Sanctioned Justice
Clicks: 5
ID: 320396
2026
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
0.0
/100
5 views
0 readers
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Ranked #13 of 16 articles by views in journal of international criminal justice
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
Abstract Sanctions by the United States of America against International Criminal Court (ICC) judges and officials pose a fundamental challenge for the future of the Court, with the key question being how states parties will respond. This article examines public statements by states parties in 2025, particularly but not exclusively at the 2025 Assembly of States Parties meeting to survey how states are responding to this crisis. Ultimately, the author argues that these sanctions should not be viewed as an aberration but an extension of longstanding US hostility towards the ICC. Accordingly, while some states parties’ statements reflect the severity of the situation, many others fall short.
| Reference Key |
openalex_W7167941526
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | Kyle Reed |
| Journal | journal of international criminal justice |
| Year | 2026 |
| DOI |
10.1093/jicj/mqag037
|
| URL | |
| Keywords | Keywords not found |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.