FAQ for lawsuit challenging Executive Order 14203 and ICC-related sanctions lmullett@afsc.org Tue, 08/11/2026 – 11:21 Main content Paragraph FAQ for lawsuit challenging Executive Order 14203 and ICC-related sanctions Overview On August 11, 2026, the American Friends Service Committee (AFSC), the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR), Human Rights Watch, and the Open Society Institute (OSI) filed a lawsuit challenging Executive Order 14,203, signed by President Donald Trump on February 6, 2025, and the sanctions designations made pursuant to it. The lawsuit argues that the executive order unlawfully authorizes sanctions against International Criminal Court (ICC) officials and others involved in seeking accountability for genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity. It asks the court to strike down the sanctions regime in its entirety.  What is Executive Order 14203? Executive Order 14,203, Imposing Sanctions on the International Criminal Court, authorizes sanctions against certain ICC officials and other non-US persons and entities that engage with the court.  The administration has justified the order by contending that any effort by the ICC to investigate nationals of the United States or of certain allied countries constitutes a “national emergency” and specifically references the court’s arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant.  The result is an attack against independent international judicial actors and mechanisms. The order also exposes US-based individuals and organizations to civil and criminal penalties for providing services to or for the benefit of sanctioned persons. What is the ICC? The International Criminal Court is a permanent international court that prosecutes individuals accused of genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and the crime of aggression. Established under the Rome Statute of 1998, the ICC operates as a court of last resort when national authorities are unwilling or unable to genuinely investigate or prosecute such crimes. Who has been sanctioned? The administration has sanctioned: Eight ICC judges Former ICC Prosecutor Karim Khan The ICC’s two deputy prosecutors UN Special Rapporteur Francesca Albanese Three Palestinian human rights organizations: Al-Haq Al Mezan Center for Human Rights Palestinian Centre for Human Rights (PCHR) The order allows the US Secretary of State to make additional designations. What are the penalties? US persons who violate the restrictions imposed by the executive order face penalties of up to 20 years in prison and a fine of up to $1 million. Why does the executive order matter? The executive order prohibits, among other things, providing assistance to the ICC’s sanctioned prosecutors and judges, and any other sanctioned person, including organizations that are working to document and seek accountability for serious international crimes. Sanctioned persons lose access to banking, financial transactions, technology services, collaborations, and other forms of engagement. The order has a profound chilling effect on broader human rights and accountability efforts.  The sanctions have already prevented the plaintiffs from, among other things: Providing legal representation of victims before the ICC Making policy and legal submissions to the ICC Engaging in collaboration with Palestinian human rights organizations, including on documentation of human rights violations Carrying out humanitarian and advocacy work Who filed the case? The four plaintiffs are: American Friends Service Committee Center for Constitutional Rights Human Rights Watch Open Society Institute They are represented by Foley Hoag LLP. The lawsuit was filed in the US District Court for the Southern District of New York.  Who are the defendants? The lawsuit names President Donald Trump and senior administration officials in their official capacities: Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, Attorney General Todd Blanche and Director Bradley Smith of the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC). It also names the Departments of State, Treasury, and Justice, along with OFAC. What are the main legal claims? The plaintiffs argue that: The sanctions exceed the president’s authority under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). The sanctions are arbitrary and capricious, contrary to law, and an abuse of discretion under the Administrative Procedure Act. The sanctions violate the plaintiffs’ First Amendment protections for speech and association and AFSC’s religious freedom rights under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. The restrictions imposed by the sanctions are unconstitutionally vague under the Fifth Amendment. What relief are the plaintiffs seeking? The plaintiffs ask the court to: Declare the sanctions regime unlawful; Enjoin the administration from enforcing its sanctions designations and from making any further designations; and Enjoin the administration from enforcing any civil or criminal penalties for violations of the executive order. Where does the ICC have jurisdiction? The court can generally investigate and prosecute crimes committed: On the territory of ICC member states, or By nationals of ICC member states, or In any country only when the UN Security Council (of which the US is a permanent member) so authorizes. The ICC currently has 125 member countries. What is the US relationship with the ICC? The United States is not a party to the Rome Statute. US policy toward the ICC has varied over time. While US administrations have opposed aspects of the court’s work, Republican and Democratic administrations have both provided support for certain ICC investigations and accountability efforts, including in Darfur, Libya, and Ukraine. Can the ICC investigate Americans? The ICC may exercise jurisdiction over nationals of non-member states, including US citizens, when the alleged crimes are committed on the territory of an ICC member state and fall within the court’s jurisdiction. In such cases, US citizens could also be tried by the courts of the country concerned.   Layout Type Full width Background color White Intro Open in new tab Off Featured image Image Newsroom type Update Left side info Layne MullettDirector of Media Relations215-241-7085news@afsc.orgVisit our newsroom  Sort date Tue, 08/11/2026 – 12:00

