Justice Denied? Inside Trump’s 2025 War on the ICC to Shield Israel

On February 6, 2025, the fragile détente between Washington and The Hague shattered. In a move that legal scholars called “the single most significant rupture in transatlantic legal relations since 1945”, President Donald Trump signed Executive Order 14203.

While the order, titled “Imposing Sanctions on the International Criminal Court”, established the legal framework, the US “war on the ICC” did not happen all at once—it was a calculated, year-long escalation designed to dismantle the court’s ability to function.

Phase 1: The February First Strike (Prosecutor Khan)

The collision course began immediately after the inauguration. Citing the November 2024 arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defence Minister Yoav Gallant, the Trump administration declared a national emergency.

Executive Order 14203 was signed on February 6, immediately freezing the US assets of Prosecutor Karim Khan. The British King’s Counsel, who had requested the warrants, was effectively locked out of the US financial system. The White House justified the move by framing the ICC’s assertion of jurisdiction over non-state parties (Israel and the US) as an “unusual and extraordinary threat to national security.”

Phase 2: The August Escalation (Judge Guillou)

The conflict remained a diplomatic standoff until the summer, when the administration decided to target the judiciary itself. On August 20, 2025, Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced the unprecedented designation of four ICC judges.

The Primary Target: Judge Nicolas Guillou—a French national and former counter-terrorism magistrate—was sanctioned for his role in the Pre-Trial Chamber that approved the warrants.

• The Impact: This marked the first time the US Treasury (OFAC) sanctioned a judge from a NATO ally (France) for issuing a ruling.
• Diplomatic Fallout: The move sparked a crisis with Paris. The UN spokesperson, Stephane Dujarric, publicly criticised the “unilateral sanctions” for inflicting “significant personal harm” on the judges and their families.

Also swept up in the July-August dragnet was Francesca Albanese, the UN Special Rapporteur, who Rubio labelled as having “open contempt” for US allies.

Phase 3: The Domestic Front (November 2025)

The battle has now moved to American soil. Just this week, on November 24, 2025, Senator Ted Budd (R-NC) introduced the “American Allies Protection Act”.

This legislation was not a random manoeuvre but a direct response to a domestic rebellion: NYC Mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani had pledged to arrest Netanyahu if he set foot in New York for the UN General Assembly. Budd’s bill proposes stripping Department of Justice funding from any municipality that attempts to enforce ICC warrants, effectively weaponising federal grants to ensure local compliance with US foreign policy.

The Rule of Law Paradox

The sanctioning of Judge Guillou presents a profound paradox. For decades, the US has championed the “rules-based international order”. Yet, by using sanctions—typically reserved for terrorists and cartels—against a French jurist, the US has signalled that this order is subordinate to American geopolitical interests.

As we approach 2026, the question is no longer whether the ICC can prosecute war crimes, but whether its officials can survive the economic wrath of the United States long enough to try.