Senator Chris Van Hollen’s decision to personally intervene in a deportation case in El Salvador has opened a political can of worms, with critics drawing comparisons to the Michael Flynn investigation. The Maryland Democrat’s unauthorized diplomatic mission has Republicans crying foul and raising questions about potential Logan Act violations.
The Logan Act, an 18th century law prohibiting private citizens from conducting unauthorized diplomacy, gained notoriety during the Trump administration when it was cited in the investigation of Michael Flynn. Now, conservatives argue Van Hollen’s actions represent a clear case of the same offense they once decried as politically motivated.
Van Hollen’s office defends the trip as legitimate constituent service, noting Maryland’s significant Salvadoran population. They argue the Senator was simply advocating for a family who believes their relative was wrongfully identified as a gang member. However, critics counter that directly negotiating with foreign officials about a deportation case crosses into unauthorized diplomacy.
Legal experts remain skeptical about any actual Logan Act prosecution. “The law exists more as a political talking point than a practical legal tool,” explains constitutional scholar Mark Graber. “There’s a reason no one’s ever been successfully prosecuted under it in over 200 years.”
The situation highlights ongoing tensions in U.S. foreign policy between executive authority and congressional prerogatives. While the Constitution designates the president as the nation’s chief diplomat, lawmakers frequently engage with foreign officials, especially when representing immigrant communities with ties abroad.
As the Biden administration carefully avoids endorsing Van Hollen’s actions, the controversy serves as a reminder of how easily foreign policy can become entangled in domestic political battles, with obscure laws like the Logan Act providing ammunition for both sides.
