The BDN Opinion section operates independently and does not set news policies or contribute to reporting or editing articles elsewhere in the newspaper or on bangordailynews.com
Andrew I. Rudman is a senior associate in the Center for Strategic and International Studies Americas Program in Washington, D.C. He is also a member of The Steady State, a 300-plus member organization of former national security officials who remain committed to their oaths to “defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic.” He is a Colby College graduate and a Bangor native.
On Sept. 2, U.S. forces performed a “precision strike” on a suspected drug boat, killing 11 people said to be members of the Tren de Aragua, a group designated by the State Department as a foreign terrorist organization. Trump Administration officials declared the boat, purportedly carrying drugs bound for the United States, an immediate threat to the United States. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, speaking in Mexico on the following day, described the vessel as “headed towards, eventually, the United States.”
Drug trafficking incontrovertibly poses a threat to our national security and to Americans’ health and safety. Maine had 490 overdose deaths in 2024 according to a working group of the Maine Legislature. Let’s be clear, no one is suggesting that drug cartels should not be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.
This month’s attack, however, raises concerns related to the rule of law and due process in the United States. There are also implications for the safety of Americans, both domestically and abroad.
Evidence to support the administration’s claims regarding the boat’s passengers’ membership in Tren de Aragua or the presence of drugs on the vessel has not been made public. Some commentators, including retired military lawyers, have questioned the administration’s assertion that drug smuggling is legally equivalent to an armed attack on the United States. Doubts have also been raised regarding the likelihood that a fastboat, with limited cargo capacity, would be carrying so many passengers rather than trying to maximize profits.
Drug trafficking interdictions at sea are conducted by the Coast Guard, which is the “lead and only federal maritime law enforcement agency with the authority and capability to enforce national and international law, including drug interdiction, on the high seas.” A Coast Guard ship would likely have attempted to arrest the suspected traffickers and bring them to the United States for trial.
In this case, however, the attack was conducted by the Department of Defense (apparently via drone). Using the military for law enforcement raises serious concerns as it seemingly violates the Posse Comitatus Act which prohibits federal troops from participating in civilian law enforcement. (The Coast Guard is not bound by the Act.)
Further, even suspected criminals are entitled to due process under U.S. law. Nevertheless, rather than being offered an opportunity to surrender, the boat’s passengers were summarily executed without warning. Given recent reporting that indicates that the boat appears to have turned around when it spotted military aircraft, and that the incident occurred thousands of miles from the United States, the argument that the threat was imminent is dubious.
Again, the issue is not whether drug traffickers should be interdicted but rather the way in which the interdiction occurs. The Sept. 2 attack likely violates (and thus undermines) U.S. and international law.
Though the coasts of Venezuela and Maine are distant, the implications of the episode, like the purportedly carried drugs, can extend to Maine. Most illicit fentanyl consumed in Maine is trafficked over the U.S.-Mexico border and then transported to its final destination by American citizens or legal residents. It is therefore not impossible to envision drugs hidden inside the trailer of a truck travelling on the Maine Turnpike.
The question posed by the Venezuela raid is whether the administration would consider it within its authority to launch a drone strike on said vehicle. If a fastboat thousands of miles away represents an immediate threat, wouldn’t a vehicle already within the continental U.S. represent at least as immediate a threat? Most would say no, but the willingness of this administration to ignore due process and proper procedure suggests that the above scenario is not as absurd as we might wish.
The Trump Administration has appropriately prioritized drug trafficking as a national threat, however this does not obviate the obligation to uphold the rule of law while doing so.
