The United States withdrew its sanctions on U.N. Special Rapporteur for the Palestinian territories Francesca Albanese following a U.S. court intervention.
The Trump administration sanctioned Albanese last year over her heavy criticism of Israel’s military conduct in Gaza, including claims that it amounted to genocide. Albanese’s husband and daughter sued on free speech grounds, and U.S. District Judge Richard Leon ruled in their favor. On Wednesday, the Department of the Treasury announced it was complying with the ruling, withdrawing Albanese from its sanctions list in a simple notice on its website.
In his ruling, Leon argued that the unilaterally imposed sanctions against Albanese violated her First Amendment rights, and also that President Donald Trump exceeded his sanctioning authority with the designation.
Sanctions from the U.S. prevent those targeted from accessing the economic infrastructure of the U.S. and forbid businesses and individuals from doing business with them. The sanctions extend well beyond the U.S., as institutions in Europe and elsewhere will often refuse to do business with those targeted over fears of secondhand effects.
Albanese and her family have suffered under the sanctions, he said, outlining how Albanese had been “fully unbanked and cannot make or receive payments through the financial system.” She was removed from her joint bank account with her husband, was denied bank accounts at several European banks, her husband’s employer-sponsored health insurer has “refused to pay [her] health expenses,” and several universities, including Georgetown and Columbia, cut longstanding ties with her.
In his July 5 announcement sanctioning Albanese, Secretary of State Marco Rubio condemned Albanese’s statements and activities as “biased and malicious.”
“Albanese has spewed unabashed antisemitism, expressed support for terrorism, and open contempt for the United States, Israel, and the West,” he said. “That bias has been apparent across the span of her career, including recommending that the [International Criminal Court], without a legitimate basis, issue arrest warrants targeting Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant.”
The final straw for the Trump administration was her sending of “threatening letters” to dozens of global businesses and groups, including American companies, making extreme and unfounded accusations and recommending the ICC pursue investigations and prosecutions of these companies and their executives.”
Rubio was referring to a report from Albanese in which she deemed dozens of companies complicit in what she described as Israel’s illegal occupation, apartheid, and genocide in Gaza. Rubio said the U.S. would “not tolerate these campaigns of political and economic warfare, which threaten our national interests and sovereignty.”
Leon argued that since Albanese doesn’t work for the ICC, her actions and words in support of the charges constitute her opinion, which is protected under the First Amendment.
“By sanctioning Albanese under E.O. 14203, defendants are punishing Albanese for merely recommending that the ICC prosecute certain individuals-a non-binding opinion that does not compel any action on the part of the ICC,” he argued.
TRUMP JOKES HE’LL ‘GO TO ISRAEL AND RUN FOR PRIME MINISTER’ AFTER LEAVING WHITE HOUSE
Leon pointed to Rubio’s statement accompanying the sanctions, arguing it was also his opinion.
“Finally, protecting the freedom of speech is ‘always’ in the public interest. … That is so even when an individual’s views are ‘hurtful,’ ‘caustic,’ or ‘even outrageous’… as defendants clearly believe Albanese’s speech to be, see Rubio Statement at 1-2 (labeling Albanese’s speech as ‘biased and malicious,’ ‘antisemiti[c],’ and ‘extreme’),” he concluded.