The debate over the state of exception in El Salvador is no longer a cause championed exclusively by Democrats in the United States. The hearing, held on April 16 by the House of Representatives’ Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission, showed that the issue has begun to cross party lines and generate differing viewpoints within the Republican Party.
The hearing clearly distanced itself from two similar meetings held in 2022 and 2024. This time, it was not a forum dominated by journalists, academics, and human rights advocates demanding that President Donald Trump’s administration take a tougher stance against the abuses and possible crimes against humanity attributed to Nayib Bukele’s government. It was, unequivocally, a bipartisan hearing.
The committee’s co-chairs —Democrat James McGovern and Republican Christopher Smith— shared leadership of the hearing, which also included conservative voices among the witnesses.
With that composition, the discussion became harder to dismiss as an initiative driven exclusively by liberal sectors. Even so, officials from Bukele’s government have not participated in any of the three hearings, although embassy representatives have been present on more than one occasion.
Trump Deals In Blackmail and Flattery with Latin American Militaries
This shift did not happen overnight. In 2022, six months after Bukele decreed the suspension of constitutional guarantees to combat gangs, the hearing was spearheaded solely by McGovern and brought together representatives of the Biden administration, civil society organizations, and human rights advocates.
In 2024, at the end of the Biden administration, Smith appeared alongside McGovern for the first time and acknowledged that the state of exception had helped “restore order,” though he timidly called for El Salvador to exit that regime.
At the 2026 hearing, Smith went a step further by requesting the inclusion as a witness of Andrés Martínez-Fernández, Senior Policy Analyst for Latin America for a leading pro-Trump think tank, the Heritage Foundation.
The message was clear: Bukele’s security model is no longer a topic Republicans avoid, but one that some are willing to debate. As expected, Smith opened his remarks by highlighting as an achievement “the transformation” of security in El Salvador and the alleged 98 percent reduction in homicides.
But at the same time, the Republican —one of the longest-serving representatives in the House of Representatives— issued a clear warning: Bukele’s reelection “does not eliminate the importance of fundamental rights or the rule of law.”
He emphasized that the state of exception “has involved the suspension of certain constitutional protections in the areas of due process and criminal procedure” and concluded by describing as “legitimate” the concerns of human rights organizations and international bodies regarding allegations of arbitrary detentions, prison conditions, and restrictions on civil liberties.
Martínez-Fernández downplayed the concerns expressed by most of the panelists by describing human rights abuses as “failings.” The Heritage Foundation advisor further argued that “too many seek to exaggerate the nature and the scale of these concerns.”
However, the mere participation of both conservatives suggests that there is concern within sectors of Trump’s coalition about what is happening in the Central American country.
Since Trump’s arrival in the White House, Republicans in Congress had, for the most part, maintained a policy of limited engagement with Salvadoran civil society and silence regarding Bukele’s state of exception. The last known meetings took place in late 2024 and included the office of then-Senator Marco Rubio, now Secretary of State.
This shift coincides with a different political context. Since the last hearing in 2024, the deportations of Venezuelan immigrants and the Salvadoran Kilmar Ábrego to prisons in El Salvador have shaken U.S. public opinion and contributed to a sustained decline in Trump’s approval ratings.
In response, Washington scrapped its plans to send new deportees from third countries and U.S. citizens to Bukele’s prisons. At the same time, reports of abuse and torture in Salvadoran prisons, as well as Bukele’s deals with gangs, have become a recurring theme in the U.S. media.
It would be naive to think that the Trump administration will make a 180-degree turn in its policy toward El Salvador. However, it is possible that Republicans in Congress are preparing for a strategic realignment in the face of a potential Democratic victory in at least one of the chambers, which could translate into a tougher stance on Bukele’s security policy.
Beware the Ides of April: Nayib Bukele Exports Contempt for the Law
The difference in tone between Smith —a Republican with more than 40 years in Congress— and MAGA figures like Republican Representative Anna Paulina Luna —who calls Bukele a hero— suggests that a different vision may be taking shape: one that does not abandon Bukele, but begins to acknowledge the need to more clearly demand an end to the state of exception and an investigation into human rights violations.
Bukele’s propagandists often view these types of hearings as an opportunity to attack panelists they reject and to celebrate those they perceive as allies. However, whether out of ignorance or servility, they seem not to realize that the tone of the debate has shifted.
Allegations of human rights violations in El Salvador are ceasing to be a marginal issue in Washington and are beginning to make the Salvadoran model a growing source of discomfort, even for sectors of the conservative establishment that previously viewed it with greater leniency. The Bukele model is becoming radioactive.
Ricardo Valencia is an associate professor of communications at California State University, Fullerton. Find him on X: @ricardovalp