Members of our community have requested that the Port ban shipment of specific cargo through the Oakland San Francisco Bay Airport (OAK). The Port’s leadership has met with the campaign organizers on a regular and ongoing basis and has investigated this issue thoroughly. The Port’s Board of Commissioners has since issued a public statement explaining its position on the issues. Yet there are still significant misunderstandings of the Port’s actual regulatory role and authority. The following questions and answers seek to summarize the Port’s discussions with organizers, the Port’s past public statements, and the facts and law on this topic.
Question: “Why are Oakland and OAK being associated with the movement of military cargo to Israel?”
Answer:
In August 2025, a report was released by the Palestinian Youth Movement that reported that the federal government was using private air cargo provider FedEx at OAK to ship replacement parts for the F-35 military aircraft to Israel. The F-35 is a fighter aircraft predominantly used by the U.S. military that is also licensed by the federal government for use by approximately 20 other nations, including Israel, which first received the aircraft in 2016. The sale and use of this aircraft by foreign nations was permitted by Congress and the federal government as early as 2002 and has since expanded over multiple Presidential administrations. The federal Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) in Tracy, CA, was designated by the federal government as a resupply center for the F-35 program in 2019.
The report detailed the likely shipment of aircraft parts from the DLA facility by private air cargo providers through several airports, including OAK, to the FedEx HQ facility in Memphis, TN, and then to many overseas destinations which included the Nevatim Airbase in Israel.
FedEx has a long-term ground lease with the Port of Oakland and is the largest air cargo carrier operating at OAK. All of FedEx’s flight and loading operations are directly carried out by FedEx employees in areas that FedEx exclusively controls and maintains.
Like all federally regulated public airports in the nation, OAK is legally required to accommodate federally authorized air traffic, including air cargo arranged by the U.S. government, private all cargo providers such as FedEx, UPS, and cargo charters as well as passenger airlines that carry cargo in their baggage hold areas.
Question: “Can the Port stop the shipment of military parts from the airport to Israel?”
Answer:
No. Federal law prohibits an airport such as OAK from interfering with legally authorized air cargo activity by a federally approved carrier. Any attempt to interfere with legal cargo activity by OAK would violate federal law and could jeopardize all federal funding the Port receives.
Specifically, the Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution provides that federal law “shall be the supreme Law of the Land.” Any state or local measures that conflict with or stand as an obstacle to federal law are preempted and are not permissible. There are various federal laws that govern movement of military cargo, matters of national defense and foreign relations, including the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. § 2751 et seq.) and the Airline Deregulation Act (49 U.S.C. § 41713 et seq.).
To the extent that the federal government contracts with a cargo carrier such as FedEx to move military cargo or any other supplies through an airport, any attempt by a local or state agency such as the Port to restrict or block those cargo shipments would directly conflict with these and other federal laws and would be void under the Supremacy Clause.
It would also be grounds for the federal government to withhold future funding and demand repayment for previously awarded grant funds over the past 20 years. Specifically, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Grant Assurance 22 states that airport sponsors will “make the airport available as an airport for public use on reasonable terms and without unjust discrimination to all types, kinds, and classes of aeronautical activities, including commercial aeronautical activities offering services to the public at the airport.”
Question: “Can the Port pass a resolution that would stop an airline from shipping military cargo from OAK?”
Answer:
No. If the Port of Oakland or its Board of Port Commissioners were to prevent a specific carrier from shipping legal cargo, the Port would be in direct violation of federal law and subject to litigation and damages.
The Port is prohibited from passing resolutions or ordinances that would intentionally violate the federal laws that govern our airport. Just as the Commissioners cannot pass a resolution that would prohibit an individual or groups of individual passengers from boarding an airline for personal travel to a specific destination, the Board cannot pass a resolution that would ban an authorized airline carrier from carrying legal cargo. This is not unique to OAK, and these laws govern every commercial airport in the nation.
Question: “Can other airports ban military cargo?”
Answer:
No. The laws and regulations that govern OAK are true for every federally authorized airport that receives federal funding.
Question: “Why hasn’t the Port taken action on this report?”
Answer:
The Port’s Commissioners, executive leadership, and attorneys have invested significant time and effort meeting with the organizers on multiple occasions and with their attorney and have conducted extensive research on this matter. Specifically, Port leadership, including legal staff, met with the Oakland Peoples Arms Embargo representatives in person and via Zoom on several occasions with the first group meeting occurring in October of 2025 and the most recent meeting in March of 2026. At each of these meetings, the Port has presented relevant federal statutes and laws regulating cargo and requested any examples from the organizers that could demonstrate how the Port would have the legal authority to take the action the organizers demanded. No such legal evidence has been provided, and the Port’s analysis has not been disputed by the campaign. These meetings have included the legal representative of the organizers.
