US sanctions on the International Criminal Court

US sanctions on the International Criminal Court are economic sanctions and entry restrictions imposed by the United States on officials associated with the International Criminal Court (ICC) and, from 9 October 2026, on the court itself. The measures have principally concerned ICC investigations involving American personnel and proceedings against Israeli officials. A sanctions framework introduced in 2020 was revoked in 2021; a separate framework established in February 2025 was subsequently expanded to additional personnel and the institution. (2017-2021.state.gov)

Background and jurisdiction

The ICC is a treaty-based court established under the Rome Statute to investigate and prosecute individuals for genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and the crime of aggression. The United States and Israel are not parties to the statute. The Trump administration has argued that ICC proceedings against their nationals without their governments’ consent infringe national sovereignty. (icc-cpi.int)

The court’s jurisdictional position differs from that of the US administration. In particular, the ICC maintains that its territorial jurisdiction can encompass alleged crimes committed by nationals of non-party states on the territory of a state party. In its proceedings concerning Palestine, the court relied on territorial jurisdiction rather than Israeli consent. This disagreement over jurisdiction is distinct from a judicial determination of an individual’s criminal responsibility. (bridge.www.icc-cpi.int)

Two sets of proceedings were central to the sanctions:

Afghanistan: On 5 March 2020, the ICC Appeals Chamber authorized an investigation into alleged crimes committed in Afghanistan from 1 May 2003 and related alleged crimes committed on the territory of other states parties from 1 July 2002. The US administration subsequently cited efforts to investigate American personnel when imposing sanctions. (icc-cpi.int)
Palestine: On 21 November 2024, the ICC issued arrest warrants for Benjamin Netanyahu and Yoav Gallant concerning alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity. The February 2025 US executive order expressly cited those warrants as a reason for renewed sanctions. (icc-cpi.int)

Development of the sanctions

The 2020 measures and their revocation

On 11 June 2020, President Donald Trump issued Executive Order 13928, authorizing sanctions against certain persons associated with the ICC. On 2 September 2020, the United States designated Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda and Phakiso Mochochoko, head of the Office of the Prosecutor’s Jurisdiction, Complementarity and Cooperation Division. The State Department attributed Bensouda’s designation to efforts to investigate US personnel and Mochochoko’s designation to support for those efforts. (2021-2025.state.gov)

On 2 April 2021, President Joe Biden revoked the order, ending the associated sanctions and visa restrictions. The administration nevertheless retained its objections to ICC jurisdiction over American and Israeli personnel, stating that those disagreements should be addressed through engagement rather than sanctions. The ICC welcomed the revocation on 3 April 2021. (2021-2025.state.gov)

Renewal in 2025

On 6 February 2025, Trump issued Executive Order 14203, titled Imposing Sanctions on the International Criminal Court. Its annex named ICC Prosecutor Karim Khan. The order created a new framework for blocking property and restricting entry into the United States. (whitehouse.gov)

Further designations expanded the measures beyond the prosecutor:

On 5 June 2025, sanctions were announced against judges Reine Alapini-Gansou, Solomy Balungi Bossa, Luz del Carmen Ibáñez Carranza and Beti Hohler. (icc-cpi.int)
On 20 August 2025, judges Kimberly Prost and Nicolas Guillou and deputy prosecutors Nazhat Shameem Khan and Mame Mandiaye Niang were designated. (icc-cpi.int)
On 18 December 2025, the United States announced sanctions against judges Gocha Lordkipanidze and Erdenebalsuren Damdin. (apnews.com)

In August 2026, sanctions were extended to ICC President Tomoko Akane and a trial lawyer in the Office of the Prosecutor. The Presidency of the Assembly of States Parties issued a statement opposing that extension on 19 August 2026. (icc-cpi.int)

Institutional designation in October 2026

On 9 October 2026, the US Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) added the International Criminal Court itself to its Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons List under Executive Order 14203. This changed the scope of the programme from designations of selected personnel to the blocking of the institution. OFAC simultaneously issued four general licences authorizing specified categories of transactions. (ofac.treasury.gov)

Legal framework and operation

The programme rests on the International Emergency Economic Powers Act and the National Emergencies Act, together with executive orders and implementing regulations. The renewed framework is codified in the International Criminal Court-Related Sanctions Regulations, 31 CFR part 528. OFAC administers the financial restrictions and licensing system. (ofac.treasury.gov)

Executive Order 14203 provides for three principal mechanisms:

Property blocking: Covered property within the United States or in the possession or control of US persons may not be transferred or otherwise dealt in without authorization.
Additional designations: Foreign persons may be designated for specified ICC actions against “protected persons,” for material support, or for acting on behalf of blocked persons.
Entry restrictions: Specified foreign nationals and immediate family members may be barred from entering the United States, subject to exceptions.

These are measures under US domestic law, rather than amendments to the Rome Statute. (whitehouse.gov)

Licences and exceptions

Institutional designation did not prohibit every transaction involving the ICC without exception. General License 13, issued on 9 October 2026, authorized transactions ordinarily necessary to maintain or wind down operations, contracts and other agreements involving the court until 12:01 a.m. eastern daylight time on 7 April 2027. Covered activities included states parties’ payments, salaries, health insurance, rent, utilities and routine services. The licence did not generally authorize transactions involving separately blocked individuals. (ofac.treasury.gov)

General License 14 separately authorized specified telecommunications, internet communications and enterprise-software transactions involving the institution, including certain data-storage, cybersecurity and cloud-based services. Additional licences addressed pension payments and transactions concerning certain ICC detainees. Consequently, the legal effect of the designation depends on both the blocking provisions and the applicable authorizations. (ofac.treasury.gov)

Institutional responses and reported effects

The ICC has repeatedly opposed the sanctions. In its 9 October 2026 statement, it described the institutional designation as an attempt to obstruct its work and stated that it would continue to discharge its mandate independently. The Bureau of the Assembly of States Parties also opposed the institutional sanctions in a statement dated 10 October 2026. These statements represent the positions of the court and its treaty institutions, rather than judicial rulings on the validity of US sanctions law. (icc-cpi.int)

The court has reported that individual sanctions disrupted officials’ financial transactions and affected their personal and family lives, including within states parties in Europe. Following the institutional designation, Canada, Denmark, Germany, France, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom expressed disagreement with the measures in a joint statement. (asp.icc-cpi.int)