A Coalition of 38 Global Civil Society Organizations Challenge Trump’s Sanctions on the International Criminal Court

Author: Faryal Fatima

October 4, 2026

HRRC supports the challenge to the Trump administration’s sanctions on the International Criminal Court. We condemn the administration’s attack on international law, civil society organizations, and independent judicial institutions. 

President Trump signs and Executive Order at the White House [Image credit: White House]

On September 23, a coalition of 38 civil society groups united to file an amicus curiae (“friend of the court”) brief with the US District Court for the Southern District of New York, backing a lawsuit challenging sanctions imposed by the Trump administration through Executive Order (EO) 14203. In a continued campaign against the International Criminal Court (ICC), the Trump administration authorized economic sanctions and travel restrictions against judges, prosecutors, and other staff of the ICC, a United Nations human rights expert, and three Palestinian human rights groups. The initial lawsuit, filed by the American Friends Service Committee (AFSC), Center for Constitutional Rights , Human Rights Watch, and the Open Society Foundations, questions the legality of the sanctions imposed under EO 14203. 

The coalition, which includes Amnesty International, International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH) and 36 other global civil society organizations, stated that the measure is obstructing civil society's efforts towards international justice. Separately, Physicans for Human Rights, which submitted its own amicus curiae brief in the case, noted that the sanctions make it more difficult for victims of war crimes, genocide and crimes against humanity to seek justice.

Briefs filed by others, including the Brennan Center for Justice, former U.S. sanctions officials, international prosecutors, bar associations, and legal academics, argue that the sanctions threaten judicial independence, the rule of law, legal work, and academic freedom.

“As the Trump administration steps up its attacks on the ICC and the civil society organizations essential to its work, it is crucial to demonstrate to the US Federal Court how sanctions are harming global civil society, victims and survivors of crimes under international law, and the very idea of international justice,” said Agnès Callamard, Amnesty International’s Secretary General.

The lawsuit was  initially filed on August 11, 2026. At the time, the plaintiffs requested a preliminary injunction to halt the sanctions, which they said infringe upon access to justice for victims of grave international offences and impede the ability of civil society organizations to collaborate to end impunity.

The groups contend that the sanctions are an obvious violation of international justice. They further added that the sanctions have limited their ability to engage in many activities, infringing on the First and Fifth Amendment rights guaranteed by the US Constitution and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. The Act protects the exercise of religion from substantial government burdens, and the AFSC is religiously affiliated, which is why the groups cite it in their challenge to the sanctions. 

Their lawsuit also argues that the “sanctions exceed the president’s powers and are based on a false claim of a ‘national emergency,’ arising out of the work of the ICC, that has no basis in fact.”

European leaders are expressing support for the ICC after President Trump urged countries to immediately withdraw from the organization. In a speech to the United Nations General Assembly on September 24, Irish Prime Minister Michael Martin affirmed his support of the ICC, adding Ireland's strong opposition to attempts to undermine the court will continue.

Glossary

• Amicus Curiae: Someone (such as a professional person) or something (such as an organization) that is not a party to a particular case but that is allowed by the court upon petition or by the court's request to advise it in respect to some matter of law that directly affects the case in question.

• Coalition: The joining together of different political parties for a particular purpose.

• Crimes against humanity: Certain crimes committed as part of large scale attack against civilians.

•  Genocide: Certain acts committed with the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic or religious group.

• Impunity: Freedom from punishment or from the unpleasant results of something that has been done.

• Infringe: To encroach upon in a way that violates law or the rights of another.

• Injunction: An official order given by a law court, usually to stop someone from doing something.

• Judicial independence: The ability of courts and judges to perform their duties free of influence or control by other actors.

• Lawsuit: A problem taken to a law court by an ordinary person or an organization rather than the police in order to obtain a legal decision.

• Legality: The fact that something is allowed by law.

•  Obstructing: To try to stop something from happening or developing.

• Plaintiff: Someone who makes a legal complaint against someone else in court. 

• Sanction: A strong action taken in order to make people obey a law or rule, or a punishment given when they do not obey.

• Substantial: Large in size, value or importance.

• War crime: A crime committed during a war that breaks the accepted international rules of war.