The Trump ‌administration imposed sanctions on several judges at the International Criminal Court last ‌year ⁠in retaliation over the war tribunal’s issuance of an ⁠arrest warrant for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and a past decision to open a case into alleged war crimes by US troops in Afghanistan. | Photo Credit: EVELYN HOCKSTEIN

Three International Criminal Court judges on Wednesday sued US President Donald ‌Trump and his administration over sanctions imposed on them last year, arguing the ​measures were unlawful.

In the lawsuit filed in the federal court ⁠in Manhattan, judges Kimberly Prost of Canada, Solomy Balungi Bossa of Uganda and Reine Adelaide Sophie Alapini-Gansou of Benin said the sanctions were designed to exert extrajudicial pressure with the objective of ‌punishing and coercing the judges.

The State and Treasury departments and the White House did not immediately respond to requests for comment. The Trump ‌administration imposed sanctions on several judges at the International Criminal Court last ‌year ⁠in an unprecedented retaliation over the war tribunal’s issuance of an ⁠arrest warrant for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and a past decision to open a case into alleged war crimes by US troops in Afghanistan.

Sanctions severely hamper individuals’ abilities to carry out even routine financial ​transactions as any banks with ‌ties to the US, or that conduct transactions in dollars, are expected to have to comply with the restrictions.

The ICC, which was established in 2002, has international jurisdiction to prosecute genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes in member ‌states or if a situation is referred by the UN Security Council.

Although ​the ICC has jurisdiction over war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide in its 125-member countries, some nations, including the US, ⁠China, Russia, and Israel, do not recognise its authority.

The Trump administration’s dislike of the court goes back to Trump’s first term. In 2020, Washington imposed sanctions on then-prosecutor Fatou ‌Bensouda and one of her top aides over the court’s work on Afghanistan.

Judges challenge legal basis

The lawsuit argues that the sanctions were against the law as they exceeded the scope of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act and were not based on a genuine national emergency or extraordinary threat.

“The Sanctions Regime ... is designed to exert extra-judicial pressure on these judges and their colleagues on the ICC bench by ‌targeting their financial and other personal interests, with the objective of punishing them for prior judicial ​decisions and coercing them into prioritising their private interests over deciding cases on the basis of the law and facts,” the lawsuit said.

“Being ⁠subjected to such sanctions under IEEPA is tantamount to the financial death penalty. Due ⁠to the sanctions, Judges Prost, Bossa, and Alapini-Gansou are no longer able, among other things, to use credit cards; access banking services; use common online ‌platforms, such as Amazon and Google; book travel; and in some cases, obtain health insurance,” it said.

The judges also said that the sanctions bar the ​submission of evidence and argument in any pending or future proceeding before them.

Published on June 25, 2026