By R.J. Morales | TX3DNews.com
Congressman Keith Self’s latest newsletter to constituents opens with strong words:
“This week, President Trump took a bold step to keep our families safe by ordering a U.S. military strike against Tren de Aragua (TdA), a designated Foreign Terrorist Organization linked to the regime of Venezuela’s Nicolás Maduro. The operation took out 11 narco-terrorists transporting a load of illegal drugs.”
Self went on to say the strike “sends a powerful message” that cartels attempting to flood American communities with drugs will face “severe consequences.” He described groups like TdA as responsible for “much of the drug trafficking, human smuggling, and violent crimes that are tearing communities apart and fueling the opioid crisis.”
The Congressman praised Trump’s decision to label cartels as terrorist organizations, arguing it gives the U.S. “tougher tools in order to shut them down for good.” He added, “Our southern border is now the most secure it’s been in modern times. Ensuring the safety and security of our country remains one of my top priorities in Congress.”
Agreement on the Problem
On one level, few in TX-03 would dispute the Congressman’s concern. Families here know the heartbreak of opioids and fentanyl. Residents are frustrated by human smuggling along the southern border. Many believe cartels deserve the harshest of consequences.
The Harder Question
But the deeper dilemma is not whether drug trafficking is destructive — it is. The question is whether the U.S. government should respond by killing alleged smugglers without trial.
The 11 men killed at sea may have been guilty. But they never faced a judge, never heard evidence against them, and never had the chance to defend themselves. Their guilt was presumed, and their sentence carried out by missile.
If a president can declare someone a “narco-terrorist” and eliminate them abroad, where does that authority stop? How far are we, as a nation, willing to stretch the meaning of justice?
Lessons from the Past
This is not the first time America has faced such choices. After 9/11, drone strikes against suspected terrorists abroad were justified as acts of war. But even then, controversy grew when U.S. citizens were killed without trial. Courts largely stepped aside, leaving the executive branch wide latitude.
Now, with cartels labeled “terrorist organizations,” the same logic is being applied to drug smugglers. It raises a haunting question: if due process can be suspended overseas in the name of safety, what principles remain unshakable at home?
Due Process and America’s Identity
Our justice system rests on the principle that guilt must be proven, not assumed. Bypassing that principle may feel expedient, but it reshapes America’s identity. Do we want to be known as a country that prizes quick retaliation, or one that upholds the rule of law even when tested by fear and crime?
Claims and Facts
Self tied the strike to what he described as “three months straight” of zero illegal border crossings. Customs and Border Protection data show a steep decline under Trump-era restrictions, but not zero. He also pointed to June’s seizure of 742 pounds of fentanyl — accurate, though most fentanyl typically enters through legal ports of entry, not high-seas smuggling operations.
These facts don’t erase the Congressman’s point about real dangers, but they complicate the narrative of decisive strikes and total security.
Local Spotlight in the Shadows
After praising the strike, Self’s newsletter shifted to district recognitions: Greenville High School’s solar car team racing across Australia, CASA of Hunt County’s Lori Cope marking 10 years of leadership, Allen Chamber CEO Kyle Jacobson’s one-year anniversary, and the appointment of Dr. Prabhas Moghe as president of UT Dallas.
These stories reflect community pride and civic leadership. Yet their placement behind the celebration of killings at sea suggests what Self wants constituents to remember first: force, not local achievement.
Questions for TX-03 Residents
Nobody wants drugs in their neighborhood. Nobody wants cartels to operate unchecked. But do we, as Texans and as Americans, want our government to wield lethal power without trial?
If this is how we treat foreign nationals accused of smuggling, where does it end? Could other nations justify the same against those they accuse? What message does this send to our own children learning about justice in school — that trial by jury is essential, unless the government decides it’s inconvenient?
The Congressman calls such strikes a victory. The real question for TX-03, is whether we share that definition — or whether the cost to America’s principles is too high.
Because in the end, this debate is not just about drugs or borders. It is about who we are as a nation, and what kind of justice we are willing to accept in our name.
KKongressman Keith is very brave, at least when he doesn’t have to face his constituents.