Cleveland Marshall School of Law–co-sponsored by the American Branch of the International Law Association’s ICC Committee, AALS National Security Law Section, and the American Society of International Law’s International Courts and Tribunals Interest Group–hosted a virtual event on Wednesday, January 27, at 12 pm ET, titled “Sanctions Against the International Criminal Court: Constitutional and International Law Issues.”

Speakers included:

• Leila N. Sadat, James Carr Professor of International Criminal Law, Washington University School of Law
• Milena Sterio, The Charles R. Emrick Jr. – Calfee Halter & Griswold Professor of Law, CSU Cleveland-Marshall College of Law
• Gabor Rona, Professor of Practice, Cardozo School of Law
• Scarlet Kim, ACLU
• Gregory Magarian, Thomas and Karole Green Professor of Law, Washington University School of Law (moderator)
• Stephen J. Rapp, Distinguished Fellow at the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum’s Center for Prevention of Genocide and Senior Fellow of Practice at the Center for Law, Ethics and Armed Conflict at Oxford University; former Ambassador-at-Large, Office of Global Criminal Justice, U.S. Department of State

In June 2020, the Trump Administration announced a new sanctions regime against International Criminal Court officials on national security law grounds; in September 2020, the Administration designated for sanctions two high-level ICC officials, including Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda. The sanctions regime has been challenged in U.S. federal court by two different lawsuits, in New York and in California. In addition, the sanctions regime has provoked a sharp rebuke by the ICC itself, as well as by several other countries, international organizations, and NGOs. This panel discussion focused on the sanctions regime that the Trump Administration imposed against ICC officials, as well as against those who provide material assistance to the court. Panelists discussed the ongoing litigation brought against the Trump Administration on First and Fifth Amendment grounds in two different federal circuits. Panelists also analyzed both constitutional as well as international law and policy issues that are implicated by the current sanctions regime.