The Law Prohibits the Administration from Summarily Executing Alleged Drug Smugglers

Since September 2025, American military forces have killed more than 100 civilians who were on vessels in the Pacific or the Caribbean that allegedly were smuggling drugs to the United States. These attacks prompted considerable controversy, which intensified when it was revealed that on September 2, 2025, the American military made two lethal strikes on a single boat. The first strike killed nine of the 11 persons on the boat; the second killed the two survivors, even though they appeared to pose no imminent threat to others. See December 5, 2025 CNN report titled, Exclusive: Survivors clinging to capsized boat didn’t radio for backup, admiral overseeing double-tap strike tells lawmakers, and a November 29, 2025 Statement of the “Former JAGs Working Group” on Media Reports of Pentagon “No Quarter” Orders in Caribbean Boat Strikes.

The focus on the second strike’s evident cruelty and contempt for human life was entirely warranted. But that discussion also drew attention away from the even more fundamental question of whether the first strike, or any of the other fatal strikes on alleged drug smuggling boats, have any legal basis. The Rule of Law Task Force of the New York County Lawyers Association believes all those killings violate American and international law.

Under a number of statutes, such as 14 U.S.C. § 522, which applies to the U.S. Coast Guard, American law enforcement officers may and do arrest alleged drug traffickers on the high seas or in U.S. territorial waters, and bring them to the United States to be tried in U.S. courts. See e.g., U.S. Coast Guard seizes $28M in cocaine off Miami Beach, KIOR7 (Dec. 3, 2025) (reporting that the Coast Guard turned three alleged smugglers over to federal prosecutors). But once apprehended, the alleged smugglers are entitled to the same Constitutional rights as any person accused of a United States crime. These rights include, among many others, the right—before they may be punished in any manner—to due process under the Fifth Amendment and to a “speedy and public trial” under the Sixth Amendment. There is no exception for those accused of drug smuggling, regardless of where American officials arrest them.

It goes without saying that, under both American criminal law and international human rights law, accused criminals may not be summarily executed, no matter how heinous the alleged crime may be. Moreover, under federal law the alleged drug smugglers would not have been subject to the death penalty. Thus, the summary executions violate the most basic principle of the rule of law, namely that the law be followed.

In fact, under American criminal law, persons who summarily execute any individual may themselves be prosecuted for murder:

• 18 U.S.C. 1111(b) 18 provides that it is a felony to commit murder—defined as “the unlawful killing of a human being with malice aforethought”—within the “special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States,” which is defined to include the high seas (see 18 U.S.C. § 7(1)). Futhermore,18 U.S.C. § 956(a)(1) provides that it is a felony to conspire within the United States “to commit at any place outside the United States an act that would constitute the offense of murder … if committed in the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States,” if “any of the conspirators commits an act within the jurisdiction of the United States to effect any object of the conspiracy.

• 10 U.S.C. 918 [which is part of the chapter setting forth the Uniform Code of Military Justice] states that “[a]ny person subject to this chapter who, without justification or excuse, unlawfully kills a human being, when such person— (1) has a premeditated design to kill; [or] (2) intends to kill … is guilty of murder.”

Moreover, Article 6(1) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, to which the United States is a party, states that “[n]o one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his life”—a prohibition that generally proscribes summary killings, other than in the context of an armed conflict, or if lethal force is necessary to prevent imminent violence against others. At the time they were killed, none of the victims posed a threat of imminent violence against anyone else or was engaged in an armed conflict.

To justify these summary executions, the Administration offered two main arguments: the alleged smugglers allegedly engaged in an armed conflict with the United States, and they are terrorists – indeed, “narco-terrorists.” Neither argument, however, is persuasive.

No drug-trafficking gang or cartel associated with any of the alleged smugglers has used military means against the United States or our military forces. Nor is any organized to do so. In short, they are not engaged in any military conflict with the United States. The Administration’s own statements bear out this point. The War Powers Resolution of 1973 is a U.S. law that requires the President to notify Congress within 48 hours of deploying U.S. armed forces into “hostilities,” and limits the deployment of those forces to a period of 60 days (with a possible 30-day extension) unless Congress makes a formal declaration of war or grants a specific authorization. With the recent strikes against suspected drug smugglers, the

• Administration relied on the lack of such a conflict with the alleged smugglers to argue that the War Powers Resolution of 1973 does not apply.

• The “narco-terrorism” characterization similarly fails. Even if the victims were members of gangs or cartels meeting the US State Department criteria for a foreign terrorist organization, as defined in 8 U.S.C. 898, as a matter of law, such a designation would not permit the United States to summarily execute any of them.

For these reasons, the Rule of Law Task Force of the New York County Lawyers Association, consistent with the Association’s missions to promote the administration of justice and to ensure equal access to justice for all, urges everyone committed to the rule of law to call on the President and his Administration to stop summarily executing alleged drug smugglers. We urge Congress to fulfill its constitutional role by stopping these summary executions and fully investigating the Administration’s actions, including by closely examining all documents created by the Administration that pertain to the legality of these summary executions.

About the New York County Lawyers Association
The New York County Lawyers Association (www.nycla.org) was founded in 1908 as one of the first major bar associations in the country that admitted members without regard to race, ethnicity, religion, or gender. Since its inception, it has pioneered some of the most far-reaching and tangible reforms in American jurisprudence and has continuously played an active role in legal developments and public policy.

###

The views expressed here are those of the author, and do not necessarily represent or reflect the views of NYCLA, its affiliates, its officers, or its Board.