Which US judge signed the warrant to seize a Venezuelan oil tanker and when was it issued?
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive summary
The warrant to seize the Venezuelan oil tanker M/T Skipper was signed by U.S. Magistrate Judge Zia Faruqui of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia on November 26, 2025, and the unsealed court papers show the warrant gave U.S. authorities until December 10, 2025 to execute the seizure, which occurred on that date [1] [2].
1. The narrow answer: who signed and when
A newly unsealed seizure warrant names U.S. Magistrate Judge Zia Faruqui as the judicial officer who signed the order on November 26, 2025, authorizing the Justice Department to pursue forfeiture of the M/T Skipper; court filings and contemporaneous reporting identify that signature date and judge explicitly [1] [3] [2].
2. Legal route and the ticking clock behind the signature
The Justice Department says the warrant was authorized under federal statutes allowing seizure of assets tied to terrorism-related crimes and civil forfeiture provisions, and the paperwork signed by Magistrate Judge Faruqui set an execution window that expired on December 10, 2025 — the very day U.S. forces boarded and took control of the tanker, according to prosecutors and unsealed court records [2] [1] [3].
3. What the unsealed documents do — and do not — show
The unsealed warrant confirms the judge’s signature and the November 26 issuance date but leaves key investigative material redacted: the affidavit and much of the supporting evidence remain sealed, and news outlets report the affidavit has not been publicly disclosed, limiting outside scrutiny of the factual basis presented to Magistrate Judge Faruqui [1] [2].
4. How officials and critics read the warrant’s timing and scope
U.S. officials framed the warrant as a sanctions-enforcement and national-security action tying the vessel to illicit oil shipments; administration statements and Justice Department materials tie the seizure authority to laws aimed at disrupting assets linked to terrorism or sanctions evasion [2] [3]. Critics and foreign governments disputed the move: Venezuela called the action “blatant theft” and “international piracy,” while Russia demanded explanations and questioned the legality and motives behind the operation, underscoring geopolitical blowback even as Washington points to the court-signed warrant as legal cover [4] [5].
5. The operational follow-through that matched the warrant’s deadline
Reporting from multiple outlets shows U.S. forces — including the Coast Guard with FBI and Homeland Security support — boarded and seized the Skipper in international waters on December 10, 2025, the last day the warrant authorized U.S. action, a fact emphasized in press accounts that noted the seizure occurred “just as” the judge-signed warrant would have expired [1] [6] [2].
6. Why the identity of the magistrate and the date matter beyond formality
Naming Magistrate Judge Zia Faruqui and the November 26 issuance date is not mere procedural detail: it anchors the government’s claim that the action had a domestic judicial predicate rather than being solely a military or executive-decision operation, and it concentrates legal scrutiny on what affidavits and evidence were presented to Faruqui — materials that remain largely redacted and therefore a locus for dispute about legality and precedent [2] [1] [3].
7. Remaining gaps and how they shape the debate
Even with the judge’s name and the date public, independent confirmation of the underlying factual claims is constrained by redactions; outlets note anonymous officials have offered competing rationales (Iran-linked smuggling versus sanctioned Venezuelan oil), and the sealed affidavit means courts, lawyers and foreign governments are currently relying on government statements rather than full public disclosure to evaluate the legal sufficiency of what was shown to Magistrate Judge Faruqui [7] [1] [2].