SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
jim mcgovern
42 House Dems Help GOP Pass Bill Targeting ICC Officials Over Israel
The ACLU warned the legislation would "harm free speech protections" and "undermine the rule of law and the independence of the ICC."
Jun 04, 2024
Human rights defenders on Tuesday decried the U.S. House of Representatives' passage of a bill that would sanction International Criminal Court officials over the Hague tribunal's pursuit of arrest warrants for Israeli leaders—legislation critics warned would undermine the court's independence and could be weaponized to silence Americans' free speech.
House lawmakers voted 247-155 in favor of H.R. 8282, the Illegitimate Court Counteraction Act. Forty-two pro-Israel Democrats joined all but two Republicans who voted "present" in approving the bill, which was sponsored by far-right Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas).
"The idea that they would issue an arrest warrant for the prime minister of Israel, defense minister of Israel, at the time where they're fighting for their nation's very existence against the evil of Hamas as a proxy of Iran is unconscionable to us," said House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.), according toThe Hill. "And as I said a couple of weeks ago, the ICC has to be punished for this action."
However, Rep. Delia Ramirez (D-Ill.) said on the House floor ahead of Tuesday's vote that "we need the ICC" because "in the last 241 days, thousands, thousands have been victims of unimaginable atrocities, and [Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu's violations of international law have threatened the peace of the world."
Since October 7, when a massive attack by Hamas-led militants left more than 1,100 Israelis and foreign nationals dead and over 240 others hostages, Israeli forces have killed or injured upward of 130,000 Palestinians in Gaza, including at least 11,000 people who are missing and believed dead and buried beneath the rubble of hundreds of thousands of bombed-out buildings. Israel's forced displacement of around 2 million of Gaza's 2.3 million people and its famine-inducing siege have also been cited as evidence in a genocide case before the International Court of Justice (ICJ).
Congressman Jim McGovern (D-Mass.) said passing H.R. 8282 would fuel international allegations of U.S. hypocrisy.
"I am already being challenged to explain U.S. double standards every time I meet with representatives of foreign governments," McGovern said on the House floor ahead of the vote. "What better gift to China and Russia than for us to undermine the international rule of law."
The ACLU warned Tuesday in a letter to members of Congress that the bill "would harm free speech protections and the rule of law."
"This legislation raises serious First Amendment concerns, as it would chill U.S. persons from engaging in constitutionally protected speech under the threat of civil and criminal penalties" and "undermine the rule of law and the independence of the ICC," the group added.
The Friends Committee on National Legislation (FCNL), a Quaker organization,
said on social media Tuesday that sanctioning ICC officials "would undermine the court's independence and the global community's ability to uphold international law."
"Sanctions would obstruct support for other important ICC investigations, including into Russia's invasion of Ukraine," FCNL added. "This vital accountability mechanism must be allowed to impartially seek justice."
Last month, ICC Prosecutor Karim Khan announced he was seeking warrants to arrest Netanyahu and Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant for alleged "crimes of causing extermination, causing starvation as a method of war, including the denial of humanitarian relief supplies, [and] deliberately targeting civilians in conflict."
Khan is also seeking arrest warrants for Hamas leaders Yahya Sinwar, Ismail Haniyeh, and Mohammed Deif for alleged crimes including "extermination, murder, taking of hostages, rape, and sexual assault in detention."
A panel of ICC judges will decide whether to issue the warrants.
Meanwhile, congressional leaders have invited Netanyahu to Washington, D.C. for the rare honor of addressing a joint session of Congress. The prime minister has reportedly accepted the invitation, although no date has been set for his speech.
U.S. President Joe Biden was accused of double standards for condemning the ICC's targeting of Israeli leaders—whose conduct is under investigation in the ICJ genocide case—while applauding its March 2023 arrest warrants for Russian President Vladimir Putin and Russian Commissioner for Children's Rights Maria Alekseyevna Lvova-Belova for alleged crimes committed during the ongoing invasion of Ukraine.
The White House said Monday that it "strongly opposes" the ICC sanctions bill, but Biden has not said whether he would veto the legislation in the unlikely event it is taken up—and passed—by the Senate.
Tuesday's vote has already had consequences, as the youth-led progressive group Path to Progress said it would not endorse Reps. Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.) and Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.) as expected in their respective U.S. Senate races due to their approval of the bill.
