Marco Rubio, the US Secretary of State, has launched a campaign against the International Criminal Court (ICC). The move has started a global debate over international law, national sovereignty, and the role of the court. Rubio said the ICC could interfere with US military and law enforcement activities. He argued that the United States must protect its officials from legal action outside the country. Rubio shared his position through a published opinion piece and a video message on social media. He said American leaders, border officers, and service members should not face the risk of prosecution by judges from other countries. He described the campaign as an effort to defend the nation's sovereignty and protect those serving the country. The State Department is also expected to encourage other countries to reduce their support for the ICC. Reports suggest that governments receiving US assistance could face closer review if they continue recognizing the court's authority. Possible measures may include sanctions, travel restrictions, or visa actions. Officials have not released a detailed timeline for the campaign. The International Criminal Court is based in The Hague and was created under the Rome Statute, which came into force in 2002. The court investigates genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and the crime of aggression. It only has jurisdiction in countries that have accepted the Rome Statute or in situations that meet specific legal requirements. The United States has never ratified the Rome Statute. Because of this, legal experts say the ICC does not have general authority over actions that take place inside the United States. They also note that the court has not opened investigations into crimes committed on US territory. Several international legal experts challenged Rubio's claims. They said the court only investigates cases within its legal framework and does not claim unlimited power over every nation. According to these experts, the ICC operates under rules accepted by its member states, and its authority is limited by international agreements. The dispute between Washington and the ICC has continued for many years. While the United States has supported some international investigations, it has strongly opposed cases involving American personnel or close allies. This disagreement has become more visible during investigations connected to conflicts in the Middle East and Afghanistan. The ICC has issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant as part of its investigation into alleged war crimes linked to the conflict in Palestine. Those actions increased tensions between the court and the US government. Earlier in President Donald Trump's second term, the administration declared a national emergency over what it described as the ICC's actions involving the United States and Israel. The administration then imposed sanctions on several ICC officials, including Chief Prosecutor Karim Khan, his deputies, and judges connected to investigations involving Israel and US service members. During 2025, the sanctions expanded to include additional individuals and organizations involved in human rights investigations related to the Palestinian territories. The administration argued that these measures were necessary to protect American interests and support its allies. It remains unclear how Rubio's latest campaign will affect the ICC in the coming months. Some former government officials believe the administration could introduce broader sanctions against the court itself. Such measures could limit cooperation between American citizens, businesses, and the tribunal. Companies and financial institutions could also face legal or financial consequences if stricter restrictions are introduced. Human rights organizations have expressed concern about the campaign. They argue that weakening the ICC could reduce accountability for serious international crimes and make it harder for victims to seek justice. Supporters of the administration, however, say the effort is necessary to defend US sovereignty and prevent foreign courts from influencing American legal matters. The future of the ICC's relationship with the United States remains uncertain. As diplomatic discussions continue, governments around the world will closely watch whether more countries change their position on the court and how the campaign shapes international cooperation and global justice.