US Turns Sanctions Spear Toward the International Criminal Court as an Institution

The US State Department has announced sanctions against the International Criminal Court as an institution, escalating action against the international judicial body, which employs some 900 staff, to a new level. According to Al Jazeera, Secretary of State Rubio said in a video released on Friday on social media that the new sanctions would prohibit any transactions with this "rogue court" and "cut off its resources and cripple its capacity to take action against us." Speaking in his capacity as the United States' top diplomat, he declared: "The United States and the American people are not subject to the jurisdiction of this bogus International Criminal Court. Either the ICC stops threatening us, or we will end it."

The sanctions order targets not individuals, but the institution as a whole. According to Al Jazeera's compilation, the sanctions freeze all property and interests of the International Criminal Court in the United States and prohibit "any contribution of funds, goods, or services" to it, dealing a blow to the court's day-to-day operations, which depend on external technology, insurance and other services. Previous US sanctions targets have also included the court's judges and prosecutor, a UN Special rapporteur focused on the occupied Palestinian territories, and Palestinian rights groups that have provided evidence to the court.

The United States has characterized two ICC judicial actions as "threats": the investigation into atrocities committed in Afghanistan — proceedings that could implicate US military and intelligence personnel; and the arrest warrants issued for Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Gallant — the two men accused of war crimes in the Gaza war. Al Jazeera noted that neither the United States nor Israel is a state party to the Rome Statute, but the ICC has long maintained that crimes committed by US or Israeli nationals on the territory of a state party fall under its jurisdiction. Israel is among the welcoming parties of Washington's latest action — Netanyahu thanked the Trump administration in a social media statement.

ICC Deputy Prosecutor Nazhat Shameem Khan chose to face the media directly. Reuters quoted her as saying the measures "must be condemned," that they sought "to undermine the rule of international law and the work of an independent judicial institution," and emphasizing that the court would "continue to advance across all situations, investigations and prosecutions." The International Criminal Court called on states parties to "redouble support" and warned that "history will judge this moment." The statement read: "Future generations — and in particular the victims of mass atrocities — will ask what we did when an institution created to protect them came under attack."

The timing of the sanctions is notable — coming just hours after the Norwegian Nobel Committee awarded this year's Peace Prize to South African jurist and former ICC judge Navi Pillay. Al Jazeera reported that Pillay chaired a 2025 UN human rights report that determined Israel's operations in Gaza constitute genocide. In its citation, the Nobel Committee stated bluntly that the prize was awarded at "a moment when judges and institutions of international law are coming under political attack," and that "an international legal system in which war criminals are held to account and victims of abuse obtain justice is a prerequisite for a peaceful world."

William Schabas, professor of international law at London's Middlesex University, told Al Jazeera that the Nobel Committee's recognition of Pillay was "also a polite endorsement of the International Criminal Court itself, and of the report she authored last year for the United Nations condemning Israel for committing genocide." He also linked the timing of the State Department's announcement to Trump's ongoing grievances with the Nobel Committee.

The ICC's membership system has already been under ebb-tide pressure. According to Al Jazeera's compilation, in July of this year Chad and Venezuela announced their withdrawal from the International Criminal Court in succession; countries that withdrew earlier include Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger — African and Latin American countries that, amid tense relations with the West in recent years, have repeatedly expressed dissatisfaction with the double standards of the international order.

The United States, meanwhile, is extending pressure to its allies. According to Al Jazeera, the State Department has urged other countries to withdraw from the court and hinted that positions on the ICC issue would be a consideration for foreign aid decisions. Mark Costan, an international law expert at Fraser Valley University in British Columbia, Canada, told Al Jazeera that since Trump began his second term, direct sanctions on the court itself have been the scenario "most feared" by supporters of the International Criminal Court. "The worst-case scenario has come to pass," he said. "Most European countries, large parts of Latin America and Africa, Canada and Australia are still members; whether the court ultimately endures will depend on whether they provide concrete support."

The new sanctions simultaneously set out several temporary exemptions — maintenance services, technology and pension programs are excluded. The State Department said these exemptions "buy time for states parties to make meaningful progress, diplomatically and legally, on the United States' fundamental concerns." But how long the exemptions will last and whether states parties will take corresponding action remain uncertain. Quoting Professor Schabas, Al Jazeera reported that the court has been preparing for this possibility for over a year: "They have been working on Plan B," including migrating some US-made software to European alternatives, and recently ending its relationship with AXA, a French insurer that had business dealings in the United States. But Schabas also acknowledged that, for the court as an institution, the sanctions "will undoubtedly substantially increase operational difficulty."

To date, the International Criminal Court has not sought to indict any US citizen. According to Al Jazeera's compilation, a US law traceable to the 2002 "Global War on Terror" context already bars the extradition of US citizens to the International Criminal Court and authorizes the use of military force should US citizens be detained by the court — dubbed the "Hague Invasion Clause" by its critics.