This isn't the first time that Congress has targeted the ICC. In 2002, lawmakers passed and then-President George W. Bush signed the American Servicemembers Protection Act, also known as the Hague Invasion Act because it authorizes the president to use "all means necessary and appropriate" including military intervention to secure the release of American or allied personnel held by or on behalf of the ICC.
In 2020, the administration of former U.S. President Donald Trump—who is expected to challenge Biden in November's election—imposed sanctions on then-ICC Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda and Phakiso Mochochoko, the court's prosecution jurisdiction division director, in retaliation for a probe of alleged war crimes committed by American troops in Afghanistan.
Last month, Khan condemned "all attempts to impede, intimidate, or improperly influence" ICC officials. Later in May, the Israeli media outlets +972 Magazine and Local Call, along with Britain's The Guardian, revealed that the head of the Mossad, Israel's main foreign intelligence agency, spent nearly a decade attempting to intimidate Bensouda into dropping an investigation into alleged Israeli war crimes.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'What Dictators and Pariah States Do': Republicans Advance Bill to Sanction ICC
"Lawmakers should unequivocally oppose the new Republican bill to sanction the International Criminal Court," said one analyst.
Jun 04, 2024
House Republicans on Monday advanced legislation that aims to sanction the International Criminal Court after the Hague-based tribunal formally applied for arrest warrants last month against Israel's prime minister and defense minister.
The GOP-dominated House Rules Committee voted 9-3 to send the Illegitimate Court Counteraction Act to the floor of the lower chamber, barreling ahead with an attempt to punish the ICC for working to hold Israeli leaders accountable for war crimes committed in the Gaza Strip. The ICC is also seeking arrest warrants for Hamas leaders.
The measure was introduced by Reps. Chip Roy (R-Texas) and Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.) in early May, two weeks prior to the ICC prosecutor's announcement of the arrest warrant applications.
The bill's language is sweeping: If passed, it would require the U.S. president to impose sanctions on the ICC if the body is "engaged in any effort to investigate, arrest, detain, or prosecute any protected person of the United States and its allies."
The Republican-authored measure defines protected persons as current or former armed forces members, current or former elected or appointed government officials, and "any other person currently or formerly employed by or working on behalf of" the U.S. or an allied government.
"This is a bad bill," Rep. Jim McGovern (D-Mass.), the ranking member of the House Rules Committee, said Monday during the panel's hearing on the legislation. "The International Criminal Court is an important institution, and those who care about human rights would certainly agree with that assessment. And I think that it is not in America's moral or strategic interest to attack the court for attempting to do its job."
"Lawmakers should unequivocally oppose the new Republican bill to sanction the International Criminal Court."
Dylan Williams, vice president of government affairs at the Center for International Policy, noted on social media that the bill is "so broadly written that it could even sanction officials of the ICC or U.S. allies who help investigate, arrest, or prosecute Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh, because he resides in a 'major non-NATO ally' that is not a party to the Rome Statute."
"Lawmakers should unequivocally oppose the new Republican bill to sanction the International Criminal Court," Williams wrote. "Threatening and penalizing legitimate international institutions, their staff, or members is what dictators and pariah states do, not democracies seeking to uphold the rule of law."
Neither the U.S. nor Israel are state parties to the Rome Statute, which established the ICC. The governments of both nations have argued that the ICC lacks jurisdiction to investigate Israeli war crimes—a claim that international legal experts have rejected—and U.S. and Israeli lawmakers have openly threatened the tribunal over its probe in the occupied Palestinian territories.
While the Biden administration supported the ICC's decision to issue arrest warrants against Russian President Vladimir Putin in 2023 over war crimes committed in Ukraine—even though neither Russia nor Ukraine are parties to the Rome Statute—the administration has condemned the ICC's pursuit of arrest warrants against Israeli leaders.
But in an official policy statement released Monday, the Biden White House said it "strongly opposes" the GOP's Illegitimate Court Counteraction Act, noting that the bill "could require sanctions against court staff, judges, witnesses, and U.S. allies and partners who provide even limited, targeted support to the court in a range of aspects of its work."
The White House did not pledge that U.S. President Joe Biden would veto the bill if it passes the House and Senate, saying only that "there are more effective ways to defend Israel, preserve U.S. positions on the ICC, and promote international justice and accountability, and the administration stands ready to work with the Congress on those options"—without offering specifics.
