President Claudia Sheinbaum has called on the U.S. government to explain why 17 members of Joaquín “El Chapo” Guzmán’s family were allowed to enter the United States without prior notification to Mexico.
On May 14, 2025, during her regular morning press conference (la “mañanera”), President Claudia Sheinbaum publicly demanded that the United States government disclose the reasons why it accepted into U.S. territory 17 relatives of convicted drug lord Joaquín “El Chapo” Guzmán and his son, Ovidio Guzmán, without prior notification to Mexican authorities. She emphasized that Mexico had not been informed of any agreement or legal basis underpinning their entry, and insisted that the U.S. owes Mexico a clear explanation in the spirit of mutual respect and cooperation.
According to multiple reports, the family members—among them El Chapo’s former wife, Griselda López Pérez—crossed into the United States last Friday via the San Ysidro border crossing in Tijuana before being escorted by U.S. federal agents. Mexican Security Secretary Omar García Harfuch later confirmed the operation and linked it to negotiations with U.S. authorities, noting that such movements of high-profile cartel relatives typically align with cooperation or plea‐deal processes.
The saga traces back to January 2023, when Mexican forces recaptured Ovidio Guzmán in a large-scale operation that resulted in the deaths of several soldiers and cartel members. Ovidio was extradited to the United States in September 2023 to face federal charges for drug trafficking and money laundering. He is scheduled to appear in a Chicago court on July 9, 2025, for a hearing on his anticipated guilty plea.
President Sheinbaum underscored that the entrance of these individuals directly contradicts the U.S. policy of “not negotiating with terrorists,” since the Sinaloa Cartel was designated a foreign terrorist organization last year alongside five other Mexican cartels. “They have publicly stated they do not negotiate with terrorists—yet here we see their own policy sidestepped,” she remarked, framing the incident as a breach of stated principles and a challenge to Mexico’s sovereignty.
Omar García Harfuch, Mexico’s Security Secretary, was more blunt, saying that the family transfer “clearly indicates some form of negotiation or agreement with the Department of Justice” in Washington. He warned that Mexico’s government cannot remain in the dark about understandings that bear on bilateral security efforts, especially when Mexican soldiers lost their lives capturing Ovidio.
In addition to probing the U.S. Justice Department’s rationale, Sheinbaum took the opportunity to signal the incoming U.S. ambassador, Ron Johnson, about the need for heightened transparency. “When Ambassador Johnson presents his credentials, I will request direct coordination and collaboration—not subordination,” she said, referring to the tradition of diplomatic courtesy but stressing the importance of equal partnership.
Experts in security and international law have weighed in with similar concerns. Oscar Hagelsieb, a former head of Homeland Security Investigations in Ciudad Juárez, told Mexican journalist Luis Chaparro that “they won’t be the last to receive such benefits,” suggesting the U.S. may extend comparable arrangements to other cartel affiliates. Analysts argue this approach aims to secure critical testimony but risks undermining Mexico’s legal authority and public confidence.
The incident has reignited debate over how Mexico and the United States balance cooperation against organized crime with the defense of national sovereignty. Calls for stronger mechanisms to inform Mexico of cross-border actions involving its citizens have grown louder in Congress and civil society, with senators and human-rights groups urging the federal government to leverage diplomatic channels to prevent future surprises.
Diplomatic sources indicate that Mexican Foreign Minister Alicia Barcena has already sent formal inquiries to her U.S. counterpart, demanding access to any memorandums of understanding or diplomatic notes related to the family’s entry. While U.S. officials have yet to reply publicly, insiders suggest Washington is reviewing whether internal Department of Justice protocols were properly followed.
Beyond immediate transparency, legal experts caution that such agreements could set a troubling precedent. If cartel members or their kin can trade cooperation for sanctuary or residency, critics say, it may incentivize future crimes and bypass Mexico’s judicial processes. They stress the need for a trilateral legal framework—incorporating Canada as a USMCA partner—to standardize treatment of organized-crime witnesses across North America.
President Sheinbaum concluded Wednesday’s conference by reiterating that Mexico “will continue to cooperate in the fight against drug trafficking,” but “never at the cost of our sovereignty”. Her office has tasked national security advisors with preparing a dossier on the event, to be shared with both legislative committees and the incoming U.S. ambassador.
As both governments await further documentation and explanations from Washington, the episode stands as a flashpoint in US-Mexico relations—highlighting tensions between pragmatic law-enforcement agreements and the political imperative of transparent, sovereign decision-making. Only with full disclosure, advocates say, can trust be restored and collaboration against transnational crime be strengthened for the long term.