UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
In re: AXJ VENEZUELA Application for Writ of Habeas Corpus NICOLÁS MADURO MOROS,
Petitioner,
v.
WARDEN, METROPOLITAN DETENTION CENTER BROOKLYN,
and/or UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Respondents. Case No.: [To be assigned]
PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS FILED BY AXJ VENEZUELA
PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. § 2241 TO THE HONORABLE JUDGES OF THE COURT:
Petitioner Nicolás Maduro Moros, and his wife, currently detained unlawfully at the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn, New York, respectfully petitions this Court for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241, challenging the legality of his detention as unlawful under the Constitution, laws, and treaties of the United States, as well as international law.
1. Jurisdiction and Venue
This Court has jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2241(a), as Petitioner is in custody under color of federal authority within this district. Venue is proper in the Eastern District of New York, where Petitioner is confined.
2. Petitioner and Custodian
- Petitioner: Nicolás Maduro Moros, former President of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, currently detained at MDC Brooklyn.
- Respondent: Warden of the Metropolitan Detention Center Brooklyn (immediate custodian), and/or the United States Attorney General/Department of Justice (ultimate custodian).
3. Statement of Facts
On or about January 3, 2026, Petitioner was captured in Caracas, Venezuela, during a U.S. military operation described by U.S. officials as an arrest in execution of a 2020 federal indictment (superseding charges filed in the Southern District of New York). He was transported to the United States against his will and arraigned on January 5, 2026, where he pleaded not guilty to charges including narco-terrorism conspiracy, cocaine importation conspiracy, and related weapons offenses. Petitioner remains detained pending further proceedings (next hearing March 17, 2026).
Petitioner asserts he is the legitimate head of state of Venezuela (despite U.S. non-recognition of his government) and was subjected to a military abduction that violated Venezuelan sovereignty, international law (including principles of non-intervention under the UN Charter and customary international law), and U.S. domestic law.
This capture constitutes an unlawful extraterritorial seizure without due process or extradition proceedings.
4. Grounds for Relief
Petitioner is in custody in violation of the Constitution, laws, and treaties of the United States on the following grounds:
Ground One: Violation of Head-of-State Immunity and Sovereign Immunity
As the sitting or former head of a sovereign state, Petitioner is entitled to immunity from U.S. criminal jurisdiction for official acts. The capture and detention disregard principles of head-of-state immunity under international law (e.g., as recognized in U.S. precedents and the UN Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities) and U.S. law. Detention violates due process under the Fifth Amendment.
Ground Two: Unlawful Extraterritorial Capture / Military Abduction
The January 3, 2026, operation constituted an armed incursion into sovereign Venezuelan territory without consent, constituting aggression under international law (UN Charter Art. 2(4)). This “military abduction” renders subsequent detention unlawful, analogous to challenges in cases involving extraterritorial seizures. The Ker-Frisbie doctrine (permitting prosecution despite unlawful abduction) does not immunize violations of international law or fundamental due process.
Ground Three: Violation of International Law and Treaties
The capture breaches treaties and customary international law binding on the U.S., including prohibitions on the use of force against sovereign states and protections for heads of state.
Petitioner invokes the Suspension Clause (U.S. Const. art. I, § 9, cl. 2) and precedents emphasizing habeas as a safeguard against arbitrary executive detention.
Ground Four: Lack of Legitimate Basis for Detention
Any pretextual reliance on drug-related charges (including references to a purported “Cartel de los Soles,” reportedly revised or questioned in recent proceedings) does not justify the military nature of the seizure or override immunity/sovereignty concerns.
5. Exhaustion and Prior Proceedings
No prior § 2241 petition has been filed. Petitioner reserves the right to pursue motions in the underlying criminal case (S.D.N.Y.) but files this emergency petition due to the extraordinary nature of the detention (military capture of a foreign head of state) and risk of irreparable harm.
6. Relief Requested
Petitioner respectfully requests that this Court:
- Issue an order directing Respondents to show cause why the writ should not be granted.
- Grant the writ of habeas corpus and order Petitioner’s immediate release from custody.
- In the alternative, stay further criminal proceedings and order release pending resolution of immunity and legality issues.
- Grant such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.
Verification
I, Nicolás Maduro Moros, declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct to the best of my knowledge.
Executed on _____, 2026.
/s/ Nicolás Maduro Moros
Petitioner ( by AXJ VENEZUELA )
Note on Emergency Filing to SCOTUS
While activist discussions (e.g., via #AXJNEWS posts) speculate on a direct emergency application to the Supreme Court, § 2241 petitions generally must start in district court. Original jurisdiction in SCOTUS is rare and requires exceptional circumstances (e.g., 28 U.S.C. § 2241(a)). Any such filing would face significant procedural hurdles, including exhaustion requirements and the government’s likely arguments on lawfulness under domestic indictments.
Petitioner’s current counsel, Barry Pollack, has signaled challenges to the “military abduction” in the criminal case). The actual habeas filing by #ActionsForJustice (#AXJ) of Venezuela or related AXJ parties has been reported as of January 6, 2026.
Background
On January 3, 2026, Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores, have been captured by U.S. forces during a large-scale military strike on Venezuela and flown to the United States.
U.S. President Donald Trump announced the operation early on January 3, stating that Maduro and his wife were captured and removed from the country. Multiple major news outlets, including AXJ, CNN, The New York Times, BBC, Reuters, AP News, and others, report that Maduro has arrived in New York (landing at Stewart Air National Guard Base) to face federal charges in the Southern District of New York.
Key Details
- The operation involved overnight strikes in Caracas and other areas, with reports of explosions and low-flying aircraft.
- It was justified by the U.S. as enforcement of a long-standing 2020 indictment against Maduro for narco-terrorism, conspiracy to import cocaine, and weapons-related charges (with a reward increased to $50 million in 2025).
- Trump has stated the U.S. will temporarily “run” Venezuela until a safe transition, and American companies may invest in its oil reserves.
- Venezuela’s Vice President Delcy Rodríguez (now acting as interim leader) has condemned the action as aggression/kidnapping and demanded Maduro’s release.
- Reactions are mixed: celebrations among Venezuelan expatriates (e.g., in South Florida), criticism from some Democrats and international figures over legality and intervention, and comparisons to the 1989-1990 U.S. operation against Panama’s Manuel Noriega.
This is a rapidly developing story with significant geopolitical implications. Maduro is expected to be arraigned soon in U.S. court on Monday January 5, 2025.