What We Know About the El Paso Airspace Shutdown – The New York Times

Lead

Late on Tuesday, Feb. 11, 2026, the Federal Aviation Administration ordered a halt to flights to and from El Paso International Airport and surrounding airspace, a restriction that was lifted in under eight hours. The order initially took the form of a 10-day notice covering a roughly 10-mile radius that included Santa Teresa, N.M., while exempting flights above 18,000 feet. Trump administration officials said the action responded to a suspected incursion by Mexican cartel-operated drones; other officials and observers have questioned that explanation. The closure disrupted passengers and businesses and left local leaders seeking clearer answers.

Key Takeaways

• The FAA issued a NOTAM at 11:30 p.m. local time on Feb. 11, 2026, imposing a 10-day restriction on flights to and from El Paso International Airport.
• The restriction covered about a 10-mile radius around El Paso and included adjacent Santa Teresa, N.M., but did not apply to aircraft operating above 18,000 feet.
• The FAA notice warned the federal government “may use deadly force” against aircraft judged to pose an imminent security threat.
• The restriction was lifted in less than eight hours; FAA records show the initial 10-day NOTAM was not fully exercised.
• Administration officials attributed the order to a breach of U.S. airspace by Mexican cartel drones; that claim has not been independently verified.
• Airlines, travelers and some elected officials reported being caught off guard by the sudden notice; multiple flights and business plans were disrupted.

Background

The El Paso region sits on a busy international border adjacent to Ciudad Juárez, Mexico, and has long been a focal point for U.S.-Mexico security and immigration policy debates. In recent years U.S. authorities have raised concerns about cross-border smuggling and the use of small unmanned aircraft systems for illicit deliveries and surveillance along the border.

Temporary flight restrictions (NOTAMs) are a routine tool for managing aviation safety and security; they range from short, event-driven TFRs to longer security-related orders. However, broad airspace restrictions that carry language about potential use of deadly force are uncommon in densely populated commercial airport areas and typically prompt coordination between federal agencies, local officials and carriers.

Main Event

At approximately 11:30 p.m. local time on Feb. 11, the FAA posted a notice halting inbound and outbound flights at El Paso International for “special security reasons,” specifying a 10-day effective window and a 10-mile radius that encompassed nearby Santa Teresa, N.M. The notice exempted aircraft operating above 18,000 feet.

The FAA’s language included an unusual operational warning that federal forces “may use deadly force” against aircraft determined to present an imminent security threat. The notice did not disclose the specific intelligence or incident that prompted the order.

The restriction remained in place for less than eight hours before it was rescinded. During that interval travelers reported cancelled or delayed departures, airlines said they were initially uninformed, and local officials said they had received limited explanation from federal authorities.

Administration officials publicly linked the measure to an alleged incursion of drones tied to Mexican cartels; some security analysts and local leaders have since asked for the underlying evidence and for clearer interagency communication about the decision-making process.

Analysis & Implications

The brief but abrupt closure raises several operational and policy questions. First, the use of a 10-day NOTAM that was exercised for only hours suggests either new intelligence that was rapidly resolved or a precautionary posture that outpaced public explanation. Both possibilities underscore the tension between operational secrecy and the need for transparency in civilian airspace decisions.

If cartel-operated drones did enter U.S. airspace, the incident would highlight the growing challenge of small, low-cost unmanned systems for border security and aviation safety. Conversely, if the drone claim cannot be substantiated, the event could deepen mistrust between local authorities and federal agencies and invite scrutiny of the criteria used to impose severe airspace restrictions.

The explicit mention of potential deadly force in an FAA notice introduces legal and ethical concerns. Applying force at low altitudes near a commercial airport carries high risk to civilians on the ground and in the air, and would require precise rules of engagement, interagency coordination and legal authorization.

Economically and logistically, even a short closure can ripple through a regional transport hub like El Paso, affecting scheduled passenger flights, cargo operations and businesses that rely on timely air links. Repeated or poorly explained restrictions could alter airline routing decisions or erode public confidence.

Comparison & Data

This table summarizes the published NOTAM parameters and the actual short enforcement interval. The discrepancy between the 10-day window and the sub-eight-hour action is central to questions about the underlying intelligence, the interagency decision process and the communication breakdowns experienced by carriers and local officials.

Reactions & Quotes

“Mexican cartel drones had breached U.S. airspace,” administration officials said when explaining the decision.

Administration official (public statement)

“Sorry, I don’t have some clear answer,” Representative Joaquin Castro said when contacted early Wednesday about the shutdown.

Rep. Joaquin Castro (D-Texas)

“They didn’t know anything about the airport being closed,” a traveler who arrived at El Paso International said after speaking with an airline representative.

Alex Torres, traveler

Unconfirmed

• The claim that Mexican cartel drones definitively breached U.S. airspace has not been independently verified through public evidence.
• The specific intelligence source, sensor data or law enforcement reporting that prompted the 11:30 p.m. NOTAM has not been released publicly.
• Whether military or law-enforcement assets were positioned to execute the “deadly force” warning remains unclear.
• The full extent of flight cancellations and economic impact across the region has not been quantified in official reports.

Bottom Line

The Feb. 11 airspace action over El Paso was an unusual, short-lived disruption: the FAA posted a broad 10-day restriction late at night and then rescinded it within hours. The most consequential open question is whether the administration’s assertion about cartel-operated drones will be supported by verifiable evidence; that determination matters for policy, cross-border cooperation and public confidence.

Officials should provide a fuller account of the intelligence basis, interagency process and risk assessment that produced a NOTAM carrying language about possible deadly force. For residents, travelers and businesses in the El Paso region, the key near-term outcomes to watch are any formal findings, changes to coordination protocols, and whether similar measures are needed or anticipated in future border-area incidents.

Sources

• The New York Times — news report
• Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) — official agency (NOTAMs and aviation notices)