Trump has criticized Democrats for questioning the legality of U.S. strikes, while lawmakers and legal analysts warn the actions may amount to unlawful killings that require clear Congressional authorization or a formal declaration of war.

The White House, Justice Department, and Pentagon have not provided detailed public legal justifications; the Pentagon asserts the operations are lawful under U.S. and international law, while the DOJ says the strikes comply with the laws of armed conflict.

U.S. military strikes in the Caribbean and eastern Pacific have reportedly killed at least 83 people across 21 operations, raising questions about legality and authority for such actions.

Trump has framed Maduro and allied drug organizations as the legal basis for military actions, and the administration has designated Cartel de los Soles as a foreign terrorist organization to broaden authorities.

There is vigorous debate over whether an Authorization for Use of Military Force or other post-9/11 tools authorize these strikes, with lawmakers like Sen. Jack Reed calling for congressional authorization and more transparency; Republicans largely back the administration’s actions.

Democrats seek declassification of a DOJ Office of Legal Counsel opinion from September 5, which reportedly argues U.S. personnel cannot be prosecuted for lethal actions abroad, signaling concerns about the opinion’s rationale and public availability.

Senate Democrats demand the administration publicly disclose the legal justification for lethal strikes against drug boats near Venezuela, arguing that deadly force requires transparent grounding.

Trump has signaled openness to expanding actions into Venezuela itself, with military buildup near the country fueling concerns about escalation and legal framework.

There is broad disagreement over the legality of the strikes under international and U.S. law, with critics labeling them extrajudicial killings and the UN human rights office warning they may violate international law.