Why UN legal experts say Maduro capture broke international law
- - Why UN legal experts say Maduro capture broke international law
Josh Meyer, USA TODAY January 8, 2026 at 2:37 AM
0
WASHINGTON – President Donald Trump has hailed the U.S. military operation to capture Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and bring him to the United States to face criminal trial for drug trafficking as "brilliant" and "amazing," but many legal experts say it violated domestic and international law.
The legality of the capture of Maduro and his wife Cilia Flores on Jan. 3 remains a subject of intense debate between the Trump administration and Democrats in Congress and other critics. It is also a point of conflict between Washington and some foreign governments and the international community.
The United States captured Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro and his wife in an overnight military operation on Jan. 3, 2026, President Donald Trump said, as explosions rocked Caracas and targets across the country.
" style=padding-bottom:56%>Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro, pictured here after his capture aboard the USS Iwo Jima, is seen in this handout image posted by U.S. President Donald Trump on Truth Social Jan. 3, 2026. The United States captured Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro and his wife in an overnight military operation on Jan. 3, 2026, President Donald Trump said, as explosions rocked Caracas and targets across the country.
" data-src=https://s.yimg.com/ny/api/res/1.2/8ehmqTM_Efph4ZoI3AuUGg--/YXBwaWQ9aGlnaGxhbmRlcjt3PTEyNDI7aD0yODQw/https://media.zenfs.com/en/usa_today_slideshows_242/cf59ea264913da3f34e4e01c69aa6c5e class=caas-img data-headline="US bombs targets in Venezuela and captures Nicolás Maduro" data-caption="
Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro, pictured here after his capture aboard the USS Iwo Jima, is seen in this handout image posted by U.S. President Donald Trump on Truth Social Jan. 3, 2026. The United States captured Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro and his wife in an overnight military operation on Jan. 3, 2026, President Donald Trump said, as explosions rocked Caracas and targets across the country.
">Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro, pictured here after his capture aboard the USS Iwo Jima, is seen in this handout image posted by U.S. President Donald Trump on Truth Social Jan. 3, 2026. The United States captured Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro and his wife in an overnight military operation on Jan. 3, 2026, President Donald Trump said, as explosions rocked Caracas and targets across the country.
" src=https://s.yimg.com/ny/api/res/1.2/8ehmqTM_Efph4ZoI3AuUGg--/YXBwaWQ9aGlnaGxhbmRlcjt3PTEyNDI7aD0yODQw/https://media.zenfs.com/en/usa_today_slideshows_242/cf59ea264913da3f34e4e01c69aa6c5e class=caas-img>
1 / 39US bombs targets in Venezuela and captures Nicolás MaduroA still image from video posted by the White House's Rapid Response 47 account on X.com, which originated from the @PaulDMauro account, shows Venezuela's President Nicolas Maduro being walked in custody down a hallway at the offices of the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) in New York City on Jan. 3, 2026.
“These actions represent a grave, manifest and deliberate violation of the most fundamental principles of international law, set a dangerous precedent, and risk destabilizing the entire region and the world,” a panel of United Nations experts said in a Jan. 7 statement.
The panel of 16 “special rapporteurs” are independent human rights experts appointed by the United Nations Human Rights Council. Their views “do not necessarily” represent those of the United Nations but were officially released by the UN Human Rights office.
That opinon is unlikely to affect whether Maduro and Flores will stand trial in the Southern District of New York on drug-trafficking and other charges. That’s because a decades-old Supreme Court decision essentially holds that once a person is brought to the U.S. under a legitimate arrest warrant, it doesn’t matter how they got here in terms of whether their prosecution should go forward.
More: Maduro bolted for the door as US forces raided. Trump's attack stuns the world.
What does international law say?
The panel of human rights experts said the unprovoked use of armed force on Venezuelan sovereign territory is a clear breach of Article 2(4) of the UN Charter, which “unequivocally prohibits the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any State.”
“It may also constitute the international crime of aggression attributable to the individual political and military leaders involved,” the UN panel said.
The UN experts also said that under international law, sitting heads of state like Maduro are immune from the criminal jurisdiction of foreign courts while in office. (Maduro's defense attorney has signaled he intends to make this argument.)
Article 2(4) of the United Nations charter prohibits the use of force against the territorial integrity and political independence of a sovereign state without UN authorization or a valid claim of self-defense.
China condemned the capture of Maduro and Flores as a "clear violation of international law” in a Jan. 4 statement published online.
“China calls on the U.S. to … release them at once, stop toppling the government of Venezuela, and resolve issues through dialogue and negotiation,” said the statement.
Other foreign adversaries and some Latin American countries issued similar critiques, while U.S. allies in Europe and Israel praised the move.
Protesters opposed the United States actions in Venezuela stand outside the Federal Courthouse in lower Manhattan where deposed President Nicolas Maduro is be arraigned Jan. 5, 2026.What does domestic U.S. law say?
The Trump administration maintains its actions were legally justified, and part of a pressure campaign to stop Venezuela from sending cocaine to the United States.
