By Michael Phillips | MDBayNews
The January 3, 2026 U.S. military operation that captured Venezuelan strongman Nicolás Maduro and his wife Cilia Flores has triggered sharp—and telling—reactions across Maryland’s political landscape.
As President Donald Trump confirmed that U.S. forces seized the indicted Venezuelan leader and transferred him to U.S. custody to face long-standing federal charges, including narco-terrorism, Maryland officials split along clear ideological lines: Republicans praised decisive action, Senator Chris Van Hollen loudly condemned it, and key Democratic leaders remained notably silent.
Republicans: Justice, Not Diplomacy
Maryland’s only Republican member of Congress, Andy Harris, applauded the operation as long-overdue accountability.
“It’s about time someone stood up to the narcoterrorists who have been poisoning our youth for years while our government has turned a blind eye,” Harris said. “Thousands of innocent American lives will be saved by President Trump’s decision to seize and arrest Maduro.”
Former Maryland Governor Robert L. Ehrlich Jr. also weighed in, praising U.S. law enforcement, intelligence officers, and special forces for what he called the “successful arrest of an indicted dictator.”
“Prayers for a new Venezuela free from narco-terror and collectivism,” Ehrlich wrote.
Together, Harris and Ehrlich articulated a center-right view increasingly common among conservatives: that years of sanctions, negotiations, and diplomatic posturing failed to restrain a regime U.S. prosecutors have long described as a criminal enterprise.
Van Hollen Takes the Lead in Opposition
On the Democratic side, Chris Van Hollen has emerged as one of the most outspoken critics of the operation—both within Maryland and nationally.
In a series of posts on X within hours of the announcement, Van Hollen denounced the operation as illegal, unauthorized, and motivated by regime change and oil interests rather than justice.
“Trump and his cronies can try to dress this up, but it is an illegal act of war to replace Maduro and grab Venezuela’s oil for his billionaire buddies,” Van Hollen wrote, attaching a full written statement expanding on his objections.
In follow-up posts, Van Hollen argued the administration’s justification was internally inconsistent.
“Don’t be fooled: you can’t both claim this was simply the execution of an arrest warrant AND say the U.S. is now ‘running’ Venezuela & grabbing its oil resources,” he wrote. “Trump just admitted this was a clear regime-change play.”
In his longer statement, Van Hollen acknowledged Maduro’s repressive rule but argued the operation bypassed Congress, violated international norms, and risked escalation without a defined strategy—framing the issue as one of constitutional limits rather than outcomes.
Other Democrats: Criticism, With Lower Volume
Other members of Maryland’s Democratic delegation echoed similar concerns, though without the same national visibility.
Johnny Olszewski Jr., a member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, called the action “unauthorized, violent and reckless,” arguing it fell “outside the limits of the law and the Constitution.”
Kweisi Mfume said the operation “should anger every American,” adding that “Trump was elected to run America, not Venezuela.”
Silence From Annapolis—and the Junior Senator
Equally striking has been who has not spoken.
As of January 3, Wes Moore had issued no public statement addressing the Maduro capture. Maryland’s junior U.S. senator, Angela Alsobrooks, has also remained publicly silent.
That quiet contrasts sharply with Van Hollen’s aggressive messaging and suggests political caution—particularly in a deep-blue state where opposing Trump is often safer than engaging publicly with the implications of removing an indicted foreign leader by force.
A Familiar Divide, a New Test
Maryland’s reaction mirrors the broader national debate now underway. Republicans see the capture as enforcement of existing indictments and a blow against transnational drug trafficking. Democrats emphasize congressional war powers, international law, and the risks of executive overreach—even when the target is a widely condemned dictator.
Whether the Maduro operation becomes a one-off or signals a lasting shift in U.S. foreign policy remains uncertain. What is clear is that in Maryland, the contrast could not be sharper: vocal opposition from Senator Van Hollen, enthusiastic praise from Republican leaders, and conspicuous silence from the state’s top Democratic officials as events continue to unfold.
Keep This Reporting Free
If this work matters to you, please consider supporting it.
Your contribution helps fund independent reporting across our entire network.
Have a tip or documents to share?
We review submissions confidentially and responsibly.
Discover more from Maryland Bay News
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.