American Allies Protection Act
- Sponsor
- Sen. Budd, Ted [R-NC]
- Committees
- Judiciary Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Nov 20, 2025
Bottom line
The bill aims to deter U.S. state and local entities from cooperating with the International Criminal Court in actions against officials of U.S. allies by threatening the loss of federal grants.
What it actually does
This bill, titled the "American Allies Protection Act," prohibits the Attorney General from awarding, renewing, or extending grants for a four-year period to any state, territory, the District of Columbia, or political subdivision that arrests or detains current or former foreign officials from NATO member countries or Major Non-NATO Allies based solely on International Criminal Court (ICC) warrants, or cooperates with the ICC in such actions. It includes a waiver provision allowing the Attorney General to bypass this penalty if the President certifies the action is essential to U.S. national security.
Proponents argue
Proponents argue this bill reinforces U.S. sovereignty and protects key allies from what they view as politically motivated or illegitimate actions by the International Criminal Court. They contend that allowing state and local cooperation with the ICC undermines U.S. foreign policy and could strain relationships with NATO and MNNA partners, whose officials might be targeted.
Opponents contend
Opponents might argue that this bill undermines international justice and accountability for serious crimes, potentially shielding officials from prosecution. They could also contend that it interferes with the autonomy of state and local governments to make decisions regarding international cooperation, and that it could be seen as a retreat from global human rights commitments.
The bill is very short and straightforward, making it highly accessible for any reader to understand its core provisions quickly.
Section 2(a)
Prohibition on Grants for ICC Cooperation
This section mandates that if any state or local official arrests or detains a current or former official from a NATO country or a Major Non-NATO Ally, solely based on a warrant from the International Criminal Court (ICC), or assists the ICC in such an action, then the Attorney General must stop providing grants to that state or local government for four years. This is intended to prevent U.S. sub-national entities from enforcing ICC actions against allied officials.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue this provision is crucial for protecting U.S. allies from what they consider overreach by the ICC, which the U.S. does not recognize as having jurisdiction over its citizens or those of its allies. They believe it safeguards diplomatic relations and prevents state-level actions from conflicting with federal foreign policy.
Critics contend
Critics contend this provision could undermine international efforts to hold individuals accountable for war crimes, genocide, and crimes against humanity, especially if U.S. allies' officials are genuinely implicated. They might argue it creates a double standard and could be perceived as shielding individuals from justice, potentially harming the U.S.'s standing on human rights.
Tradeoffs
The provision balances the U.S. government's stance against ICC jurisdiction over its allies with the principle of international accountability for serious crimes. It also creates a tension between federal foreign policy objectives and the potential for state and local autonomy in law enforcement matters.
Section 2(b)
Presidential Waiver Authority
This subsection allows the Attorney General to ignore the grant prohibition if the President certifies to specific Congressional committees (Judiciary, Foreign Relations, Armed Services in both chambers) that cooperating with the ICC in a specific instance is "essential to the national security interests of the United States." This provides a safety valve for the executive branch to override the penalty in exceptional circumstances.