Secretary of State Marco Rubio defended U.S. military strikes on boats in the Caribbean Sea and Pacific Ocean during a Senate hearing June 2, saying the Defense Department determined each strike's legality through intelligence-based decisions made by legal officers.
The U.S. military struck another boat it said was engaged in "narco-trafficking operations" in the eastern Pacific Ocean on May 30, killing three men and raising the total death toll to 205 people since strikes began Sept. 2. The administration has struck at least 59 boats during this period.
What the Left Is Saying
Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., questioned Rubio during the hearing about the criteria used to target vessels, asking how legal determinations are made before attacks. Legal experts have challenged the administration's assertions that the strikes comply with international law and maritime conventions.
Walter Olson, a senior fellow at the libertarian Cato Institute, said the administration has not answered why it could not use U.S. vessels to intercept and search boats rather than destroy them outright. Anthony Clark Arend, an international law specialist at Georgetown University, told PolitiFact in September that under Article 2(4) of the United Nations Charter, the U.S. would only have the right to use military force against a foreign vessel on the high seas if it could be demonstrated that the vessel was engaging in an armed attack or such an attack was imminent.
John Walsh, director for drug policy and the Andes at the Washington Office on Latin America, said organized crime adapts to enforcement efforts. "The idea that these boat strikes would have some sort of decisive role in curbing supply just seems pretty illusory," Walsh told PolitiFact.
What the Right Is Saying
Rubio said during the Senate hearing that every strike involves a legal officer who must determine whether the action is legal before it proceeds, describing the process as consistent with how the Department of Defense operates in other theaters. The administration has maintained that the attacks are legal under existing authorities.
President Donald Trump declared in October that the U.S. is in an "armed conflict" with drug cartels and designated some as terrorist organizations, providing what the White House calls legal justification for the strikes. Trump has said each boat destroyed saves 25,000 American lives by stopping drugs from entering the country.
The Pentagon watchdog announced in May it will evaluate whether the military followed proper targeting frameworks during the boat strikes, a review the administration says demonstrates accountability.
What the Numbers Show
PolitiFact rated Trump's claim that each boat strike saves 25,000 lives as "Pants on Fire." The Trump administration has provided no evidence about the type or quantity of drugs found on destroyed boats. There were over 68,000 U.S. drug overdose deaths from January 2024 to December 2025, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Trump also claimed that "drugs entering our country by sea are down 97%." PolitiFact rated this claim "False." While Customs and Border Protection air and marine operations showed a drop in seizures during certain months, the Coast Guard—which oversees most drug interdictions on water, especially international waters—reported an increase in drug seizures. Experts say neither figure demonstrates how many drugs are actually entering the country.
The U.S. has provided no evidence linking boat strike victims to Tren de Aragua, the Venezuelan gang the administration initially identified. Most fentanyl reaching the U.S. originates from Mexico; most cocaine comes from Colombia.
The Bottom Line
The death toll continues to rise as strikes continue in international waters where legal authority remains contested. The Pentagon's upcoming review of targeting procedures may provide more clarity on how decisions are made, though that evaluation has not yet been completed. Congressional scrutiny is expected to continue, particularly regarding the legal basis for operations and the evidentiary standards used before attacks.
Venezuela's role in U.S. drug trafficking remains a subject of debate. Experts note that even if traffickers face disruption from strikes, organized crime networks typically adapt their methods and routes. What happens next will likely depend on the outcome of the Pentagon watchdog evaluation and any further congressional action on funding or authorization for continued operations.