North Carolina lawmakers are voicing strong and divergent opinions following the recent U.S. military strike on Venezuela and the capture of its president, Nicolás Maduro.
In a move that sent shockwaves through the international community, President Donald Trump declared that the U.S. government would temporarily oversee Venezuela and begin selling large quantities of the country’s oil reserves to other nations.
Bipartisan Responses Reflect Sharp Divide
Republican U.S. Senator Ted Budd described Maduro as an “illegitimate dictator” who has long been wanted in the United States for charges including narco-terrorism, corruption, and drug trafficking. “The decision to capture the Venezuelan leader and bring him to justice is monumental for ending his brutal regime in Venezuela and will save countless American lives from the deadly drugs his thugs have brought to our shores,” Budd said.
On the other side, Democratic U.S. Congresswoman Deborah Ross criticized President Trump’s unilateral actions, saying he had “acted without regard for the Constitution and without considering the long-term consequences for our security or our democracy.” While acknowledging Maduro’s record of election fraud, political imprisonment, and human rights abuses, Ross emphasized that the Trump administration “cannot unilaterally impose regime change and push the United States to the brink of war.”
Democratic U.S. Congressman Don Davis echoed calls for accountability and transparency, stating that “protecting American families and ending narcotics trafficking are essential to our national security, but the use of military force demands accountability and transparency, and Congress must be kept fully informed to ensure proper oversight.”
Republican U.S. Congressman Greg Murphy described Maduro as “more the head of a narco-terrorist state than the leader of a country.” He expressed hope for justice and future U.S. engagement in Venezuela following Maduro’s capture.
Democratic Congresswoman Valerie Foushee also condemned Maduro as an “oppressive, illegitimate ruler who has brutalized his people and dismantled democratic institutions in Venezuela,” but she strongly disagreed with the manner of U.S. intervention. “That fact does not give any United States president the authority to unilaterally launch military action without congressional approval,” Foushee stated.
Constitutional Questions and Foreign Policy Implications
The military operation and subsequent U.S. oversight of Venezuela have sparked debate over executive authority and the role of Congress in approving military interventions. Lawmakers remain divided over the legality, potential repercussions, and long-term strategy for U.S. involvement in Venezuela’s future.
As events continue to unfold, members of North Carolina’s congressional delegation stress the importance of constitutional checks and balances, the need for transparency, and careful consideration of the broader implications for American security and democracy.
