Illegitimate Court Counteraction Act

Floor Speech

Mr. Speaker, first of all, let me thank the gentleman from Florida for his opening and congratulate him on his new chairmanship. I hope that there will be occasions where we can work together on issues that will advance the cause of human rights and promote stability in the world, but unfortunately, today is not one of those occasions.

Mr. Speaker, of all the ways that Republicans have shown this country how messed up and backward their priorities are, I have to say that this bill that we are debating today to sanction the International Criminal Court, the ICC, really takes the cake.

We have a natural disaster unfolding in California right this second as 100,000 people are fleeing a climate change-driven fire that is burning up entire neighborhoods. We have a gun violence epidemic, as we see massacres in our schools nearly every single day. Families are unable to make ends meet because they are being ripped off by billionaire corporations that don't care about anything but the bottom line.

There are over 40 million hungry people in this country who don't know where their next meal is going to come from. There are 40 million hungry people in the richest country on Earth.

All those challenges and this is what the out-of-touch, elitist, billionaire Republican Party wants to waste time on, sanctioning the ICC.

I actually listen to people in my district, Mr. Speaker, and I ask them what they want Congress to work on. Not once, never ever, have I heard them talk about sanctioning the ICC as one of their priorities. They talk about their bills. They talk about healthcare costs. The farmers in my district talk to me about climate change. They talk about global problems, but they don't talk about sanctioning the ICC.

Republicans think this is so very important, such an emergency, that we have to debate it during the first week of Congress--during Jimmy Carter's funeral, by the way, which is offensive considering his record on actually standing up for human rights, which is the opposite of what this bill does.

I would say to America, no, don't worry about climate change because Republicans are going to sanction the janitors at the ICC. While they are at it, they are going to rename the Gulf of Mexico. That is really going to help people pay bills and keep the lights on.

All I can say, Mr. Speaker, is that this is not what America voted for. This Republican majority is not what people asked for in the last election. Maybe that is why Republicans lost multiple seats, because they keep bringing up lousy bills like this one.

Nonetheless, let's talk about the matter at hand.

Mr. Speaker, the terror attacks on October 7 were unconscionable and unacceptable. The victims on that dark day were overwhelmingly civilians, 62 of whom are still being held illegally as hostages in unknown circumstances. I would hope that every single Member of this Chamber would demand their immediate and unconditional release.

It was an attack, I think, that rises to the level of war crimes and crimes against humanity. That is the reason that the International Criminal Court applied for arrest warrants against three Hamas leaders in May 2024. No one seemed to criticize the ICC for that decision.

Now, Republicans want to sanction the ICC simply because they don't want the rules to apply to everyone.

I want to be very clear here, Mr. Speaker. Prime Minister Netanyahu has an absolute right to defend his people, but there is no international right to vengeance, and what we are seeing in Gaza is vengeance.

I mean, where is our humanity? Have we just given up on the idea of human rights?

At least 45,000 people have been killed in the war in Gaza, and I fear that number is much higher. Mr. Speaker, 85 percent of the people there have been forcibly displaced, often repeatedly. Last September, a group of physicians estimated 62,000 had died of starvation. Hospitals, schools, mosques, churches, and libraries have all been destroyed.

Food is not getting in. Water is not getting in. Medicine is not getting in. People are dying. Children are dying. Babies are dying, some of them from the bombs, some from starvation, some from the cold.

The war has not shrunk. It expanded to Lebanon, where I hope the recent truce continues to hold.

Mr. Speaker, I have sharply critiqued my own government for our conduct when we have been at war because right is right and wrong is wrong, no matter what side you are on.

What is going on in Gaza right now is wrong, and I especially call it out because if we stand for freedom and human rights, then we need to stand for freedom and human rights all the time, not just when it is convenient.

That is why the nations of the world set up the International Criminal Court in the first place. This is an institution designed to make sure the horrors that we saw all too often in the 20th century do not repeat themselves in the 21st century.

We have international humanitarian law to prevent this kind and this scale of destruction. Just because someone doesn't like the law doesn't mean they get to break the law.

As a court of last resort, the ICC can only become involved when and where a country has demonstrated unwillingness or inability to hold its people to account for crimes within the ICC's jurisdiction. When the warrants were issued, the ICC appealed to the Israeli courts to take up and investigate these charges under their own jurisdiction. There is still time for the Israeli courts to do that.

In fact, my understanding is that the Israeli Government is appealing these arrest warrants at the ICC. Ironically, these sanctions could actually undermine those efforts.

Mr. Speaker, I want the United States and Israel to have an amazing relationship and friendship, but friendship means we tell the truth. It means we hold ourselves and our allies to the same high standards.

I understand why people want vengeance. I have been to the region that Hamas attacked. I have met with the families of hostages and the victims of October 7 whose lives have been destroyed by what happened; many, by the way, who are furious at Prime Minister Netanyahu for the way he has conducted this war and for his failure to bring home their loved ones.

