Federal officials approve nearly $200 million for two luxurious jets amid shutdown controversy

20 October 2025

US Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem in Washington, DC, on October 8, 2025. FRANCIS CHUNG/POOL/EPA/Shutterstock

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has signed a contract worth approximately $172 million to acquire two Gulfstream G700 private-jets, each capable of carrying up to 13 passengers and boasting a 7,750-mile range, intended for use by Secretary Kristi Noem, senior DHS officials and the United States Coast Guard's long-range command-and-control operations.

The acquisition follows an earlier request by the Coast Guard for about $50 million to purchase a single jet a considerable contrast with the nearly four-fold larger contract now revealed. According to DHS officials, the existing aircraft are more than 20 years old, have experienced frequent unplanned maintenance days over 30 since January 2025 and are considered past their operational lifecycle.

The contract includes customised features such as specialised paint and enhanced cabin amenities, consistent with the G700’s reputation as “the most spacious cabin in the industry.” The purchase emerged while the federal government was facing a shutdown, drawing sharp criticism from Congressional Democrats who accused agency leadership of prioritising luxury over operational effectiveness.

In a letter to Secretary Noem, Representatives Rosa DeLauro and Lauren Underwood raised concerns that this procurement appears to elevate personal comfort above the needs of frontline service members. “It appears that your first priority is your own comfort,” the letter stated.

DHS officials maintain the contract is for operational readiness rather than personal luxury. A DHS adviser asserted that maintaining secure long-range mobility and command-control capability for senior officials is critical for national-security operations, even during the government funding lapse.

The backlash also highlights broader issues of procurement transparency and priority setting. Congressional critics argue that authorising such a costly purchase during a shutdown, particularly when some Coast Guard personnel were reportedly furloughed or unpaid, presents an ethical and fiscal dilemma. 1

For Noem’s defenders, the narrative frames the acquisition as necessary modernisation a replacement of aged equipment and not just an upgrade of convenience. The Coast Guard states that the older jet was not only beyond safe operating limits but had caused mission cancellations due to maintenance.

Regardless of justification, the timing and optics pose significant risks. During a period of budget constraints and political gridlock, allocating hundreds of millions of dollars for executive transport raises questions about value, priorities and message. Analysts suggest that even if fully operationally justified, the decision invites scrutiny and may affect public trust and funding flows for other mission-critical items.

From a policy perspective the episode illustrates the tension between necessity, perception and prioritisation in public-sector spending. It also raises questions about how infrastructure investments get approved especially in high-visibility regions such as senior-official travel and how oversight mechanisms respond under pressure.

Contract details show the jets were procured under sole-source conditions and payment includes training. Critics contend this heightens the need for documentation demonstrating that less-costly alternatives were assessed a point made in the congressional letter requesting analysis of alternatives and justification for funding during the fiscal impasse.

House Committee on Appropriations

Looking ahead, the procurement must still pass final appropriations review and face potential oversight hearings. Congress may request detailed breakdowns of cost savings, usage policy, and whether the aircraft will serve primarily mission-critical operations or broader official travel. The Coast Guard’s role in defining usage memos will be under the microscope.

Ultimately the story is about more than jets it is about how government defines operational necessity amid competing pressures for transparency, cost-control and accountability. If the procurement is seen as justified, it may withstand scrutiny. If not, it may become a cautionary tale about timing, cost and public-sector optics.