U.S. Sanctions bosses of Venezuela's Tren de Aragua gang, citing threat to region
The gang, which originated inside a Venezuelan prison, has rapidly grown into a powerful transnational criminal network involved in drug trafficking, extortion, migrant smuggling and sexual exploitation, with operations reaching key areas of the United States, including South Florida.
The group has been linked to human trafficking networks that move migrants north through Central America and Mexico, with stops in border cities like Tapachula and Tijuana — and eventual arrivals in U.S. cities.
The sanctions freeze any assets the individuals have under U.S. jurisdiction and prohibit any U.S. citizen or business from engaging in transactions with them. Officials also warned that foreign banks doing business with the gang could face secondary sanctions and risk losing access to the U.S. financial system.
Guerrero, a former inmate at Venezuela's notorious Tocorón prison, is credited with building Tren de Aragua — often referred to as TdA — into a global force, using brutal tactics and prison contacts to extend the gang's reach throughout Latin America.
'Guerrero expanded TdA from a prison gang involved in extortion and bribery to an organization engaged in terrorism with growing influence throughout the Western Hemisphere,' the Treasury said in a press release. 'The Department of State is offering a reward of up to $5 million for information leading to the arrest and/or conviction of Guerrero.'
In addition to Niño Guerrero, the Treasury Department's Office of Foreign Assets Control sanctioned:
Yohan Jose Romero ('Johan Petrica') – A co-founder of the gang and Guerrero's close lieutenant. He oversees the group's illegal mining operations and weapons trafficking, including military-grade arms. A $4 million reward is being offered for his arrest.Josue Angel Santana Pena ('Santanita') – An original member of the gang, accused of coordinating bombings, homicides, and terrorist activity from behind bars.Wilmer Jose Perez Castillo ('Wilmer Guayabal') – A cell leader involved in drug trafficking, assassinations of law enforcement and military personnel and bribery schemes.Wendy Marbelys Rios Gomez – Guerrero's wife, who is believed to manage the group's money laundering operations and is tied to terrorist financing.Felix Anner Castillo Rondon ('Pure Arnel') – The leader of Los Gallegos, a Tren de Aragua affiliate in Chile, implicated in human trafficking, sexual exploitation and narcotics activity.
All individuals were sanctioned under executive orders targeting both transnational criminal organizations and global terrorist actors.
Tren de Aragua has become South America's most feared gang, surpassing even MS-13 and Brazil's PCC in brutality and expansion. Chilean and Colombian authorities have blamed the group for surges in homicides and disappearances in recent years.
Earlier this year, the U.S. State Department designated Tren de Aragua as a Foreign Terrorist Organization, citing its use of violence, corruption and terror to control communities, extort local businesses and infiltrate government institutions.
The presence of TdA members in the United States led President Donald Trump to invoke the Alien Enemies Act to quickly deport Venezuelans suspected of being part of the violent gang to a megaprison in El Salvador, without giving them the opportunity to defend themselves in court.
The practice was immediately halted by a federal court, but a recent Supreme Court decision has opened the door for the administration to deport undocumented migrants to third countries. ICE plans show that the administration is preparing to send migrants to distant countries while giving them as little as 24 hours to respond — and, in some cases, as little as six hours.
According to the proclamation issued by Trump in March, the Nicolás Maduro regime had launched 'an invasion of the United States' by sending TdA members to infiltrate the U.S. with the ultimate goal of causing havoc.
