Nicolás Maduro’s U.S. defense team says the American government is blocking the Venezuelan state from paying legal bills that, under Venezuelan practice, would typically be covered for a former head of state facing foreign prosecution. In a message filed into the public record of the Manhattan federal case, attorney Barry Pollack told the judge that the U.S. Treasury Department’s sanctions office first granted permission for the payments and then withdrew it within hours, without an explanation.
Pollack’s account centers on the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC), which administers U.S. sanctions. He said OFAC approved a license on January 9 that would allow Venezuela’s government to pay the defense costs for Maduro and Cilia Flores, who is described by U.S. authorities as the former first lady. Pollack said the authorization was then rescinded less than three hours later, while a separate license allowing payment for Flores’ lawyers remained in place.
Both Maduro and Flores have been held in New York without bail since their capture and have pleaded not guilty, according to the court filing and the broader case timeline. Pollack said he intends to ask the court for relief if the Treasury Department does not restore the license, arguing that his client cannot otherwise afford representation.
Case Tied To Sanctions & Diplomacy
The dispute over legal fees is unfolding alongside a fast-moving shift in U.S.-Venezuela relations following Maduro’s seizure in what AP described as a stealth nighttime raid on January 3 after a U.S. military buildup in the Caribbean. The operation removed Maduro from Venezuela and left his vice president, Delcy Rodríguez, serving as acting president, according to AP reporting.
Pollack suggested that the payment issue is not merely administrative, as it intersects with Washington’s political posture toward Caracas. AP reported that U.S. policy had cut ties with Maduro in 2019, recognizing Venezuela’s opposition leadership as the legitimate government, and that subsequent U.S. administrations maintained that approach. Allowing Venezuela’s government to fund the defense, Pollack indicated, could complicate how prosecutors respond to arguments that the capture was unlawful and that Maduro should be treated as a foreign head of state entitled to immunity.
At the same time, AP reported that Rodríguez has taken steps under U.S. pressure, including opening parts of Venezuela’s oil industry to American investment, releasing political prisoners, and restoring direct communications with Washington—ties that had been severed when the U.S. embassy in Caracas closed during the first Trump administration.
Indictment, Immunity Claims, Next Steps
The criminal case itself is anchored by a 25-page indictment that accuses Maduro and others of collaborating with drug cartels and elements of the military to move thousands of tons of cocaine into the United States, AP reported. The report said both Maduro and Flores could face life in prison if convicted.
Prosecutors, meanwhile, are expected to confront legal challenges that go beyond the underlying allegations. AP has reported that the defense is positioned to argue that the capture was illegal and that Maduro is immune from prosecution under U.S. and international law, claims that could shape pretrial litigation alongside any disputes over access to counsel and funding.
Pollack said he asked OFAC on February 11 to reinstate the original license. He framed the issue in constitutional terms, asserting that government action is interfering with Maduro’s ability to retain counsel and implicates the Sixth Amendment right to choose one’s lawyer. Messages seeking comment from the Treasury Department, the White House, and the Justice Department were not immediately returned, AP reported.
Broader Legal Debate Over US Operation
Separate AP coverage has described growing debate in Washington over the legal basis for U.S. actions tied to Venezuela, including questions about presidential authority and congressional oversight. In that reporting, legal experts and lawmakers argued over whether the administration’s framing of counternarcotics operations amounts to an expansive claim of war powers, and whether Congress has adequately authorized or constrained such moves.
The AP report noted that congressional leaders demanded briefings after learning of the operation, either during or after it began, and described preparations for a Senate vote on a bipartisan war-powers measure that would restrict the use of U.S. forces against Venezuela without congressional authorization. That broader dispute runs alongside the courtroom fight over what the defense calls basic access to representation in a high-stakes federal prosecution.
