The Trump administration has sanctioned four judges at the International Criminal Court (ICC) for their purported involvement in efforts to investigate, arrest, or prosecute U.S. and Israeli nationals without the consent of the United States or Israel. The sanctions were announced by Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Thursday, who called the ICC’s actions ‘illegitimate and baseless.’ The four judges from Uganda, Peru, Benin, and Slovenia are accused of participating in the ICC’s alleged targeting of American and Israeli citizens.
These sanctions are part of a broader effort by the U.S. to counter what it views as politically motivated actions by the ICC in its May 2024 arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant. The warrants, which accuse them of war crimes and crimes against humanity, have been criticized by both the U.S. and Israel as an overreach of the ICC’s jurisdiction. The Trump administration’s February 6 executive order, which condemns the ICC’s actions, is directly tied to these sanctions against the four judges.
Secretary of State Rubio emphasized the ICC’s ‘dangerous assertion and abuse of power’ in making unfettered claims over the investigation of U.S. nationals and allies. He argued that the court’s actions risk infringing on the sovereignty and national security of the United States and its allies. In response, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu praised the U.S. for ‘standing up for the right of Israel, the United States, and all democracies to defend themselves against savage terror.’
Experts have pointed out that the ICC only prosecutes cases when domestic law enforcement is unable to act, a principle that underscores the court’s limited enforcement power. Israel, which is not a member of the ICC, remains outside the court’s jurisdiction. Despite the ICC’s warrants, the court’s actions rely on cooperation from its member states to enforce any legal measures. The U.S. and Israel have been vocal in their criticism of the ICC’s recent actions, arguing that the court has politicized its processes and failed to operate within its legal mandate.