Rights groups sue Trump Administration over targeting ICC lmullett@afsc.org Tue, 08/11/2026 – 10:34 Main content Paragraph NEW YORK (August 11, 2026) – Four human rights groups filed a lawsuit in the Southern District of New York on August 11, 2026, alleging that the Trump administration is illegally sanctioning individuals and organizations affiliated with or assisting the work of the International Criminal Court (ICC) and is criminalizing those who associate with or otherwise support them. The suit challenges President Donald Trump’s February 6, 2025, executive order authorizing sanctions on ICC officials, judges, and others working with the court to seek justice for genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity.The plaintiffs (the American Friends Service Committee, the Center for Constitutional Rights, Human Rights Watch, and the Open Society Institute, a part of the Open Society Foundations) state that the sanctions are a blatantly illegal attack on international justice and should be struck down. The groups assert the sanctions force them to curtail a wide range of human rights and legal work in violation of their First and Fifth Amendment rights under the US Constitution and under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. The lawsuit also argues that the sanctions exceed the president’s powers and are based on a pseudo “national emergency” that has no basis in fact. “The fact that so many leading human rights and humanitarian organizations have come together to challenge Trump’s unlawful executive order demonstrates the widespread harm it is causing across civil society groups dedicated to bringing those responsible for grave crimes to justice,” said lead counsel Andrew Loewenstein of Foley Hoag LLP. “The plaintiffs are seeking an end to this sanctions regime, which transgresses the president’s authority and violates international and US law, including the rights to freedom of expression and religion.”The ICC has launched 18 investigations around the globe, including in Afghanistan, Central African Republic, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Libya, the Philippines, Darfur (Sudan), and Ukraine. This includes a Palestine investigation that led to the issuance of arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Israeli Minister of Defense Yoav Gallant on charges of war crimes and crimes against humanity committed in Gaza. Palestine is a state party to the ICC. Undermining the court makes it harder for survivors to pursue justice and have their voices heard when they have nowhere else to turn, the groups said.“The US government’s efforts to dismantle the ICC and punish people seeking justice for grave human rights violations harm far more than the individuals and groups facing sanctions. It is an affront to all victims and survivors of war crimes and genocide,” said Joyce Ajlouny, General Secretary of the American Friends Service Committee. “This executive order seeks to intimidate human rights defenders and deter people of conscience from advocating for the rights and dignity of others. We are joining this lawsuit because we refuse to stay silent when the pursuit of justice is criminalized.”The sanctions are one of many actions the administration has taken against free speech, protest, and advocacy in support of the human rights of Palestinians. To date, the Trump administration has used the order to sanction ICC prosecutors, eight ICC judges, the UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian Territory occupied since 1967, and three leading Palestinian human rights groups. On July 13, 2026, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced an escalated campaign to “dismantle” the court, including an increased use of sanctions and pressure on ICC member countries to leave the court. While the US claims ICC investigation of Americans, who otherwise would enjoy impunity, is a threat to U.S. sovereignty, Americans who commit crimes abroad may already be prosecuted by foreign courts where the crimes took place, a well-established principle of international law.  “For many years, I have represented victims in pressing for justice for crimes committed by the powerful, and finally saw much-needed, even if overdue, investigations opened at the ICC. In response, the Trump administration took the extraordinary step to not only deny Palestinians and victims of US torture equal access to justice, but to criminalize and punish them, their lawyers and advocates, and their partners,” said Katherine Gallagher, Senior Staff Attorney at the Center for Constitutional Rights and legal representative for victims before the ICC. “All victims of international crimes – from Sudan and Ukraine to Palestine and Afghanistan – need and deserve to have an independent and strong ICC able to fulfill its mission of ending impunity, without fear or favor.”Sanctioned individuals and the Palestinian human rights groups have experienced frozen or closed bank accounts, rejection of financial transactions, denial of access to digital services, and travel bans. US organizations, including the plaintiffs, can face punishment of up to 20 years of imprisonment and exorbitant fines for providing services to sanctioned persons or entities. The sanctions have stopped the four plaintiff organizations from continuing or undertaking activities like representing victims of war crimes as legal counsel, making legal and policy submissions to the ICC, and collaborating with the sanctioned Palestinian human rights groups to undertake litigation, coordinate advocacy campaigns, research human rights violations, or provide humanitarian aid. The executive order profoundly