The U.S. State Department has enacted controversial visa revocations against two prominent Panamanian politicians, responding to their criticism of recent agreements struck with the Trump administration.
U.S. Takes Diplomatic Action Against Panamanian Politicians for Criticizing Trump Deal

U.S. Takes Diplomatic Action Against Panamanian Politicians for Criticizing Trump Deal
Former President Martínez Torrijos and challenger Ricardo Lombana face visa revocation from the U.S. after denouncing new agreements with the Trump administration.
On June 17, 2025, the U.S. State Department made a significant move by revoking the visas of former Panamanian President Martín Torrijos and presidential candidate Ricardo Lombana. This action has escalated tensions between U.S.-Panama relations as both politicians publicly opposed the compacts pertaining to immigration and military presence made with President Trump.
During a press conference, Torrijos announced he received notification of his visa cancellation, emphasizing that this is a warning to all Panamanians regarding the repercussions of criticizing their government's ties with the U.S. “This is not just about me… but a larger message against dissent,” he stated.
Lombana, who recently finished as runner-up in last year’s election, was similarly informed through an email of his visa cancellation. The fallout from this crisis stems from months of discord after President Trump expressed intentions to reclaim the Panama Canal, which had been handed back to Panama under a treaty signed by President Jimmy Carter.
President José Raúl Mulino of Panama is caught in the middle of the diplomatic turmoil. While he advocates for Panama's sovereignty, critics argue he has made concessions to the Trump administration, including accepting deported non-Panamanian migrants and permitting increased U.S. troop presence on former military bases. Mulino has denied allegations that he agreed to waive fees for U.S. warships transiting the canal, yet distrust continues to fester amid escalating tensions.
The recent decisions reflect an increasingly contentious political landscape where criticism of the U.S. and its agreements could carry heavy consequences.