I have met with people in my district who have been deeply impacted by this horrific tragedy, including too many who are justifiably afraid about the rise of anti-Semitism in this country and around the world.

The overwhelming majority of this Congress, Mr. Speaker, has voted to support basically unlimited military assistance and offensive weapons to Mr. Netanyahu, but even if someone approves of that military assistance, they should vote against this bill.

I have long considered myself a friend of Israel. I have traveled there. I believe Israelis deserve security. They deserve peace. They deserve safety.

However, turning a blind eye to what is happening in Gaza and saying that all these civilian casualties are somehow okay, in my opinion, does not make Israel more safe. It makes Israel less safe, less secure.

Sanctioning and attacking the ICC is not only bad for Israel, but it is bad for the United States. It is bad for the world.

Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``no'' vote on this bill, and I reserve the balance of my time.

First of all, to the gentleman from Texas, yeah, I don't know how the vote on this will come out. I am sure some Democrats may vote for it. Actually, on our side, we welcome debate, and we welcome ways to improve the legislation. I am told that there were negotiations going on to try to actually improve this legislation, and then the Speaker made a unilateral decision to go with the most extreme version.

This was not marked up in committee, and there were no amendments to this. It didn't come to the Rules Committee, so nobody can offer an amendment, nobody can make a suggestion. It is take it or leave it. I mean, I guess that is the way the Republicans are going to want to run the House.

To the distinguished chairman of the committee, I think he must have misinterpreted me. He said something like: This is the people's House, so let me translate what the gentleman, meaning me, just said in my opening remarks. He said bringing the hostages home should not be a priority.

Now, I know I am from Massachusetts and you may have a tough time understanding my accent, but the bottom line is, that is not what I said. In fact, I said very clearly that the taking of hostages is a war crime. What I said very clearly is that the hostages should be released immediately and unconditionally. I have said that over and over and over again.

I don't think, like many of the families of the hostages have expressed to me, that increased bombing is going to result in getting their loved ones home. That is the message that many of them have delivered to me personally when they have visited here in Washington.

Again, please don't kind of manipulate what I have said here today. The taking of these hostages is horrific, and they must be released immediately and unconditionally. I hope that nobody disagrees with that.

Mr. Speaker, again, I am going to respond to the chairman of the committee. Yeah, we do disagree on the impact of this bill. I disagree that this bill is going to do anything to get the hostages released. Every time we have seen hostages released, it has been during a cease- fire and not in the middle of intense bombing.

Again, as many families of the hostages have expressed to me directly, they worry very much about the Prime Minister's continued policy of all-in in terms of military attacks in Gaza because they worry very much that it decreases the likelihood that their loved ones will be freed.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I say to the gentleman, that was a great speech for social media, but it will do nothing to get the hostages released, just like this bill.

Mr. Speaker, just for the record, I just want the record to reflect that I remember hearing widespread support from many of my Republican colleagues when the ICC issued a warrant against Vladimir Putin for the kidnapping of Ukrainian children, as well as when they issued a warrant against Bashir for genocide in Sudan.

I guess what we are hearing here is that we want to pick and choose on their side how we are going to react to the ICC based on what they do. I mean, the bottom line is this is the beginning of a process. It is not the end of a process.

This bill will do nothing to help get the release of our hostages, including those Americans who are held hostage, and it will isolate us within the world community, especially with many of our allies.

Mr. Speaker, two things to the gentleman who just spoke: The reason why my colleagues are not here is because the Republicans scheduled this debate during President Carter's funeral, which I find to be incredibly disappointing given President Carter's stature in this country and his commitment to human rights.

To the chairman of the committee, I was a little bit startled when he said get with the American team; because we have a disagreement, that somehow I am not with the American team. Last time I checked, we are still a democracy, at least for the time being. You can have disagreements on this issue, and we can still respect each other's point of view.

If I thought for one second that this bill that we are debating today would help get the release of the hostages and the American hostages, I would be with you, but it won't. It complicates things even further, and it isolates us in the world community at a time, quite frankly, when we need allies, and we need everybody working to try to resolve the conflict in the Middle East, to get all the hostages released, to ensure that Israel has its security, and to ensure that the Palestinians have a future, as well.

Mr. Speaker, as I close debate, I want to reiterate my opposition to this misguided legislation. The International Criminal Court exists to hold the world accountable to prevent atrocities and to serve as a reminder that no one is above the law.

Abandoning the ICC, as H.R. 23 proposes, undermines our values, undermines our alliances, and undermines our credibility on the world stage.

This is a moment to reaffirm our commitment to human rights, to international law, and to the partnerships that have defined American leadership, and this bill fails that test.

By sanctioning officials of the ICC and anyone who has done business with them, this bill would have a chilling effect on America's work to support human rights and rule of law around the world.

