Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
Did Rubio turn over Department of Justice MS13 informants to get access to El Salvadoran prisons.
Executive summary
Reporting based on The Washington Post and widespread follow-ups says Secretary of State Marco Rubio promised Salvadoran President Nayib Bukele during a March 13 call to deliver several MS‑13 figures — including individuals described as U.S. informants protected by DOJ — as part of securing U.S. access to El Salvador’s CECOT prison for deportations [1]. Multiple outlets summarize that Rubio later urged Attorney General Pam Bondi to terminate protections for those informants and at least one MS‑13 member was repatriated shortly after the call [2] [3] [1].
1. What the core reporting says: a backroom pledge to Bukele
The Washington Post reported that Rubio told Bukele he would fulfill Bukele’s request for nine MS‑13 leaders — some of whom were described as U.S. informants — to secure use of El Salvador’s Terrorism Confinement Center (CECOT) for holding deported migrants, and that Rubio then sought to have U.S. protections for those informants withdrawn [1]. Follow‑up stories and summaries in outlets including The Independent and Truthout repeat that account and say one named suspect, César López‑Larios, was sent back to El Salvador days after the reported call [2] [3].
2. How other outlets framed the allegation and reactions
News organizations summarized the Post’s reporting as saying Rubio “promised to betray” or “gave up” U.S. informants to seal the deal; some commentators described the move as a severe compromise of witness protections and U.S. law‑enforcement operations [4] [5]. State Department commentary quoted in coverage defended the diplomacy as helping deport hundreds of gang members and improving U.S. safety, per summaries of official responses [6].
3. Who the purported informants were and why that matters
Reporting says some of the MS‑13 leaders Bukele sought had previously cooperated with U.S. prosecutors or provided testimony alleging links between Salvadoran officials and gang members — making their protection by the U.S. government significant for ongoing investigations and witness safety [3] [7]. Multiple outlets flagged the risk that removing protections could chill future cooperation from informants and disrupt law‑enforcement intelligence on MS‑13 [4] [5].
4. Legal and operational consequences cited in coverage
Coverage links the alleged pledge to a broader legal fight over deportations to El Salvador: a federal judge in D.C. had ordered planes turned back in an emergency lawsuit, and the administration’s haste to deport was central to the dispute; the Post’s account places the Rubio–Bukele call in that context [2] [8]. Available reporting notes that at least one deportation proceeded and that courts or attorneys for detainees mounted challenges, but full legal outcomes for the specific informants mentioned are varied across accounts [2] [8].
5. Points of disagreement, limitations, and what sources do not say
Most secondary articles base their claims on The Washington Post’s reporting; many characterize Rubio’s actions as an active abandonment of informant protections, while defense statements framed the diplomacy as successful anti‑gang cooperation [1] [6]. Available sources do not provide a direct on‑the‑record statement from Rubio admitting he “turned over” informants; they instead cite officials familiar with the conversation and reporting that he “promised” to deliver or sought to undercut protections [1] [2]. Detailed DOJ internal records or a public record of formal revocations of individual witness‑protection agreements are not presented in these summaries [1] [3].
6. Practical implications and competing perspectives
Critics argue that compromising informant protections undermines investigations, endangers witnesses, and damages U.S. credibility with future cooperating witnesses [4] [5]. Supporters — including a quoted State Department deputy spokesperson in summaries — say the diplomatic trade enabled mass removals of alleged gang members and enhanced public safety by leveraging an ally’s detention capacity [6]. The tension is between immediate operational goals (detaining and deporting suspected gang members) and longer‑term intelligence and rule‑of‑law consequences tied to witness protection [3] [4].
7. Bottom line for readers seeking to judge the claim
Available reporting from The Washington Post, and many outlets that cite it, say Rubio offered to secure the return of MS‑13 members — some described as U.S. informants — to win access to CECOT, and that he sought to have U.S. protections for those informants ended; at least one such individual was reportedly repatriated soon after the call [1] [3] [2]. However, direct, public documentary evidence of formal DOJ revocations for each named informant is not included in the summaries provided here, and official denials or fuller DOJ records are not present in the available reporting [1] [6].