The full House is expected to vote on the legislation on Tuesday. Axiosreported that "several pro-Israel House Democrats, including Reps. Greg Landsman (D-Ohio) and Ritchie Torres (D-N.Y.), signaled" that they are "likely" to join Republicans in supporting the bill.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Guess I Hit a Nerve': McGovern Rebukes 'Pathetic' GOP for Striking Remarks About Trump
"In their creepy cult-like devotion to Trump, House Republicans won't allow anybody to say anything they deem as negative about him on the floor," said the Democratic congressman after his remarks were stricken. "So much for freedom of speech."
May 23, 2024
Congressman Jim McGovern had a few additional disparaging words Thursday for his GOP colleagues, a day after factual remarks about former president Donald Trump he made on the House floor were formally stricken from the record by Republicans who control the gavel.
"I guess I hit a nerve," McGovern said in an early morning post on X.
"In their creepy cult-like devotion to Trump," added the Massachusetts Democrat, "House Republicans won't allow anybody to say anything they deem as negative about him on the floor. So much for freedom of speech. Like I said yesterday—pathetic!"
Explaining the situation in a social media thread on Wednesday evening, McGovern detailed how earlier in the day Republicans in the House "moved to 'take down my words,' a procedural term meaning they think I violated the rules and that my words should be stricken from the record. Why? Because I stated facts about Trump's trials."
Watch the clip showing McGovern's remarks and the reaction it received:
🧵 This afternoon during debate, Republicans moved to “take down my words,” a procedural term meaning they think I violated the rules and that my words should be stricken from the record. Why? Because I stated facts about Trump’s trials.
Let’s talk about it. pic.twitter.com/LqMMMIMsZF
— Rep. Jim McGovern (@RepMcGovern) May 23, 2024
Posting a complete transcript of his remarks, McGovern said: "Read them yourself. Whether you love Trump or hate him, I was simply stating facts about his legal problems. I didn't say he was guilty or innocent. I didn't disparage him. I was stating facts."
And here's what he said:
We have a presumptive nominee for president facing 88 felony counts, and we're being prevented from even acknowledging it. These are not alternative facts. These are real facts.
A candidate for president of the United States is on trial for sending ahush money payment to a porn star to avoid a sex scandal during his 2016 campaign, and then fraudulently disguising those payments in violation of the law. He's also charged with conspiring to overturn the election. He's also charged with stealing classified information, and a jury has already found him liable for rape in a civil court.
And yet, in this Republican-controlled House, it's okay to talk about the trial, but you have to call it a "sham." It's okay to say that the jury is rigged, but not that Trump should be held accountable. It's okay to say the court is corrupt, but not that Trump is corrupting the rule of law.
As the Washington Postreported, the House "was brought to a halt for over an hour" after Republicans objected to McGovern's remarks, including one lawmaker, Republican Congresswoman Erin Houchin of Indiana, who declared, "Mr. Speaker, I demand that his words be taken down."
At the time of the procedural altercation, it was Rep. Jerry L. Carl (R-Ala.) presiding over the House floor and holding the Speaker's gavel who first admonished McGovern as he told members they must refrain from attacks directed toward "presumed nominees for the office of the president," in this case Trump.
After an hour of deliberation with the clerk and members of the GOP-controlled Rules committee, Carl went back to the lectern to announce that McGovern's words, in his judgement, were a violation of an archaic House rule that originally was conceived to prevent, as the Post reports, "House members from criticizing the king."
Carl argued it was "a breach of order to refer to a candidate in terms... personally offensive." While Trump is not technically the Republican nominee for president at this point, and won't be until the RNC convention this summer, Carl argued the rule also applies "once there's no reasonable dispute that the candidate will receive the nomination."
Following this announcement, McGovern's remarks were ordered stricken and he was barred from speaking on the House floor for the remainder of the day.
"Apparently, Republicans are allowed to say [on the House floor] that Trump's trial is a sham, and the judge is corrupt and the jury is rigged," McGovern said in his Wednesday evening post. "But it's against the rules for me to even acknowledge that the trials exist."
"But look," he added, "I get it."
"Republicans don't want Americans to know the truth about the man they support. I will keep speaking the truth," said McGovern. "They can try to shut me up, but they will fail. They don't want Americans to know the truth about the man they support. We need to make sure everyone hears it."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular