By Lucretia Hughes
WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump’s administration is preparing sweeping new sanctions against the International Criminal Court that could isolate the tribunal from the global financial system and severely restrict its ability to conduct daily operations, according to published reports.
The proposed measures would target the ICC as an institution rather than sanctioning only individual judges, prosecutors and court officials, according to The Wall Street Journal. If implemented, the restrictions could prevent banks, technology companies, vendors and other businesses with ties to the United States from providing services to the court.
The sanctions reportedly would include a six- to seven-month wind-down period before taking full effect. After that period, most transactions involving the ICC could be prohibited, with limited exemptions expected for communications-related services.
The administration has not formally announced the broader sanctions, and the final timing and details could still change.
The latest development represents a significant escalation in the administration’s confrontation with the Hague-based court, which the United States has accused of exceeding its authority and threatening American sovereignty.
Trump signed an executive order in February 2025 declaring that the ICC had engaged in “illegitimate and baseless actions” against the United States and Israel. The order authorized the blocking of property and financial assets belonging to individuals involved in certain ICC investigations and prosecutions.
The United States and Israel are not parties to the Rome Statute, the treaty that established the ICC, and neither country recognizes the court’s jurisdiction over its citizens.
“The ICC has no jurisdiction over the United States or Israel, as neither country is party to the Rome Statute or a member of the ICC,” Trump stated in the order.
The administration’s dispute with the court intensified after the ICC issued arrest warrants in November 2024 for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant over allegations connected to Israel’s military campaign against Hamas in Gaza.
Israel has rejected the accusations and condemned the warrants as politically motivated. The Trump administration has argued that allowing the court to claim authority over officials from nations that never joined the ICC establishes a dangerous precedent that could later be used against American military personnel, elected officials and government employees.
The administration previously imposed sanctions on ICC prosecutor Karim Khan and later expanded those restrictions to include several judges and prosecutors associated with investigations involving Israel and the United States.
The reported institutional sanctions would go considerably further. Because international commerce frequently depends upon access to U.S. banks, American technology companies and dollar-denominated transactions, targeting the court itself could disrupt payroll, investigations, digital services, travel and payments to outside contractors.
Foreign governments supporting the ICC may attempt to protect the organization from the financial consequences. European Union members and Japan have continued to defend the court, arguing that it serves an important role in prosecuting genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity.
ICC officials have described the earlier American sanctions as an attack on the court’s independence. Supporters of the tribunal maintain that its work must remain free from political pressure.
The Trump administration, however, has maintained that the central issue is not accountability but jurisdiction. American officials argue that an international court cannot claim prosecutorial authority over citizens of countries that never agreed to place themselves under its control.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio has repeatedly criticized the ICC’s actions and warned that prosecutions involving Americans or citizens of allied countries could undermine the sovereignty of the United States.
Trump’s 2025 executive order declared that ICC actions against protected Americans or allied officials constitute “an unusual and extraordinary threat” to U.S. national security and foreign policy.
If the administration proceeds with sanctions against the entire institution, the move could become the strongest financial action ever taken by Washington against the ICC. It would also send an unmistakable message: The United States will not allow an unelected international tribunal to exercise unchecked authority over Americans or America’s allies without their consent.
The reported plan places the court at a crossroads. Its leaders may continue challenging nations outside its membership, but doing so could now come at the cost of access to the very financial and technological systems necessary for the court to operate.
Original article
Comments