U.S. President Donald Trump’s claim that America will 'run' Venezuela after a controversial military operation to detain President Nicolás Maduro has ignited a fierce debate among legal scholars. 🌍⚖️ Experts warn the move violates international law and the U.S. Constitution, calling it a dangerous precedent.
In a New York Times interview this week, Trump doubled down on plans to extract Venezuela’s oil reserves, framing the operation as 'law enforcement.' But Georgetown University’s David Super argues: 'President Trump himself described this as ‘war’… It’s overt defiance of U.S. law.'
Three Legal Bombshells 💣
1. War vs. Law Enforcement: The operation’s legal footing is shaky. While Trump claims it’s about 'narco-terrorism' charges, scholars note Congress never declared war—a constitutional requirement. 'This isn’t a Marvel movie where the president can solo a sovereign nation,' quipped one analyst.
2. Can the U.S. ‘Run’ Venezuela? 'Absolutely not,' says Michigan’s Mitchel Sollenberger. The U.S. has no legal framework to govern another country, and Congress hasn’t funded such a mission. 'It’s like trying to download a country—you’ll just crash the system.'
3. Head of State Immunity: Maduro’s legal team argues his arrest violates international law. Though U.S. courts may ignore his presidential status, Super warns: 'This trial could set a wild precedent—imagine China arresting a U.S. leader over trade disputes.'
With Maduro pleading 'not guilty' and calling his detention a 'military abduction,' the case has become a geopolitical lightning rod. As Sollenberger puts it: 'This isn’t just about Venezuela—it’s about whether might makes right in 2026.'
