As said by others in the comments, there are quite a few things that come into play here, which all would be true regardless of who the actual sitting President is.
- The Constitution of the US is seen as the Supreme Law of the Land. The US being subservient to the ICC would be a direct violation of that. The ICC does not and cannot carry any legal weight in this country.
- There are already laws in place saying that the US can and will use military force in order to extract a US citizen held by the ICC.
- The US is, by far, the most powerful military in the world, and it isn’t even close.
- The US is also the cornerstone of the global economy. Any attempt at enforcing sanctions against the US in order to force compliance with any kind of international law would likely simply be ignored, and would probably do more damage to the sanctioning country than to the US anyway.
- The US is host to the United Nations. I don’t think I have to say what kind of shitshow would happen if the UN tried to arrest the leader of the country that’s hosting it.
The ICC could issue a warrant for Trump’s arrest as a symbolic gesture, but it would have about as much practical effect as if I had issued it.
I wish they would arrest President Musk.
In what world does this matter, at all ?
Are they in some alternate universe where the ICC police will swoop and arrest the president of the United States, and everything will be alright ?
It’ll severely limit his ability to travel internationally. Plus sometimes it’s just about making a statement.
They have already not done this with Putin or Netanyahu.
There is a less than zero chance they will do this with a sitting American president. No one’s coming to save us from him we’re going to have to do it ourselves.
Have Putin or Netanyahu been to the EU since they had ICC arrest warrants issued for them? No they have not. Whats your point?
The US is irrelevant in that regard, they have never honored the ICC. But the US cant survive alone if they sever all connections to the rest of the western world.
To countries which will be able to fend off a US invasion? It would be interesting to see which country would defy the Hague Invasion Act.
Arresting the US President will be interpreted as an act of war and the US will retaliate militarily.
To go further, the US has never recognized the ICC. That’s not a Trump (or even a Republican) thing, either. Clinton signed it but never submitted the treaty to the Senate, Bush did nothing with it, Obama sent observers but made no move toward ratification either.
The standard arguments against joining are that the ICC doesn’t fit in with the structure of the judicial branch in the US, and that it doesn’t guarantee a trial by jury like the Constitution does. So the ICC, as it is currently structured, contradicts the Constitution so there would have to be further Constitutional changes before the US can join.
As a result, the US does not formally recognize its authority over US citizens, and should any US citizen be detained by it, we would probably dispatch some Special Forces to get them out. The countries that are part of the ICC know this, so are unlikely to push things that far.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_and_the_International_Criminal_Court
How does it “severely limit his ability to travel “ ?
Presumably, if he lands in any country that actually respects international law (which is a fair few) he will be arrested.
lol yeah that’s not happening.
The potential host country could decline not to host the President and that’s about it. Countries can do that right now and I wouldn’t blame him, although I doubt Trump will be traveling much.
The set of countries that would enforce an ICC warrant against Trump is a subset of the set of those that would enforce one against Netanyahu. None of the countries the POTUS would actually go to belong to the latter.
I doubt any respects the law that much, but I hope I’m wrong.
At this point, Canada and Mexico are probably in the mood to do it. His handling of Ukraine and Russia might have parts of Europe on board too.
In the mood? From what I see rn, that would simply be grounds for a landwar.
The US is literally already trying to use a trade ware to threaten our sovereignty and they even keep saying that’s exactly why they’re doing it. The war has literally already started, if less overtly violently.
I’d love to put him in cuffs, and give him fair warning that if he steps off the plane that’s what’s going to happen. That’s if we don’t say “sorry, we don’t have a policy that allows for leaders of enemy states to land without express permission. Say yea, you flew here, what happens next is up to you.
I can’t believe you wrote that
Be real.
Hmmm what would the Secret Service do if Trump were to be arrested while on a diplomatic trip? Yeah, Trump would not be taken into custody, I’d bet my Legos on it.
It matters, just not in as much as one might hope. It is mostly a symbolic step, true, because no one will arrest a sitting president. But it shows that the court is observing and condemning the actions. Think of what might come after: Trump couldn’t enter quite a few countries without fear of arrest once he is no longer president. Same with Putin, or Netanyahu. It makes international action so much easier if you can just say “well, there is a warrant out for you, so you better not show up”. Become a refugee? Better not go to a country that might uphold the warrant. Regime change in your current country of residence? Better think fast, the new administration might just need a reason to take you in.
Couldn’t this he used by courts in other countries to seize his foreign assets abroad and justify sanctions?
And then other countries won’t do anything about it, same as with Putin and Netanyahu
Let’s stop fucking about with such nonsense. There are far more tangible, executable solutions to the trump problem.
I’m sorry but all I got out of that was “let’s stop fucking about…executable…trump.”
Hello, I like to post dictionary definitions with no ulterior motives:
execution
noun
ex·e·cu·tion ˌek-si-ˈkyü-shən
: a putting to death especially as a legal penalty
