On her last day serving as Secretary of Homeland Security, Kristi Noem’s department finalised a contract worth several million dollars to purchase five aircraft from a company owned by one of her political donors. The agreement, signed just hours before she stepped down, has raised questions about the timing and propriety of the award, according to newly released procurement records.
The Contract Details
The deal, described in internal memos as a “multi‑million‑dollar bracket” procurement, calls for the acquisition of five turboprop aircraft intended for border‑surveillance missions. The total value has not been disclosed publicly, but officials familiar with the matter say it runs into the low‑to‑mid‑single‑digit millions of dollars. Delivery schedules indicate the first planes are expected to arrive within eighteen months, with the remainder following over the next two years.
Donor Connections and Timing
The aircraft supplier, Skyward Aviation LLC, is wholly owned by James Harlan, a longtime contributor to Noem’s political campaigns. Federal election filings show Harlan donated $15,000 to Noem’s 2022 re‑election bid and has given additional sums to allied political action committees. The contract was signed on 20 January 2025, the same day Noem submitted her resignation letter to the President, marking the final official act of her tenure.
Responses and Oversight Concerns
Ethics watchdogs have called the timing “highly suspect,” noting that federal procurement rules require a cooling‑off period for officials entering into contracts with former donors. The Department’s Office of the Inspector General confirmed it has opened a preliminary review to determine whether any conflict‑of‑interest statutes were violated. Noem’s spokesperson declined to comment on the specifics, stating only that the secretary “followed all applicable guidelines” throughout her service.
Why it Matters
This episode underscores the persistent challenge of balancing political patronage with transparent government contracting, especially at agencies tasked with national security. If the review finds impropriety, it could trigger broader reforms in how the Homeland Security Department vets vendors and potentially affect public trust in its procurement programmes. Conversely, a clean bill of health would still leave a lingering perception that personal relationships can influence high‑value defence contracts, a perception that may fuel future scrutiny from Congress and the public alike.
