The Trump administration is facing some serious legal questions after conducting a lethal strike on a civilian boat in international waters, which President Trump claimed was a drug-carrying vessel operated by the Venezuelan Tren de Aragua gang, but there’s no evidence supporting this claim.
The incident happened in the southern Caribbean and was announced by Trump himself in a social media post that included a short, black-and-white video of what looked like a speedboat on fire after a bright flash of light. The president insisted the people on the boat were “terrorists” and that there were “illegal narcotics” on board. However, there’s no publicly available evidence to support either of these claims.
While the administration initially got the ‘Trump orders strike that kills bad guys’ headlines it was likely looking for, people realized that his story is not legally okay. For starters, it isn’t legal to use lethal force against a civilian boat in international waters unless you have evidence to back it up. Secondly, the USA is not the world police, and can’t bomb another country’s citizens without a really good reason.
Trump’s legal team has to have a legal defense for what could be a murder caught on tape
According to a report from The New York Times, Pentagon officials were still scrambling to figure out what legal authority they would cite to justify the strike. This really does feel like a literal example of “shoot first, ask questions later,” which I can confirm is not legal, as a former law enforcement officer myself.
A lot of experts are raising red flags. Ryan Goodman, an NYU law professor and former special counsel at the Pentagon, took to Bluesky to express his disbelief. He wrote, “I literally cannot imagine lawyers coming up with a legal basis for lethal strike of suspected Venezuelan drug boat. Hard to see how this would not be ‘murder’ or a war crime under international law that DoD considers applicable”. It’s a pretty telling quote when a legal expert can’t wrap their head around the logic.
This is a significant deviation from typical U.S. drug-fighting efforts. Normally, officials would try to intercept the boat, seize the cargo, and arrest those on board, giving them a chance to surrender before resorting to blowing anyone up. That is the legal way (which Trump so often tries to avoid).
The use of lethal force in this way against a civilian vessel, without any apparent self-defense justification, is something that should shock any good person. Everyone should be innocent until proven guilty. International standards and even the U.S.’s own regulations for maritime operations against civilian vessels call for restraint and a gradual, proportionate response. They explicitly or implicitly prohibit lethal force when there is no self-defense justification. Mere suspicion of carrying drugs or being pursued is not a death sentence, and even if it were, the president is no judge or jury.
Published: Sep 4, 2025 04:59 pm