To go further, the US has never recognized the ICC. That’s not a Trump (or even a Republican) thing, either. Clinton signed it but never submitted the treaty to the Senate, Bush did nothing with it, Obama sent observers but made no move toward ratification either.
The standard arguments against joining are that the ICC doesn’t fit in with the structure of the judicial branch in the US, and that it doesn’t guarantee a trial by jury like the Constitution does. So the ICC, as it is currently structured, contradicts the Constitution so there would have to be further Constitutional changes before the US can join.
As a result, the US does not formally recognize its authority over US citizens, and should any US citizen be detained by it, we would probably dispatch some Special Forces to get them out. The countries that are part of the ICC know this, so are unlikely to push things that far.
Arresting the US President will be interpreted as an act of war and the US will retaliate militarily.
To go further, the US has never recognized the ICC. That’s not a Trump (or even a Republican) thing, either. Clinton signed it but never submitted the treaty to the Senate, Bush did nothing with it, Obama sent observers but made no move toward ratification either.
The standard arguments against joining are that the ICC doesn’t fit in with the structure of the judicial branch in the US, and that it doesn’t guarantee a trial by jury like the Constitution does. So the ICC, as it is currently structured, contradicts the Constitution so there would have to be further Constitutional changes before the US can join.
As a result, the US does not formally recognize its authority over US citizens, and should any US citizen be detained by it, we would probably dispatch some Special Forces to get them out. The countries that are part of the ICC know this, so are unlikely to push things that far.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_and_the_International_Criminal_Court