A landmark judicial decision shook diplomatic circles when Judge Nancy Torsen decisively rejected Donald Trump's presidential order aimed at the International Criminal Court (ICC). The magistrate qualified the document as excessively restrictive and an unlawful infringement of fundamental civil rights.
The judicial ruling came after a five-month period of tension following the introduction of presidential sanctions in February. Trump initially announced the order as an "extraordinary national priority" aimed at protecting American interests and allies.
The key point in the judicial opinion is the finding that the order unjustifiably prohibits any communication services related to the ICC prosecutor's activities. According to the court's interpretation, such a restriction represents an unwarranted interference in international justice.
The genesis of the conflict dates back to the Hague court's attempts to issue international arrest warrants against Israeli political leaders - Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant. Trump described these actions as an "unprecedented threat" to national security.
The initial order provided for total restrictions - a ban on entering the US for Prosecutor General Karim Khan and nearly 900 court employees. More than six high-ranking officials have already left the institution due to concerns about potential repressive measures.
Simultaneously, in the Senate, opposition Democrats blocked a Republican bill aimed at imposing "paralyzing" sanctions against the ICC. Although the proposal received a majority of 54 to 45 votes, it failed to pass the necessary 60-vote threshold to overcome procedural obstacles.
The judicial decision represents a significant blow to the Trump administration's attempts to limit international justice and demonstrates the independence of the American judicial system.