As debate intensifies over the legality and consequences of President Donald Trump’s military operation in Venezuela, members of Congress are sharply divided.
The overnight capture of Nicolás Maduro has triggered partisan reactions that reflect longstanding disputes over presidential war powers, foreign intervention and congressional oversight.
The United States carried out a large-scale military strike in Caracas early Saturday, capturing Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores, without reported American casualties. President Trump announced that the operation was aimed at enforcing federal indictments against Maduro, who was charged in 2020 with drug trafficking and narco-terrorism.
U.S. officials have accused him of leading a state-backed cartel that worked with Colombian rebels to smuggle cocaine into the U.S. and armed foreign militias. Trump said the U.S. would govern Venezuela temporarily to ensure a secure transition, citing national security threats and the country’s links to hostile regimes like Iran and Cuba.
Lawmakers across party lines responded within hours, offering sharply contrasting views on the mission, its legality and its implications.
The following pages highlight some of those responses.
