U.S. Justice Department Urges New York Court to Reject Maduro Immunity Claim
The U.S. Justice Department has asked a New York judge to deny sovereign immunity to Nicolás Maduro and Cilia Flores, arguing Venezuela knew how to assert immunity in another case but stayed silent here. Prosecutors cite Caracas’s handling of a separate Florida lawsuit as evidence in their push to keep the criminal case alive.
U.S. prosecutors have moved to block Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro from claiming sovereign immunity in a New York criminal case, telling a federal judge that Caracas’s own actions undercut his bid for protection.
In a recent filing, the U.S. Justice Department urged the court to reject immunity claims presented on behalf of Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores. Prosecutors argued that the Venezuelan government has already shown it understands how to invoke sovereign immunity by doing so in a separate lawsuit in Florida. In that case, officials formally raised immunity arguments.
By contrast, prosecutors said, Venezuela’s “devastating silence” in the New York criminal case should weigh heavily against the defendants. The government’s lack of any immunity assertion here, they contend, undermines the idea that Maduro and Flores are entitled to be treated as immune from U.S. jurisdiction at this stage.
The dispute turns on a core question in international practice: when, and to what extent, sitting foreign leaders can face criminal proceedings in another country’s courts. Sovereign immunity doctrines generally protect heads of state and top officials for acts tied to their official roles. How those doctrines apply in this case now sits before the New York judge.
Prosecutors’ comparison between the New York and Florida matters is central to their strategy. By pointing to the Florida lawsuit—where Caracas did raise immunity—they aim to show that Venezuela’s leadership made a deliberate choice not to intervene in the same way in New York. In their view, private defense lawyers cannot retroactively create protections that the state itself declined to assert.
The outcome will shape what happens next in the New York proceedings. If the judge agrees with the Justice Department and denies sovereign immunity, the criminal case against Maduro and Flores can continue on the merits, subject to the practical question of whether either defendant ever comes into U.S. custody. If the judge rules that immunity applies, the decision could constrain U.S. efforts to pursue criminal cases against sitting foreign leaders in similar circumstances.
Observers watching the case are focused not only on which side prevails but on how the court explains its reasoning. The way the judge handles the “devastating silence” argument and the comparison with the Florida lawsuit may influence future disputes over immunity for foreign officials well beyond Venezuela.
Sources
- OSINT