Last week, the Southern Command's (SOUTHCOM) commanding officer stepped down just as Donald Trump was talking about expanding operations in the region against alleged drug traffickers.
There was speculation at the time that Adm. Alvin Holsey was leaving his role because he was worried about possible future criminal charges stemming from the strikes.
Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) is now calling these operations illegal, and there are some hard questions being asked as to whether the officers working on the operations, their commanding officers, or even perhaps Trump and Secretary of War Pete Hegseth, could face charges over these strikes.
Last week, Trump suggested that the war on drugs could soon include land operations.
On Wednesday, he stated that he may soon go to Congress to get approval for such operations.
Trump stated, “We will hit them very hard when they come in by land. And they haven’t experienced that yet, but now we’re totally prepared to do that.”
The president continued, “We’ll probably go back to Congress and explain exactly what we’re doing when [they] come to the land.”
This week, Hegseth announced that operations were now expanding to the Pacific, as yet another boat was taken out by a strike on Colombia’s Pacific coast.
He announced on X, “Yesterday, at the direction of President Trump, the Department of War conducted a lethal kinetic strike on a vessel being operated by a Designated Terrorist Organization and conducting narco-trafficking in the Eastern Pacific.”
Hegseth further warned, “Narco-terrorists intending to bring poison to our shores will find no safe harbor anywhere in our hemisphere.”
He continued, “Just as Al Qaeda waged war on our homeland, these cartels are waging war on our border and our people. There will be no refuge or forgiveness -- only justice.”
When we first started covering the strikes, I noted that Trump had designated drug cartels and gangs as terrorists. He later came out to declare that we are in an “armed conflict” with these groups. Trump used this specific language because of existing laws regarding military engagement, but a declaration from the president may not be enough to survive in the courts, if it ever comes to that.
Prof Luke Moffett of Queens University Belfast explained, "Force can be used to stop a boat but generally this should be non-lethal measures.” He then continued, "The fact that US officials describe the individuals killed by the US strike as narco-terrorists does not transform them into lawful military targets. The US is not engaged in an armed conflict with Venezuela or the Tren de Aragua criminal organization.” Prof Moffett added: "Labelling everyone a terrorist does not make them a lawful target and enables states to side-step international law."
I have seen Democrats latch onto this argument, suggesting that Trump and Hegseth are opening not only themselves but everyone involved in the strikes to possible charges for these strikes. Paul (R-KY) has also been talking along these lines, and he has been all over social media and the news hammering the notion.
Two people survived one of the recent boat strikes. They were not detained, not checked for drugs, not prosecuted. They were sent back to be tried in their own country. If the strike was based on the assumption that the boat was carrying drugs, and the survivors weren’t even… pic.twitter.com/S1QXew1ws5
— Senator Rand Paul (@SenRandPaul) October 22, 2025
The real danger for Trump comes if family members of any of the people killed in these strikes file a lawsuit. The administration would then have to prove not only that they were drug traffickers, but they would also have to prove an imminent threat that justified the use of deadly force. Trust me, this is no laughing matter, and if Democrats take back Congress, Trump could be facing some rather serious legal repercussions, if not before then, from the families of the people killed. With a Republican senator on a soapbox over this, it is only a matter of time before an attorney decides to reach out to these families to take action.
