Trendpills
A secret Department of Justice memo has provided the legal foundation for a series of deadly U.S. military strikes against suspected drug boats, basing its justification almost entirely on President Donald Trump's public assertions of an "armed conflict" with cartels. This new policy has led to at least 20 strikes in the Caribbean Sea and eastern Pacific since September, resulting in the deaths of approximately 80 people, according to reports. The attacks represent a significant escalation in U.S. counter-narcotics strategy.
The document, revealed by The New York Times and other outlets, argues that the president's wartime powers authorize the use of lethal force. It cites Trump’s claims that cartels are actively seeking to kill Americans and destabilize the region, thereby framing them as an enemy force. This legal framework has allowed the military to target and destroy vessels without the aim of capture or evidence collection, a stark departure from the longstanding U.S. policy of interdiction.
This shift was foreshadowed in a February Justice Department conference, where a top official reportedly instructed prosecutors to "just sink" suspected drug boats rather than interdict them. This new 'sink on sight' approach raises significant legal questions, as the administration has provided little public evidence to support its conclusion that the U.S. is formally in an armed conflict with these groups. While the administration claims the targets are "narco-terrorists," critics argue there is no proof of the boats' cargo or the affiliations of those killed.
The controversial anti-drug trafficking campaign has drawn sharp bipartisan criticism. Democratic Senator Ruben Gallego labeled the strikes "sanctioned murder," while Republican Senator Rand Paul referred to them as "extrajudicial killings." Concerns over the strikes' legality and oversight have intensified, with lawmakers demanding more transparency and a clearer legal basis than the president's rhetoric. The reliance on a memo that codifies political statements into a justification for military action has sparked a debate on the limits of executive power and the rules of engagement in the fight against drug trafficking.