On November 20, 2025, the Board of Port Commissioners released this statement condemning the war in Gaza and endorsing the passage of H.R. 3565, the Ban the Bombs Act, which would direct the federal government to block the sale of offensive weapons to Israel. The federal government has the exclusive jurisdiction to allow or disallow the shipment of federally authorized cargo to any destination.
Question: “Does the Port know FedEx is shipping military parts to Israel out of OAK but is doing nothing about it?”
Answer:
The Port has no legal authority to review or investigate cargo manifests from federally authorized air carriers, just as the Port does not regulate the movement of passengers on a commercial airline. Air cargo operators are not required to disclose to an airport who they are sending cargo to or what the shipments contain, just as private UPS or FedEx shipments one might receive at their home are not publicly available for review.
The Port has been provided with very limited shipping manifest data directly by the campaign organizers that disclose the movement of cargo from the DLA facility in Tracy, CA, through the FedEx facility in OAK, to the FedEx headquarters in Memphis, TN, with an ultimate destination in Israel. The organizers have not disclosed how this information was obtained. As far as the Port is aware, this information is not generally publicly available.
Question: “Can the Port’s Commissioners stop cargo airlines from shipping materials for military use out of OAK because it’s a ‘civilian airport’?”
Answer:
No. OAK serves as a commercial airport and also serves General Aviation (private/charter) aircraft. A federally authorized carrier has a right to ship legal cargo. OAK has no legal authority to ban a carrier from shipping any specific legal product.
Question: “Can the Mayor of Oakland or the Oakland City Council take formal action to prohibit cargo shipments from OAK?”
Answer:
No. Any resolution passed by a local municipality that addresses this topic would not supersede federal law and could not prohibit shipment of specific items.
Question: “If the Board of Port Commissioners has exclusive control and management of the Port, can it prohibit military cargo to Israel through OAK?”
Answer:
The Oakland Board of Port Commissioners has exclusive control and management of the Port at a municipal and local governing level. The Board cannot, however, exercise that authority in violation of state or federal laws.
Question: “Has the Port’s leadership and attorneys been provided with evidence that shows they have the legal authority to stop military cargo from passing through OAK?”
Answer:
As stated above, the Port’s leadership has met on an ongoing basis with the organizers of the campaign. To this date, after multiple meetings and extensive mutual sharing of information, the Port has not been provided with any evidence or legal basis that would permit OAK or any public commercial airport in the nation to ban legal air cargo.
Question: “In the 1980s, the Port voted to stop investing in South Africa during Apartheid – how was the Port able to pass this resolution?”
Answer:
In 1985, the Port’s Board of Commissioners passed an ordinance declaring that the Port would not enter into contracts with banking institutions doing business with South Africa and Namibia or purchase goods produced in South Africa or Namibia. This Port action did not involve a ban on Port cargo providers shipping goods to or from South Africa or Namibia. The Port is aware that, around the same time period, there were actions taken by dock workers relating to South African cargo – these workers were not employed by or controlled by the Port.
Question: “The City of Richmond passed a resolution that supports the “arms embargo” – how was the City of Richmond able to pass this resolution?”
Answer:
The Richmond City Council passed a non-binding resolution, which has no operational impact or influence at OAK, calling for an end to the sale of military arms and cargo by the federal government to Israel. Richmond does not operate a commercial airport.
Question: “Can the Port start an investigation into an airline’s cargo activities or cargo manifests for ‘environmental health and safety’ issues?”
Answer:
No. The federal government, primarily through the FAA and the Transportation Security Administration, has the exclusive authority to ensure that air cargo that is transported by an airline is safe and meets all environmental and health requirements. The Port does not have the authority to regulate, duplicate, or enforce aviation safety standards applicable to airline cargo operations based on generalized or unspecified “environmental health and safety” concerns. Local or state regulation or investigation of an airline’s cargo activity or shipments is preempted by applicable federal law, including the Hazardous Materials Transportation Act (49 U.S.C. § 5125(b)(1)).
Question: Could the Port use the Leahy Law/doctrine to stop FedEx from shipping military cargo?
Answer:
No. The Leahy Law or doctrine is a set of federal laws that prohibit the federal government from using federal funds for foreign security assistance when the federal government determines that there has been a human rights violation. The federal government, specifically, the United States Departments of State and Defense, have the exclusive authority to make determinations and restrict funding or assistance under the Leahy law. The Port does not have any authority under the Leahy law.
Question: “What can the Port of Oakland do to facilitate free speech and assembly for community concerns about this issue?”
Answer:
The Port of Oakland has always recognized our city’s championing of social justice causes – and particularly the right to free speech and assembly. We have worked closely with stakeholders to ensure that there is an ability to safely assemble and exercise their free speech concerns on Port property, including at OAK. We will continue to work with concerned residents who wish to raise public awareness on any issue in a manner that is safe for all parties involved and does not interfere with ongoing passenger and cargo operations. The Airport’s Free Speech Permit application can be found here.