Stay Tuned with Preet Trump's Law of War
Dec 16, 2025
The hosts explore the legality of U.S. actions against Venezuela, including the controversial seizure of oil tankers. They delve into whether the U.S. is truly at war and discuss the implications of declaring a non-international armed conflict. Questions arise about the legality of striking drug-trafficking boats, especially concerning survivors. A compelling debate unfolds around the duty to rescue as opposed to further aggression, highlighting the tension between political aims and legal obligations.
AI Snips
Chapters
Transcript
Episode notes
Law Of War Replaces Criminal Interdiction
- The administration reframed drug interdiction as a "non-international armed conflict" to invoke the law of war.
- That shift lets it justify strikes and seizures that normally fall under criminal law and Coast Guard authority.
Tanker Seizure Raises Maritime Law Questions
- The tanker seizure is linked to claims about trans-shipping and sanctions enforcement against Iran and Venezuela.
- Joyce Vance warns international law of the sea and other legal limits may not support the U.S. action.
Regime-Change Motive Clouds Legal Justification
- Political aims like regime change in Venezuela may underlie aggressive maritime actions.
- Preet Bharara and Joyce Vance note policy goals can't override legal constraints even if they motivate operations.