U.S. authorities for many years have sought Maduro on charges of drug trafficking and "narco-terrorism" for what the Justice Department has alleged is his enabling the transport of "thousands of tons" of the illicit drug cocaine to America.
Attorney General Pam Bondi described Maduro’s capture as a law enforcement effort to bring Maduro to the U.S. to "face justice."
"All personnel involved acted professionally, decisively, and in strict accordance with US law and established protocols," Bondi said in a statement.
Democrats and some legal experts say that the involvement of U.S. troops and bombs − and the deaths of about 75 people in Venezuela − mean Trump needed prior approval from Congress.
Maduro’s capture by Army Rangers, even if accompanied by a federal law enforcement agent who actually arrested him, violated U.S. law requiring congressional authorization of such foreign military interventions, former Defense Department legal counsel Ryan Goodman told USA TODAY.
“The Constitution vests Congress with the decision whether to engage in acts of war to carry out an arrest warrant inside a foreign country,” said Goodman, who served under President Barack Obama and is currently a law professor at New York University.
And because the operation also “was a flagrant violation of the UN Charter,” Goodman said, it violated U.S. law too.
That’s because in 1973, he said, “a near-unanimous Senate voted for the UN Charter to become domestic law binding on the President.”
The Trump administration argues that using military forces to protect the law enforcement officials carrying out an operation on foreign soil is not an act of war requiring congressional authorization.
“At its core, this was an arrest of two indicted fugitives of American justice, and the Department of War supported the Department of Justice in that job," Secretary of State Marco Rubio said Jan. 3.
Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, initially said on social media, "I look forward to learning what, if anything, might constitutionally justify this action in the absence of a declaration of war or authorization for the use of military force."
But after speaking to Rubio, he said the military was "deployed to protect and defend those executing the arrest warrant," and that "this action likely falls within the president’s inherent authority under Article II of the Constitution to protect U.S. personnel from an actual or imminent attack."
Some constitutional law experts say that decades of presidents in both parties initiating military incursions without Congress have de facto legalized such action.
"Yes, it seems like bootstrapping, or worse, to say that the United States can arrest a foreign dictator on foreign soil in violation of foreign sovereignty and then invoke the self-defense of the arresting forces to bomb the country," wrote Jack Goldsmith, a Harvard law professor who served as assistant attorney general under President George W. Bush, on the website Executive Functions. "But this is where the logic of the executive branch precedents leads."
Maduro has long denied the allegations and claims he is being politically victimized. He and his wife both entered not guilty pleas at their Jan. 5 arraignment in federal court in Manhattan.
Courtroom sketch shows captured Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and first lady Cilia Flores at their arraignment on U.S. narco-terrorism charges at federal court in New York City on Jan. 5, 2026.The Noriega precedent
The Trump administration has also pointed to the 1989 U.S. invasion of Panama to capture Gen. Manuel Noriega – also indicted on U.S. drug charges – as precedent.
That operation relied in part on a Justice Department opinion issued months earlier by then–Assistant Attorney General William Barr, which concluded that U.S. federal statutes authorize these kinds of extraterritorial arrests – and that the president’s constitutional authority is not constrained by international law because U.S. law supersedes it.
Goodman flatly rejected that argument, describing Barr’s Office of Legal Counsel memo as “one of the most discredited pieces of analysis” that is “predicated on an easily disprovable flaw in how treaties function in domestic law.”
“It's no wonder Bill Barr tried to keep the memo secret from Congress and the public,” Goodman said. “The Senate Foreign Relations Committee, on a bipartisan basis, flatly rejected the Barr theory years ago. It's astonishing that DOJ would now try to resurrect it.”
At a press briefing Jan. 7, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt responded to questions about the legality of the Maduro raid by saying that Democrats, including then-Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer of New York, had been calling for the Venezuelan leader to face justice for years.
“So the hypocrisy is really astounding here, and thank you for giving me an opportunity to point it out,” Leavitt told reporters.
Could the legal questions complicate Maduro's trial?
U.S. courts have repeatedly held that they retain jurisdiction over defendants regardless of how they were brought before the court, even if their capture violated international law, former senior Justice Department lawyer Mary Mason told USA TODAY.
The Supreme Court specifically affirmed that principle in a landmark 1992 case about U.S. federal agents’ abduction of a Mexican doctor so he could stand trial in Texas for the torture and slaying of Drug Enforcement Administration agent Enrique “Kiki” Camarena.
The Court ultimately held that the U.S. could try Humberto Álvarez Machaín because an existing U.S.-Mexico extradition treaty didn't explicitly forbid abductions, said Mason, who worked on the DOJ’s case before the court.
But that judicial ruling, Mason said, should not be mistaken for legality.
“Courts declining to intervene doesn’t mean the action was lawful,” said Mason, who said she believes the Maduro capture was clearly illegal under U.S. and international law. “It means the system has very few effective checks once a president decides to act.”
This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Trump hailed Maduro capture. UN experts call it illegal. Here’s why.
Source: “AOL Breaking”
