El Chapo’s Family in the U.S.: Uncovering the Hidden Connections Behind a Secret Trump Deal

Category: Big Picture Perspectives | Sub-Category: Hidden Connections

Introduction: A Border Crossing That Raises Eyebrows

On May 13, 2025, Mexico’s Security Secretary Omar García Harfuch confirmed a startling development: 17 family members of Sinaloa Cartel leaders, including relatives of Joaquín “El Chapo” Guzmán, crossed into the United States as part of a clandestine deal with the Trump administration. Video footage of these relatives, suitcases in tow, walking across the Tijuana-San Diego border to meet U.S. agents has ignited speculation about the motives and implications of this move. Tied to plea negotiations with El Chapo’s son, Ovidio Guzmán López, this deal reveals hidden connections between U.S. law enforcement strategies, cartel power struggles, and the geopolitics of the U.S.-Mexico border. In this Big Picture Perspective, we explore the unseen forces at play and what they mean for the fight against organized crime.

The Deal: A Web of Negotiations

Ovidio Guzmán López, one of El Chapo’s sons and a leader of the Sinaloa Cartel’s “Los Chapitos” faction, was extradited to the U.S. in September 2023 to face drug trafficking charges. Set to plead guilty on July 9, 2025, in a Chicago federal court, Ovidio’s cooperation appears central to the deal allowing 17 family members—including El Chapo’s ex-wife, Grisselda López Pérez, and her daughter—into the U.S. As García Harfuch stated on Radio Fórmula, “It is evident that his family is going to the U.S. because of a negotiation or an offer that the Department of Justice is giving him.”

The deal’s secrecy suggests a strategic bargain: Ovidio may be providing intelligence on rival cartels, such as the Jalisco New Generation Cartel, or even rival factions within the Sinaloa Cartel, in exchange for leniency or protection for his family. The group crossed with $70,000 in cash, indicating a coordinated operation, possibly involving witness protection. This move connects U.S. anti-cartel efforts to the internal dynamics of the Sinaloa Cartel, revealing a calculated effort to exploit its fractures.

The Hidden Players: Who Crossed and Why?

The 17 family members, including Grisselda López Pérez, mother of Ovidio and his brother Joaquín Guzmán López (also in U.S. custody), were not wanted by Mexican authorities. Their crossing wasn’t an escape from prosecution but a strategic relocation, likely to shield them from the Sinaloa Cartel’s ongoing internal war. Since the arrests of Ovidio, Joaquín, and co-founder Ismael “El Mayo” Zambada in 2024, Sinaloa state has seen over 1,200 deaths and 1,400 missing due to factional violence. The family’s entry into the U.S. connects their personal safety to broader U.S. objectives, raising questions about their role—witnesses, informants, or simply protected beneficiaries?

The involvement of U.S. agents, who met the family at the border, points to a hidden coordination between the Justice Department and immigration authorities. This operation’s secrecy, conducted without notifying Mexico, underscores a unilateral U.S. approach that may strain diplomatic ties.

The Timing: Narcoterrorism and Political Strategy

The deal’s announcement coincided with the U.S. Attorney General’s Office unveiling “narcoterrorism” charges against Sinaloa Cartel leaders on May 13, 2025—the first since the Trump administration designated the cartel a foreign terrorist organization. U.S. Attorney Adam Gordon’s warning, “You are no longer the hunters, you are the hunted,” signals an aggressive stance. Yet, allowing cartel relatives into the U.S. seems to contradict this rhetoric, exposing a hidden connection between tough talk and pragmatic deal-making.

This juxtaposition reflects the Trump administration’s complex approach to cartels: public bravado paired with behind-the-scenes negotiations. The designation of cartels as terrorist organizations, a controversial move, connects to broader political goals, including justifying stricter border policies. However, granting entry to El Chapo’s family while enforcing tight immigration rules for others has sparked outrage on platforms like X, with users questioning, “Why can Chapo’s family cross, but regular immigrants can’t?” This tension reveals a hidden fault line in U.S. policy: balancing national security with public perception.

