On January 3, 2026, the United States stunned the world with a dramatic military operation that resulted in the capture of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, a move that has sparked fierce political debate and raised urgent questions about the future of Venezuela—and America’s role in the region. The operation, authorized by President Donald Trump, unfolded swiftly and without prior notification to top congressional leaders, a decision that has divided lawmakers and ignited controversy both at home and abroad.
According to ABC News, the Department of Defense notified congressional staff only after the operation was already underway. President Trump, who had previously expressed concerns about potential leaks, made it clear that he would not brief lawmakers in advance of any land operations in Venezuela. "Congress has a tendency to leak. This would not be good," Trump said in a media interview following the action.
The mission itself was described as trigger-based, with Secretary of State Marco Rubio explaining at a Mar-a-Lago news conference that "conditions had to be met night after night" before the U.S. could move forward. Rubio emphasized, "This is not the kind of mission that you can do congressional notification on... it endangers the mission." He framed the operation as the arrest of "two indicted fugitives of American justice," with the Department of War supporting the Department of Justice in executing the warrant.
Nicolás Maduro, who has ruled Venezuela since 2013, was indicted in the United States nearly six years ago for drug trafficking and narco-terrorism. He has also faced investigation by the International Criminal Court for alleged crimes against humanity. Following his capture, Maduro was transferred to U.S. custody and is expected to be arraigned in federal court early the following week, as reported by the U.S. Department of Justice.
In the immediate aftermath, congressional reactions largely split along party lines. Republicans, by and large, rallied behind the president’s decision. Utah Senator Mike Lee, who initially expressed concern about the lack of congressional authorization, quickly changed his stance after a phone call with Secretary Rubio. "He informed me that Nicolás Maduro has been arrested by U.S. personnel to stand trial on criminal charges in the United States... 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," Lee posted on social media.
Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Tom Cotton, a Republican from Arkansas, was unequivocal in his support. Calling Maduro an "illegitimate dictator" tied to "large-scale drug trafficking," Cotton stated, "I commend President Trump and our brave troops and law-enforcement officers for this incredible operation." In a Fox News interview, Cotton likened the operation to a law enforcement arrest, saying, "Congress isn't notified when the FBI is going to arrest a drug trafficker or cyber criminal here in the U.S., nor should Congress be notified when the executive branch is executing arrests on indicted persons."
Other Arkansas leaders echoed this sentiment. House Intelligence Committee Chairman Rick Crawford described the event as "historic," comparing it to the 1990 U.S. capture of Manuel Noriega in Panama. Congressman French Hill praised the "decisive leadership to restore democracy in Venezuela," emphasizing that Maduro’s removal would allow the Venezuelan people to reclaim their freedom and would reinforce U.S. policy in the Western Hemisphere.
House Speaker Mike Johnson called the action "decisive" and "justified," while Senate Majority Leader John Thune described it as "an important first step to bring [Maduro] to justice for the drug crimes for which he has been indicted in the United States." Both leaders indicated that briefings for Congress would be scheduled as lawmakers returned to Washington after the holiday break.
But the operation was hardly without its critics. Prominent Democrats, including Rep. Jim Himes, Sen. Tim Kaine, and Rep. Jim McGovern, condemned the action as unjustified and illegal without congressional authorization. Himes argued, "Maduro is an illegitimate ruler, but I have seen no evidence that his presidency poses a threat that would justify military action without Congressional authorization, nor have I heard a strategy for the day after and how we will prevent Venezuela from descending into chaos." Kaine, a long-time advocate for congressional war authorizations, warned, "Trump has threatened to do all this and more and sees no need to seek legal authorization from people’s elected legislature before putting servicemembers at risk." McGovern called the strikes "unjustified" and "illegal."
Several House Republicans also voiced concerns about the constitutional and geopolitical implications. Rep. Thomas Massie questioned the legal basis for arresting a sitting foreign leader under U.S. law, while Rep. Don Bacon warned that the action could set a dangerous precedent for other nations, such as Russia and China, to justify their own military interventions. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene criticized what she saw as inconsistencies in the administration’s approach to narco-terrorism and military intervention, questioning why similar actions had not been taken against Mexican cartels or why other convicted leaders had been pardoned.
Underlying the political furor is the question of Venezuela’s future. At his Mar-a-Lago press conference, President Trump stated that the U.S. would “run Venezuela” for a period of transition and suggested that U.S. oil companies would be brought in to manage the country’s vast oil infrastructure. Venezuela holds about 17% of the world’s proven oil reserves, but its heavy-crude oil requires advanced processing—a challenge the Maduro regime has struggled to meet amid years of economic decline and international isolation.
Trump’s remarks also hinted at broader ambitions. In a Fox & Friends interview, he suggested that other countries in the region, including Colombia, Cuba, and Mexico, could face similar U.S. action if they continued to harbor drug cartels and their leaders. "Something’s going to have to be done with Mexico," he said, and warned Colombian President Gustavo Petro to "watch his ass."
Democratic leaders have called for immediate congressional briefings and a clear strategy to ensure stability in Venezuela and the region. They point to the recent failure of war powers resolutions in Congress as evidence of the need for legislative oversight. In December 2025, two Democratic-led resolutions to limit presidential authority for military action in the Western Hemisphere narrowly failed in the House, with only a handful of Republicans joining Democrats in support.
As Venezuela enters this uncertain transition, the professionalism of U.S. military and law enforcement personnel has been widely praised across the political spectrum. But the road ahead promises to be fraught with legal, ethical, and geopolitical challenges. The world will be watching to see how the United States navigates the aftermath of this historic operation—and whether the promise of democracy and stability for Venezuela can finally be realized.
