Authored by Troy Myers via The Epoch Times,
U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officers at the U.S.–Mexico border prevented more than 60 pounds of cocaine from entering the country, allegedly smuggled by an American citizen—a “trusted traveler”—the agency exclusively told The Epoch Times on Wednesday.
At California’s San Ysidro Port of Entry, a 25-year-old man was arrested on April 7 for allegedly concealing more than $1.1 million of the illegal narcotics within his vehicle and now faces federal prosecution.
The man was not named by CBP.
He was categorized as a “trusted traveler” because he was a participant in the Secure Electronic Network for Travelers Rapid Inspection program, the agency said. The program allows expedited passage into the United States for pre-approved, low-risk travelers. All applicants for the program undergo an extensive background check and an in-person interview prior to being enrolled.
Despite having qualified for expedited treatment, the man was referred for a secondary inspection while entering the United States.
“Trust, but verify,” the agency said.
Illegal narcotics hidden in the driver's vehicle doors are shown, at the San Ysidro Port of Entry on April 7, 2026. Border Patrol agents seized more than 60 pounds of cocaine from a U.S. citizen. U.S. Customs and Border Protection
During the secondary inspection, CBP said it used non-intrusive imaging technology that revealed “anomalies” within the doors of the driver’s 2020 Honda Civic. A canine team additionally alerted officers to the presence of narcotics.
According to CBP, officers discovered 20 packages containing 27.28 kilograms, or 60.14 pounds, of cocaine. The drugs, vehicle, and two cellphones were seized.
The driver was arrested and faces charges of narcotics importation and smuggling, CBP said.
“This arrest is a clear message that no one is above the law,” San Ysidro Port Director Mariza Marin said.
“We will hold everyone accountable for their actions, especially those who betray the trust of our traveler programs by attempting to smuggle dangerous narcotics.”
This latest encounter comes as the Trump administration delivered 11 straight months of zero releases at the southern border, while CBP is making increased illegal narcotics seizures across the country compared to a year prior.
Nationwide, CBP seized more than 65,000 pounds of drugs in March, which included 613 pounds of fentanyl. Compared to March 2024, that total amount is 27 percent higher.
Border Patrol agents seized more than 60 pounds of cocaine from a U.S. citizen. The illegal narcotics were hidden in the driver's vehicle doors, on April 7, 2026, at the San Ysidro Port of Entry. U.S. Customs and Border Protection
The agency said it has seized 24 percent more drugs this fiscal year through March than it did during the same time period for FY 2024.
Comparing similar figures extending into President Joe Biden’s administration, CBP seized 19 percent more illegal narcotics so far this fiscal year than it seized, on average, during the same period in each of the last four fiscal years, according to the agency.
To date in FY 2026, data showed CBP has seized a total of 341,000 pounds of drugs.
The agency counts all drug types, including cocaine, ecstasy, fentanyl, heroin, ketamine, khat, LSD, marijuana, methamphetamine, and other drugs. CBP also reports drug seizures from the southern border, northern border, coastal areas, and interior.
In February, CBP exclusively shared with The Epoch Times that it had prevented more than 660 pounds of methamphetamine, worth about $6 million, from illegally entering the United States. The drug bust came from a single commercial truck at the World Trade Bridge in Laredo, Texas.
Only days before that encounter and at the same Laredo entry point, federal officers seized 36 pounds of cocaine worth about half a million dollars. CBP said it was enough for 190,000 lethal doses.
A CBP spokesperson noted that the drug seizure metrics on its website do not include illegal narcotics seized from joint operations, such as the U.S. Coast Guard or local law enforcement, when another agency would take possession of the drugs.
“In addition to what Border Patrol and [the Office of Field Operations] has seized, which is above and beyond what has been seized in years prior, there’s also these additional activities that stop it before it even gets to the border,” the spokesperson previously told The Epoch Times.
* * *
Tyler Durden Thu, 04/16/2026 - 19:15An announcement from the administration's Science and Technology Director, Michael Kratsios, regarding the establishment of the National Initiative for American Space Nuclear Power sent reactor development companies higher over the following trading days.
The time has come for America to get underway on nuclear power in space🇺🇸 https://t.co/fLrM4MtNbM
— NASA Administrator Jared Isaacman (@NASAAdmin) April 14, 2026Oklo and NuScale have been soaring...
Investors are betting on reactor development companies being involved in multiple different nuclear-related applications in space missions to include propulsion, shuttle electrical power, and power for bases on the moon and Mars. The question stands, though, as to which developer actually has a chance of being involved in any of these programs?
For those not tracking, outer space has some slightly different environmental factors to consider compared to the surface of the Earth. Multiple physics headaches including low or zero gravity create headaches that prevent certain reactor designs from ever having a hope of operating in extraterrestrial settings.
Additional problems, like not having a readily available heat sink like a large body of water nearby, creates compound difficulties for some of the more traditional reactor designs.
Earlier this year, the administration began talking about putting reactors on the moon by 2030. We provided some details to our readers about what nuclear companies they should expect to be involved in the process.
Nuclear Reactors On The Moon By 2030 https://t.co/RCmZe8rrvt
— zerohedge (@zerohedge) January 14, 2026Relying on the opinion of Mr. Market is likely not the best idea in a technical scenario. Instead it's best to just look at the last attempt that was made at operating reactors on the moon and derive assumptions from those that were previously involved in the program.
NASA originally made attempts to develop lunar power by working with companies like Lockheed Martin, BWXT, Westinghouse, X-energy, and Boeing. Through their coordinated efforts, the leading designs for the project pointed to high-temperature gas-cooled reactors (HTGRs) utilizing tristructural isotropic (TRISO) fuel. Given the physics of the universe haven't changed much over the past few years, it's safe to assume the reactor of choice for the latest space initiatives will likely also be a HTGR.
So who is making HTGRs today? Currently, in the publicly traded space, there is Nano Nuclear and Terra Innovatum. X-energy is another likely candidate for the program, and they recently submitted their S-1 to begin the process to execute an IPO later this year.
X-energy has announced the launch of the roadshow for its IPO! https://t.co/tqwbs0s9cC pic.twitter.com/pXnFw95vBK
— X-energy (@xenergynuclear) April 15, 2026Terra Innovatum has yet to make any announcement regarding the extraterrestrial application of their SOLO reactor design, but Nano Nuclear’s Loki reactor is specifically marketed for environments like outer space.
$NNE "NANO Nuclear Energy Issues Request for Information Soliciting Potential Commercial Partner Input in Support of U.S. Department of Energy and NASA Lunar Surface Reactor Program" NANO Nuclear’s space-relevant reactor design, the LOKI MMR™ 🌕🛰️⚛️🇺🇸https://t.co/BL6BDOkX3C
— NANO Nuclear Energy (NASDAQ: NNE) (@nano_nuclear) January 15, 2026BWXT is also likely to be involved to some extent due to their extensive experience working with NASA in the areas of nuclear propulsion. Additionally, BWXT is one of only two manufacturers that is able to produce TRISO fuel in the US.
If anything, the pump across the board for nuclear names should be less attributed to their potential for involvement in NASA's missions and more attributed to the wider adoption and acceptance of nuclear energy across multiple applications besides just powering the grid.
It is a very straightforward conclusion that only certain reactor designs can operate in space. Companies like NuScale and Terrestrial Energy will almost certainly be excluded due to the physics of operating off of Earth.