The Trump administration imposed sweeping sanctions on the International Criminal Court, blocking assets it might hold in U.S. jurisdictions and giving U.S. companies and individuals doing business with the tribunal six months to wind that work down. The move puts American financial power behind a campaign to dismantle an institution that investigates war crimes and crimes against humanity.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced the sanctions Friday, Oct. 9, 2026. He said the United States would cut off resources to the court and reject its authority over Americans. The sanctions announcement followed the awarding of the Nobel Peace Prize to South African prosecutor Navi Pillay, but the sanctions move itself came before the Nobel announcement.
Who Controls the Financial Levers
The order reaches beyond the ICC itself: U.S. companies and individuals doing business with the court have six months to wind that work down. The administration is using access to U.S. jurisdictions and the threat of sanctions to pressure those connected to the tribunal, while blocking any assets the court might hold there.
“We will ban transactions with this rogue court, cutting off their resources and crippling its ability to operate against us,” Rubio said in a video address posted to social media. He added: “The United States and the American people are not subject to the jurisdiction of this fake ICC.” Those are the administration’s terms. It calls the court illegitimate and targets its ability to operate with U.S. power.
The ICC was established to prosecute war crimes and crimes against humanity that the parties involved might otherwise leave unaddressed. Pillay led investigations into potential ICC charges against U.S. troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. The administration says the court has become politicized and tried to prosecute Americans and Israelis unfairly and illegally; those are its stated grounds for the campaign.
A Bipartisan Front, One Presidential Enforcer
Rubio said Republicans and Democrats both have deep reservations about the court. He also portrayed President Donald Trump as the only one willing to act. “Both parties agree on this, but only President Trump has the resolve to take the action needed to end this threat once and for all,” Rubio said.
That bipartisan alignment leaves no electoral alternative in Rubio’s account: both parties oppose the court, while the president directs the effort to dismantle it. “Either the ICC will end its threats, or we will end the ICC,” Rubio said. The administration frames the choice as an ultimatum, not a negotiation over how the tribunal should work.
Allies Told to Fall in Line
The United States expects allies, including many NATO members in Europe and Japan, to join the actions, Rubio said. He called on those allies to rein in the court, noting that many are ICC members and rely on American service members for their defense.
“If they do not, the United States will continue its campaign to dismantle the ICC, piece by piece, until Americans are threatened no longer,” Rubio said. The report describes no grassroots response, mutual-aid effort, or community organizing around the sanctions. Instead, pressure runs from Washington toward the court, its business connections, and allied governments: cut ties, comply, or face a continuing campaign to dismantle the tribunal.