National Security Leaders for America Raise Serious Legal and Constitutional Concerns Regarding U.S. Military Action in Venezuela

January 5, 2026

Washington, DC, — National Security Leaders for America (NSL4A) is deeply concerned by the United States’ military operations on Venezuelan territory, including strikes, the capture of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, and subsequent statements from the Administration outlining the scope and intent of U.S. involvement. While President Maduro undermined democracy in his own country and caused immense suffering among the Venezuelan people, his forcible removal without Congressional authority undermines our own Constitution and risks plunging the U.S. into a war without a clear objective, strategy, or exit plan.

NSL4A calls upon Congress to demand answers from the Administration on two fundamental questions, namely “under what legal authority did the United States commit these strikes?” and “what is the objective and strategy for Venezuela?” If it does not receive satisfactory actions, Congress should deny the Administration authority to pursue further action.

“The use of military force by the United States must be firmly grounded in constitutional authority, consistent with international law, and guided by clearly defined objectives,” said NSL4A president and founder, retired Rear Admiral Mike Smith. “This mission did not secure Congressional authorization, and we have yet to hear the Administration’s desired outcome or its strategy for achieving that outcome.”

While President Maduro is rightly condemned by the U.S., its allies, and the international community for leading a regime that undermines democratic institutions, represses political opponents, and violates human rights in Venezuela, this alone does not give the United States the authority to take unilateral military action. Based on statements by President Trump, the Secretary of Defense, and publicly available information, serious questions of legality and authority remain unanswered.

Lack of Clear Legal Authority

The Administration has not clearly articulated the legal authority under which it used military force against Venezuela. Under U.S. law, criminal activity, including drug trafficking, does not constitute an armed attack and does not, by itself, justify the use of military force against a sovereign state. Absent a clear act of self-defense, use of force against another nation’s territory without a Congressional declaration of war raises profound concerns under U.S. law.

Congressional Authorization and Oversight

The U.S. Constitution assigns Congress the authority to declare war and to oversee the use of military force. The Administration's statements that this was a law enforcement action supported by the military do not provide adequate legal grounds under U.S. law. What’s more, Congressional leaders were not briefed in advance of this action nor provided sufficient information to exercise their constitutional responsibilities.

Any military operation that risks escalation, prolonged involvement, or sustained presence abroad must be subject to meaningful congressional oversight. That requirement is not optional—it is foundational to democratic governance and civilian control of the military.

Call for Transparency

NSL4A calls on the Administration to provide Congress and the American people with a full and transparent accounting of:

• The legal authority relied upon for the use of force in Venezuela, and the legal basis for using the military to capture the Venezuelan president

• The likelihood of additional military operations or deployments, including the commitment of ground troops.

• The intended scope, objectives, and duration of U.S. involvement, including a detailed plan for how the United States will oversee Venezuela and promote a return to democracy