Copy Link Share Share Comment

Sign up for the Slatest to get the most insightful analysis, criticism, and advice out there, delivered to your inbox daily.

On Monday, Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and his wife Cilia Adela Flores de Maduro were arraigned in a federal courthouse in New York City on charges of drug trafficking, continuing what has been a stunning first few days of 2026. The criminal proceedings—and likely trial—ahead are sure to be rocky and closely watched around the world. How exactly, though, will the Justice Department’s charges against the Maduros play in a court of law? We talked to an expert to find out.

“This is not a trumped-up case. This appears to be a real solid indictment,” Adam Pollock, a former assistant attorney general of New York and now a managing partner of the law firm Pollock Cohen, told me. Pollock believes the U.S. government has built an impressive case against the Maduros, with the indictment suggesting there are cooperating witnesses, recordings of drug deals, and direct links between the Maduros and Venezuelan drug-trafficking networks.

Still, the disturbing and complex facts of the Maduros’ arrest—during an apparently illegal military raid of the country Maduro was leading—makes this case anything but a slam dunk. While entering a plea of not guilty on Monday, the Venezuelan leader told the court that he had been “kidnapped.” “I am innocent. I’m a decent man,” Maduro said during his arraignment. The couple did not seek bail, and were transferred to a New York City jail. Their next court hearing is on March 17.

What comes next? What are all of the charges the indictment makes? What kind of defense could the Maduros use? I spoke with Pollock to get some answers to these questions and to understand the full breadth of the DOJ’s indictment. Our conversation has been edited and condensed for clarity.

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

Shirin Ali: After reading the entire indictment, how strong of a case do you think the DOJ has here against the Maduros?

Advertisement

Adam Pollock: This is a really robust indictment. You’re dealing with the Southern District of New York, the United States Attorney’s Office, which is a really serious office that doesn’t bring trumped-up political charges. If you compare this to the indictments of James Comey or Letitia James, that were super stamped-on details, very bare-bones, hard to know what the charges were. Why? Because those were vindictive political prosecutions. Here, we have a robust indictment full of detail, meetings, descriptions of events, and going back for, I think, almost two decades. And how do you get this information? You typically have to have either wiretaps or recording in the rooms, or what appears to........

© Slate