. To critics, by opening up its service to ICE, Avelo is not merely hauling but complicit in policies they deem immoral and inhumane.

• Enforcement of immigration under Republican and Democratic administrations has also long depended on contracts with private contractors to execute deportations, operate detention centres, and perform removals. Public opinion of such agreements has profoundly changed in recent decades, particularly in conjunction with the reports of family separation and treatment at immigration detention centres. Avelo’s actions more truly reflect for many the widespread evil of corporate profiteering from the suffering of vulnerable groups.
• This is privatization of immigration enforcement, not one airline,” Cecilia Wang, an immigration lawyer, said. “When airlines like Avelo sign contracts with ICE, they make a moral decision to choose profit over dignity.”

Behind the Flights: Restraints, Deportees, and Procedure

Some accounts have explained how ICE-chartered flight deportees, such as those on Avelo’s flights, are treated. They are usually handcuffed from the wrist to the waist to the ankle.

• One of the past Avelo cabin staff, speaking to The Guardian anonymously, described how on one of the recent deportation flights it had been “chilling”: “No dignity. People were quietly crying, handcuffed for hours. I used to come to work for this airline to help people to fly to their holidays, not deport them in chains.”
• To this problem, there are on-record cases on past ICE flights (albeit not necessarily on Avelo) in which deportees have died due to medical neglect or got traumatised during transit. These thus sully the whole deportation process and raise further questions about the moral culpability of the involved airlines.

Stakeholder Dilemmas: Tweed Airport and Local Governments

One of its multiple points of contention is at Tweed New Haven Airport in Connecticut, Avelo’s initial hotspot and central site for its business. The city and state have recently invested public money in airport development, offering subsidies and tax breaks to lure and keep Avelo as an airline. But the ICE contract has stirred a contentious debate among city officials over whether taxpayer money indirectly underwrites deportation.

• “We believed Avelo would generate economic activity in our area, not divide our community along federal immigration policy lines,” said Twed Airport Authority Board Chairman John Picard.

Conclusion

Avelo Airlines’ involvement in ICE deportation flights has escalated a multifaceted issue involving ethical, legal, safety, and economic interests. Though the airline couches its move regarding business necessity and deference to federal pressure, popular protest, political opposition, and interest-group opposition react to the sensitivities and complexities of imposing immigration. As protests persist and lawsuits linger on, Avelo is being increasingly driven out of such enterprises and towards serving the interests of its constituents.