While most experts agree that the presence of TdA members is not as widespread as the administration has suggested, a recently revealed FBI report concluded that the Caracas regime did promote and finance gang members to travel into the United States.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
2 hours ago
The UN's highest court will decide Wednesday on the climate obligations of countries
THE HAGUE, Netherlands -- The UN's highest court is handing down a historic opinion on climate change Wednesday, a decision that could set a legal benchmark for action around the globe to the climate crisis. After years of lobbying by vulnerable island nations who fear they could disappear under rising sea waters, the U.N. General Assembly asked the International Court of Justice in 2023 for an advisory opinion, a non-binding but important basis for international obligations. A panel of 15 judges was tasked with answering two questions. First, what are countries obliged to do under international law to protect the climate and environment from human-caused greenhouse gas emissions? Second, what are the legal consequences for governments when their acts, or lack of action, have significantly harmed the climate and environment? 'The stakes could not be higher. The survival of my people and so many others is on the line,' Arnold Kiel Loughman, attorney general of the island nation of Vanuatu, told the court during a week of hearings in December. In the decade up to 2023, sea levels have risen by a global average of around 4.3 centimeters (1.7 inches), with parts of the Pacific rising higher still. The world has also warmed 1.3 degrees Celsius (2.3 Fahrenheit) since preindustrial times because of the burning of fossil fuels. Vanuatu is one of a group of small states pushing for international legal intervention in the climate crisis but it affects many more island nations in the South Pacific. 'The agreements being made at an international level between states are not moving fast enough,' Ralph Regenvanu, Vanuatu's minister for climate change, told The Associated Press. Any decision by The Hague-based court would be non-binding advice and unable to directly force wealthy nations into action to help struggling countries. Yet it would be more than just a powerful symbol, since it could serve as the basis for other legal actions, including domestic lawsuits. 'What makes this case so important is that it addresses the past, present, and future of climate action. It's not just about future targets -- it also tackles historical responsibility, because we cannot solve the climate crisis without confronting its roots,' Joie Chowdhury, a senior attorney at the Center for International Environmental Law, told AP. Activists could bring lawsuits against their own countries for failing to comply with the decision and states could return to the International Court of Justice to hold each other to account. And whatever the judges say will be used as the basis for other legal instruments, like investment agreements, Chowdhury said. The United States and Russia, both of whom are major petroleum-producing states, are staunchly opposed to the court mandating emissions reductions. Simply having the court issue an opinion is the latest in a series of legal victories for the small island nations. Earlier this month, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights found that countries have a legal duty not only to avoid environmental harm but also to protect and restore ecosystems. Last year, the European Court of Human Rights ruled that countries must better protect their people from the consequences of climate change. In 2019, the Netherlands' Supreme court handed down the first major legal win for climate activists when judges ruled that protection from the potentially devastating effects of climate change was a human right and that the government has a duty to protect its citizens. ___ The Associated Press' climate and environmental coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP's standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at
New York Post
3 hours ago
- New York Post
New York realtor gets banned from Columbia for 10 years after violent airport tirade
A New York realtor has been banned from traveling to Columbia for a decade after his violent airport tirade in the South American country was caught on video — but claims he is the victim, not the agitator. Emmanuel Hernandez was waiting in line at an immigration checkpoint when he removed his shirt and launched his physical and verbal attack on agents inside Rafael Núñez International Airport on July 16, Colombia's ministry of external relations alleged. Hernandez, a New York native living in Tampa, Florida, had traveled to the Columbia for his father's 84th birthday when he became disruptive inside the airport. 5 Emmanuel Hernandez speaks out after his viral meltdown at a Colombian airport on July 16, 2025. Impacto News The shirtless traveler directed expletives at officials, tearing apart one of the security booths, knocking off several panels and punching the plexiglass dividers, according to video posted to social media. 'F–k you. You think you can f–k around with the wrong motherf–ker,' Hernandez can be heard shouting. Hernandez claims he became ill after traveling for two days, staying overnight in hotels, traveling to Peru for two hours and then landing at the Cartagena airport. 'I had just returned from a long trip from Orlando. The trip was postponed for two days and from one day to the next I had to stay in the hotel,' he told Colombia-based outlet Impacto News. 'Upon arriving in Cartagena there was a very long line, I felt bad and it was very hot. I took off my shirt,' he explained. 5 A shirtless Hernandez causing damage to an immigration booth at the Rafael Núñez International Airport in Cartagena, Colombia on July 16, 2025. X Hernandez claims airport officials began recording him instead of offering assistance, aggravating him. 