It would hamper the ICC's efforts to prosecute serious atrocities that have wrecked lives and destabilized countries in many places around the world, from Ukraine to Uganda to Darfur.

NGOs would be chilled from sharing evidence of the grave crimes committed in these places. Many of us celebrated in March of 2023 when the ICC judges issued arrest warrants for Vladimir Putin and another senior Russian official for abducting thousands of Ukrainian children.

Mr. Speaker, Congress even passed legislation to enable the United States to provide financial support to and share information with the ICC to investigate and prosecute Putin and his regime for his heinous crimes in Ukraine. The bill we are considering today would undermine that work and rob it of its legitimacy.

If passed, this misguided legislation would bluntly curtail our ability to engage the ICC, to advance our interests in supporting justice and accountability, and, crucially, to share relevant information with our partners and allies.

Speaking of our allies, this bill is so absurdly broad that it would sanction our own allies. Read the bill. Our allies would be sanctioned for supporting the ICC if this were to pass.

The largest funders of the ICC are America's closest allies: the U.K., France, Germany, Italy, Japan. As drafted, the leaders of these countries would be sanctioned for providing material assistance to the ICC. That is truly nuts. It doesn't make any sense to me.

The legislative bodies of these countries could also be sanctioned for appropriating funds for the ICC. By some interpretations, interparliamentary travel to Europe could become a sanctionable activity.

Did anybody think this through? Is sanctioning the leaders of our closest friends and allies really the best we can do here?

Not only that, this sanctions over 900 members from approximately 100 countries at the court, from judges and prosecutors to administrative staff, including nationals of close U.S. allies and partners who collectively work to prosecute war criminals all around the globe.

The language in this bill is so broad that even cafeteria workers and janitors and their families could be construed as having supported or ``materially assisted'' in these prosecutions by providing services to the ICC. This is nuts.

Mr. Speaker, what would happen next? I can tell you. American companies would be banned from doing business with the ICC if its top officials are sanctioned, and their Chinese competitors would rush in to fill the gap. Not only does this undermine America's interests, but it bolsters Russia and helps China.

Mr. Speaker, this is a bad bill. Not only is it a bad bill, but nobody had any opportunity at all to amend it. This has been brought to the floor under a completely closed process. We can't address all the faults that I have just outlined. We can't address them because of the way this majority is bringing this bill to the floor. Zero amendments are allowed because Republicans brought it up under a closed rule-- again, another wasted opportunity.

Mr. Speaker, we can do better. In my opinion, behind-the-scenes diplomacy with the International Criminal Court, alongside our partners, is far more likely to yield a result than the approach put forward by this bill.

Mr. Speaker, I oppose this legislation, and I urge my colleagues to oppose this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, if the United States of America stands for anything, we need to stand out loud and foursquare for human rights. That means we have to hold ourselves accountable, our allies accountable, and our adversaries accountable when they don't live up to those standards.

The International Criminal Court is there to hold countries accountable and to hold entities accountable when they commit human rights crimes. They are there to investigate, and they are there to prosecute.

For us in Congress to get involved in sanctioning the ICC because we don't like the fact that they are pointing out some of the serious issues in Gaza committed by one of our closest allies, for us to sanction them because of that, undermines the court, undermines our credibility in the world, and undermines our credibility on human rights. Why would we do that?

This bill does nothing to help get the hostages released. It does nothing at all. Again, let me be clear: All of us should be saying as loudly as we possibly can that all the hostages should be released immediately and unconditionally. They have arrest warrants out for the leadership of Hamas precisely because of what happened on October 7. The ICC wants to hold them accountable.

What we are doing here doesn't make any sense to me. It doesn't make any sense to me. Again, the bill as it is written is so flawed. If it went through regular order, if you brought it to the Rules Committee and we made a few amendments in order, we might be able to fix some of the flaws I pointed out.

Instead, keeping to the tradition of this Republican leadership, which oversaw the closest Congress in the history of the United States in the last session, I guess we are going to expect more of the same-- take it or leave it, my way or the highway.

This is about a sound bite, I guess, more than it is about trying to achieve peace in the Middle East, trying to get the release of our hostages, or trying to uphold a high standard of human rights. I find this really disappointing. I really do.

Again, I said at the opening of my statement to the new chairman that I hope we can find areas where we can work together to help improve the quality of life for people all around the world. This bill is not going to do that.

I think we can do so much better here. This is not about whether you support Israel or not. This is a whole different discussion that we are having here today. This is about whether you want to delegitimize the International Criminal Court, a court, by the way, which many Republicans supported when it went after al-Bashir in Darfur and Putin for kidnapping children.

Again, we are entering a very dangerous time when we are bringing legislation to the floor to demagogue issues rather than to be constructive. We have to take a deep breath around here because some of the stuff that has come to this floor is really beneath this institution.

Again, I regret that we are doing this here today. I urge everybody, and I hope some of my Republican colleagues will join with us, to oppose this legislation. We can do better. We need to do better.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source