Fact-checking U.S. military boat strikes in the Caribbean and Pacific as death toll passes 200

[Background/fact-check piece, dated June 3, 2026 -- predates Kaine's Aug. 3 letter; used only for the campaign's fact-check record, not as contemporaneous coverage of the letter.]

Secretary of State Marco Rubio defended U.S. military strikes on boats in the Caribbean Sea and Pacific Ocean during a Senate hearing June 2, saying the Defense Department determined the strikes' legality and based its decisions on intelligence information.

"Every strike has a legal officer on the deck that has to make a determination about whether the call is legal or not, and this is done by the Department of War, the way it's been done in other theaters around the world," Rubio said in response to a question from Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., about the criteria to target boats.

The U.S. military on May 30 struck another boat it said was engaged in "narco-trafficking operations" in the eastern Pacific Ocean, killing three men and increasing the total death toll to 205 people.

The U.S. military started attacking boats off the coast of Venezuela on Sept. 2; the Trump administration has said it's part of an effort to thwart drug smuggling. The U.S. has since struck at least 59 boats in the Caribbean Sea and eastern Pacific Ocean.

Trump has said that with every boat destroyed, 25,000 American lives were saved. That's Pants on Fire. The Trump administration has provided no evidence about the type or quantity of drugs on the boats.

In January, after U.S. vessel strikes in the Caribbean Sea and Pacific Ocean, Trump said "drugs entering our country by sea are down 97%." He said it again in May. It's False. There has been a drop in Customs and Border Protection drug seizures since the strikes began. But the Coast Guard -- not CBP -- oversees most drug seizures on water, especially in international waters. And that agency has seen a steep increase in drug seizures.

The White House and the Defense Department say the attacks are legal. But legal experts have said the attacks are illegal under maritime law or human rights conventions; others said it contradicted longstanding U.S. military practices.

"The administration has tried to define the boats as a military threat, but it has failed. It has not answered the question why it could not use U.S. vessels to intercept and search boats against which it can produce reasonable suspicion," said Walter Olson, a senior fellow at the libertarian Cato Institute.

The Trump administration said the people in the first boats the military struck were members of Tren de Aragua, a Venezuelan gang, and they were carrying drugs en route to the U.S. The U.S. has provided no evidence that these people are gang members.