damages the plaintiffs’ ability to collaborate with others, including the sanctioned Palestinian human rights groups, thereby harming their ability to protect human rights and advance the cause of justice.The crippling effects of the sanctions extend well beyond US borders. Due to the dominance of US financial institutions and technology companies and the threat of losing access to the US banking system, non-U.S. banks and other entities outside of US jurisdiction are also being chilled from providing services. “These sanctions are an assault on the rule of law, independent judges and prosecutors, and civil society in the United States and around the world,” said James Goldston, executive director of the Open Society Justice Initiative. “They betray historic US leadership in the cause of international justice and are a slap in the face to victims and survivors of grave crimes everywhere who depend on the ICC as a court of last resort.” In 2025, federal courts in New York and Maine found the executive order violated the First Amendment and temporarily or permanently stopped enforcement of the sanctions regime against the plaintiffs in those cases. Since the executive order was issued in February 2025, ICC states parties, the leadership body of the court’s Assembly of States Parties, the European Union, UN experts, the UN Secretary-General, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, civil society organizations, and the ICC itself have spoken out strongly against the effort to obstruct the court’s work. The ICC is a permanent international court created to try individuals accused of war crimes, crimes against humanity, genocide, and the crime of aggression. Following the genocides in the mid-1990s in Rwanda and in the former Yugoslavia, the international community created the ICC to prevent those responsible for serious crimes, including senior officials, from evading justice. The ICC does not displace the responsibility of states to bring justice for these crimes and can only act if a state is unable or unwilling to conduct genuine national proceedings. The court has jurisdiction over nationals of ICC states parties and those who commit these serious crimes on the territory of an ICC state party, whatever their nationality. Nearly two-thirds of UN member countries have joined the court.“We are taking the Trump administration to court to stop attacks on international justice and the civic space necessary to ensure that rights are protected consistently around the world,” said Liz Evenson, international justice director at Human Rights Watch. “Governments should step up to protect the ICC and those seeking justice before it to ensure no one is above the law.” Plaintiffs are represented by Foley Hoag LLP. ####The American Friends Service Committee (AFSC) promotes a world free of violence, inequality, and oppression. Guided by the Quaker belief in the divine light within each person, we nurture the seeds of change and the respect for human life to fundamentally transform our societies and institutions. We work with people and partners worldwide, of all faiths and backgrounds, to meet urgent community needs, challenge injustice, and build peace. Learn more at afsc.org and find us on instagram @afsc_orgThe Center for Constitutional Rights works with communities under threat to fight for justice and liberation through litigation, advocacy, and strategic communications. Since 1966, the Center for Constitutional Rights has taken on oppressive systems of power, including structural racism, gender oppression, economic inequity, and governmental overreach. Follow the Center for Constitutional Rights on Facebook,@theCCR on Twitter/X, and@ccrjustice on Instagram, and @ccrjustice.org on BlueSky.Human Rights Watch investigates and reports on abuses in about 100 countries in all corners of the world. We are roughly 500 people of 70-plus nationalities who are country experts, lawyers, journalists, and others who work to protect the most at risk, from vulnerable minorities and civilians in wartime, to refugees and children in need. We direct our advocacy towards governments, armed groups and businesses, pushing them to change or enforce their laws, policies and practices. To ensure our independence, we refuse government funding and carefully review all donations to ensure that they are consistent with our policies, mission, and values. We partner with organizations large and small across the globe to protect embattled activists and to help hold abusers to account and bring justice to victims. Follow Human Rights Watch through our website and social accounts, https://www.hrw.org/about/social-media.The Open Society Justice Initiative, a program of the Open Society Institute, uses and promotes strategic litigation as a pathway to advance open societies, human rights, and the rule of law. Established in 2003, OSJI has represented individuals and groups before domestic and international courts and in tribunals around the world, and has provided expert legal support to advance strategic human rights litigation. Follow the Open Society Justice Initiative on Twitter/X @OSFJustice and @OpenSocietyFoundations on Instagram and at our website, justiceinitiative.org Layout Type Full width Background color White Intro Section Description Lawsuit says executive order unconstitutional, punishes human rights work and those seeking justice Open in new tab Off Featured image Image Location United States Newsroom type Press Release Left side info Layne MullettDirector of Media Relations215-241-7085news@afsc.orgVisit our newsroom  Sort date Tue, 08/11/2026 – 12:00

5 things to remember on Nuclear Prayer Day Kate Noble Fri, 08/07/2026 – 13:34

Civic Space Global Initiative Kate Noble Thu, 08/06/2026 – 11:23 Resource URL /programs/civic-space-global-initiative Featured Image Image Show download link Off

Shared Security Kate Noble Thu, 08/06/2026 – 11:04 Or select from hosted files Document afsc-fcnl-shared-security-combined.pdf Show download link On