The House of Representatives voted largely along party lines on Tuesday to impose sweeping sanctions on International Criminal Court officials, condemning the court’s top prosecutor for charging senior Israeli leaders with war crimes over attacks on Hamas.
The bill would force President Joe Biden to restrict entry into the United States, revoke visas and impose financial restrictions on anyone involved in court attempts to investigate, arrest, detain or prosecute “protected persons” or U.S. allies. It would also target anyone who provides “financial, material or technical support” to these efforts.
Biden’s advisers said he “strongly opposes” the measure because it would impose sanctions on such a broad range of officials, including court staff and any witnesses involved in potential cases. But it reflects widespread bipartisan anger in Washington since the court’s top prosecutor announced late last month that he would bring charges against Israeli and Hamas leaders.
The Republican-drafted bill passed 247 to 155, with two Republicans present to vote and 42 Democrats crossing party lines to express support.
The bill’s author, Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas, said it was a necessary step to prevent the international court from taking action outside its jurisdiction and remove concerns that actions against Israeli officials could become a target. concerns ahead of action by U.S. officials.
“What happens here will happen to us and our country,” Roy said Tuesday. “That’s why it’s important to speak with one voice, with authority, with force.”
The move has been widely condemned by Washington since the ICC’s top prosecutor, Karim Khan, publicly raised the charges against the court’s judges. Members of both parties argued that the court exceeded its jurisdiction and inappropriately compared the actions of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, a close U.S. ally, with those of Yahya Sinwar, the leader of the Hamas terror group. Comparisons were made and both men were charged with crimes against humanity.
“The ICC prosecutor has sought to equate decisions by Israel’s elected leaders in self-defense to decisions by Hamas’ terrorist leaders,” said Rep. Gregory W. Meeks, R-N.Y., the top Democrat on the Foreign Affairs Committee. W. Meeks) said. “I repeat, there is no moral or legal equivalence here.”
But despite bipartisan dissatisfaction with court prosecutors, Mr. Meeks joined most other Democrats in opposing the bill, who urged a bipartisan measure that reflected broad rejection of the court’s move but without resorting to sanctions.
“If our goal is to change the ICC’s actions, then sanctions are the wrong tool,” Mr Meeks said. “They will not work here at all. They will not convince the ICC to back down, in fact they may push the ICC to pursue the case with greater intensity.
In the weeks since Khan announced his decision to seek arrest warrants against Israeli and Hamas leaders, Republicans and Democrats have been trying to craft a unified response, but they have been unable to agree amid disputes over how to take such action.
“We worked really hard to reach a bipartisan agreement,” Texas Republican Rep. Michael McCaul, chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, who chaired the talks, said Tuesday, adding that the White House had rejected such a proposal.
Democrats dispute that claim, saying no such deal has ever been reached.
“The two parties have certainly had serious conversations to try to reach a consensus where Democrats and Republicans can work together to confront what most of us believe to be the wrong decisions of the International Criminal Court regarding the State of Israel,” Mr. . “There is still an opportunity to find bipartisan common ground and actually legislate rather than introduce a partisan bill in the House that, as we all know, was dead on arrival in the U.S. Senate.”
But Republicans quickly sought to divide Democrats over the Gaza war, exploiting differences on the left over Netanyahu’s strategy and instead decided to move forward with their preferred measures.
“We need to act quickly because this case is already moving much faster than expected,” McCaul said before the vote.
White House national security spokesman John F. Kirby told reporters last week that the White House did not believe imposing sanctions on the court and its supporters was the right approach.
“We clearly do not believe that the International Criminal Court has jurisdiction,” he said. “But we certainly don’t support these arrest warrants, we’ve said that before. But we don’t think sanctioning the ICC is the answer.
Before the bill passed, White House officials issued a statement saying the administration “strongly opposed” the bill but stopped short of threatening to veto it. The statement said officials were “deeply concerned” about the arrest warrant but “there are more effective ways to defend Israel, preserve the U.S. position at the International Criminal Court, and promote international justice and accountability.”
Aware that his legislation is unlikely to become law in its current form, Mr. Roy said he hoped a bipartisan proposal could still come up.
“If the Senate wants to amend it, send it back to the House and try to address any of the concerns that my colleagues on the other side of the aisle or on this side of the aisle have raised — that would be great,” Mr. Roy added on Tuesday. “They can Send it back to us and we can send the product to the president.
House Democrats are angry at Roe’s insistence on rushing through a measure he knows they won’t support because of his need for consensus on the issue.
Democratic Rep. Brad Sherman said: “Once again, we have a poorly drafted, ill-conceived messaging bill that didn’t go through the committee process, didn’t go through the regular process, and didn’t go through Thoughtful. “We cannot vote for such a weak bill today and expect the Senate to clean it up. “
