The defense fails to shut the case down.
New York, March 2026.
A federal judge in New York has refused to dismiss the criminal case against Nicolás Maduro and Cilia Flores, keeping alive a prosecution centered on drug trafficking and corruption allegations with enormous political and legal implications. The ruling does not settle the substance of the case, but it marks a significant procedural defeat for the defense, whose attempt to end the matter at this stage has failed.
Judge Alvin Hellerstein made clear that the case will move forward, leaving in place charges that carry severe potential penalties, including life imprisonment. Yet the hearing also exposed another sensitive front, one less visible than the charges themselves but legally consequential: whether the Venezuelan state can use assets frozen under U.S. sanctions to finance the legal defense of Maduro and Flores.
That issue is far from secondary. The case is no longer only about whether the accusations survive. It is also about whether the defendants can sustain a private legal strategy in a highly complex proceeding. Prosecutors argue that allowing access to those funds would undermine the sanctions regime imposed on the Venezuelan leadership. The defense, by contrast, argues that blocking such access infringes on the constitutional right to mount a proper defense using Venezuelan state resources.
The most delicate moment of the hearing came when the judge appeared to question the strength of the U.S. government’s position on those frozen funds. His remarks suggested skepticism toward the claim that national security concerns should automatically outweigh the defendants’ right to legal representation, especially given Maduro’s detention status. That does not amount to a victory for the defense, but it does open a potentially important crack in Washington’s legal posture.
Maduro and Flores appeared in court in detention uniforms, using translation headsets, and both continue to deny wrongdoing. No trial date was set, and the judge did not establish a timetable for resolving the dispute over access to funds. Still, he left open the possibility that the defense could renew its effort to seek dismissal if the Treasury Department does not revise its position. That effectively turns the financial dispute into an extension of the criminal fight itself.
Outside the courtroom, the case also revealed its wider political dimension. Demonstrators both supporting and opposing Maduro gathered in Manhattan, while parallel displays of support were reported in Caracas. That underscores how the proceedings are not being read merely as a criminal matter, but as a symbolic struggle over sovereignty, legitimacy and geopolitical power.
What emerges from this hearing is a clear pattern. The case against Maduro remains very much alive, and it is now placing pressure on two fronts at once: the judicial and the diplomatic. If the prosecution advances, it will test how far the United States is willing to pursue the criminal case without easing the financial restrictions around it. And if the court eventually permits the use of Venezuelan funds for the defense, the blow would not be merely procedural. It would also be political.
Phoenix24: clarity in the grey zone. / Phoenix24: claridad en la zona gris.