'When I took off my shirt, there was an immigration officer or people at the airport who started to record me and I told them to please stop, that 'this was part of my privacy and that they shouldn't record me,'' he told the outlet. Hernandez said he began laughing at one official because he wasn't providing assistance despite the agent working for the Colombian government. 'Instead of helping me and asking me how I was, they started recording me and that was my reaction because it was my privacy and it broke my heart,' he said. 5 Hernandez shouts at an airport law enforcement officer before his arrest. X 5 Hernandez slams an item down during his outburst. X Several law enforcement officers took down Hernandez and detained him. Hernandez allegedly assaulted officers and damaged an immigration control module during his public eruption, Colombia's ministry of external relations stated. He was charged with property damage and eventually expelled from the country for his outburst. Hernandez, who identifies as Colombian having lived in the country between the ages of 9 and 14, says it will hurt not being allowed to return to the country for a decade. 5 Hernandez was charged with property damage and eventually expelled from the country for his outburst. X 'Not being able to return to Colombia to hug your parents or perhaps receive forgiveness for your aggressive behavior. What hurts me the most is not seeing my parents in Colombia for 10 years. That really hurts me,' Hernandez said. The realtor revealed he won't be able to travel back to Colombia for 10 years because of his July 16 arrest. Hernandez maintained his actions inside the airport was a natural human response and shouldn't be penalized for it. 'These things happpen and they were out of my control as a human being,' he said. 'We make mistakes, I am very ashamed. 'I made a mistake and I paid for it with all my soul. Colombia is here,' he added. Hernandez apologized to the authorities and vowed to pay for the damages he caused.
Hamilton Spectator
4 hours ago
- Hamilton Spectator
The UN's highest court will decide Wednesday on the climate obligations of countries
THE HAGUE, Netherlands (AP) — The UN's highest court is handing down a historic opinion on climate change Wednesday, a decision that could set a legal benchmark for action around the globe to the climate crisis. After years of lobbying by vulnerable island nations who fear they could disappear under rising sea waters , the U.N. General Assembly asked the International Court of Justice in 2023 for an advisory opinion, a non-binding but important basis for international obligations. A panel of 15 judges was tasked with answering two questions. First, what are countries obliged to do under international law to protect the climate and environment from human-caused greenhouse gas emissions? Second, what are the legal consequences for governments when their acts, or lack of action, have significantly harmed the climate and environment? 'The stakes could not be higher. The survival of my people and so many others is on the line,' Arnold Kiel Loughman, attorney general of the island nation of Vanuatu, told the court during a week of hearings in December . In the decade up to 2023, sea levels have risen by a global average of around 4.3 centimeters (1.7 inches), with parts of the Pacific rising higher still. The world has also warmed 1.3 degrees Celsius (2.3 Fahrenheit) since preindustrial times because of the burning of fossil fuels. Vanuatu is one of a group of small states pushing for international legal intervention in the climate crisis but it affects many more island nations in the South Pacific. 'The agreements being made at an international level between states are not moving fast enough,' Ralph Regenvanu, Vanuatu's minister for climate change, told The Associated Press . Any decision by The Hague-based court would be non-binding advice and unable to directly force wealthy nations into action to help struggling countries. Yet it would be more than just a powerful symbol, since it could serve as the basis for other legal actions, including domestic lawsuits. 'What makes this case so important is that it addresses the past, present, and future of climate action. It's not just about future targets — it also tackles historical responsibility, because we cannot solve the climate crisis without confronting its roots,' Joie Chowdhury, a senior attorney at the Center for International Environmental Law, told AP. Activists could bring lawsuits against their own countries for failing to comply with the decision and states could return to the International Court of Justice to hold each other to account. And whatever the judges say will be used as the basis for other legal instruments, like investment agreements, Chowdhury said. The United States and Russia, both of whom are major petroleum-producing states, are staunchly opposed to the court mandating emissions reductions. Simply having the court issue an opinion is the latest in a series of legal victories for the small island nations. Earlier this month, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights found that countries have a legal duty not only to avoid environmental harm but also to protect and restore ecosystems. Last year, the European Court of Human Rights ruled that countries must better protect their people from the consequences of climate change . In 2019, the Netherlands' Supreme court handed down the first major legal win for climate activists when judges ruled that protection from the potentially devastating effects of climate change was a human right and that the government has a duty to protect its citizens. ___ The Associated Press' climate and environmental coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP's standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at .