The Cartel’s Fractured Empire

The Sinaloa Cartel, once a unified juggernaut under El Chapo and El Mayo, is now a fractured empire. The Chapitos, led by Ovidio and Joaquín, control one faction, while El Mayo’s loyalists form another. The July 2024 arrest of El Mayo, allegedly orchestrated by Joaquín in a betrayal that saw him handed to U.S. authorities, deepened the rift. The resulting violence—beheadings, mass graves, and displacements—has destabilized Sinaloa state.

This deal connects Ovidio’s cooperation to the U.S.’s exploitation of these fractures. By securing intelligence from a key player, the U.S. aims to disrupt the cartel’s fentanyl trafficking, a driver of the U.S. opioid crisis. The 2023 indictment against the Chapitos detailed their brutal tactics, including torture and feeding victims to tigers, highlighting the stakes. Yet, protecting one faction’s family could inadvertently strengthen the Chapitos’ position, linking U.S. actions to the cartel’s internal power dynamics.

The Mexico-U.S. Divide: A Diplomatic Rift

Mexico’s government was blindsided by the operation, learning of it only after journalist Luis Chaparro broke the story. President Claudia Sheinbaum’s curt response—“there is no more information”—signals frustration. This echoes the 2024 El Mayo incident, which Mexico labeled a U.S.-orchestrated kidnapping. The lack of coordination connects U.S. unilateralism to strained bilateral relations, potentially jeopardizing future extraditions or joint anti-cartel efforts.

Mexico’s perspective reveals a hidden tension: while the U.S. pursues its agenda, Mexico grapples with the fallout of cartel violence. The family’s relocation may protect them, but it raises questions about their status in the U.S. and whether Mexico was deliberately kept in the dark to avoid leaks or interference.

Public Reaction: A Polarized Narrative

On X, reactions range from outrage to cautious support. One user fumed, “REG. FAMILIES CAN’T COME, BUT CHAPO’S CAN?? WTF!!” while another saw it as “a smart move to get intel from Ovidio.” These responses connect public sentiment to broader debates about immigration, justice, and U.S. priorities. The deal’s secrecy fuels distrust, with many questioning why cartel relatives receive special treatment. This backlash links the operation to domestic political pressures, particularly Trump’s immigration rhetoric.

The Big Picture: Strategy or Misstep?

This deal connects several threads: U.S. anti-cartel tactics, cartel infighting, and U.S.-Mexico relations. By leveraging Ovidio’s cooperation, the U.S. aims to disrupt drug trafficking, but at what cost? The ethical dilemma of negotiating with criminals, the risk of alienating Mexico, and the public’s perception of favoritism toward cartel families all complicate the strategy. The terrorist designation, while symbolically potent, may oversimplify the cartel’s business-driven nature, linking U.S. policy to a broader miscalculation.

What’s Next?

As Ovidio’s plea hearing nears, the deal’s outcomes will come into focus. Will his intelligence lead to major arrests, or will it merely shift power within the cartel? The family’s status—protected witnesses or free beneficiaries—remains a mystery. Mexico’s demand for transparency may force the U.S. to clarify its actions, potentially exposing more hidden connections.

Conclusion: A Deal That Rewrites the Narrative

The entry of El Chapo’s family into the U.S. under a secret Trump deal is more than a headline—it’s a nexus of hidden connections between crime, politics, and diplomacy. It reveals the lengths to which the U.S. will go to combat cartels, even if it means navigating ethical gray zones and diplomatic fallout. As the Sinaloa Cartel’s war rages on, this deal underscores the complex interplay of power, betrayal, and strategy shaping the U.S.-Mexico border.

Thought-Provoking Questions:

1. How does the U.S.’s willingness to negotiate with cartel figures like Ovidio reflect the hidden trade-offs in the fight against drug trafficking?

2. Could the unilateral nature of this deal damage long-term U.S.-Mexico cooperation, and what hidden consequences might arise?

3. Does protecting cartel family members undermine the U.S.’s immigration narrative, or is it a necessary price for strategic gains?

4. Are narcoterrorism charges and terrorist designations effective tools against cartels, or do they obscure the deeper connections driving organized crime?