S 2935119th CongressIn Committee

Sovereign Enforcement Integrity Act of 2025

Introduced: Sep 29, 2025

Civil Rights & Justice

Standard Summary

Comprehensive overview in 1-2 paragraphs

S. 2935, the Sovereign Enforcement Integrity Act of 2025, would block state, territorial, and local law enforcement in the United States from arresting or detaining foreign nationals based solely on any International Criminal Court (ICC) indictment, warrant, or request, unless federal law explicitly authorizes such cooperation. The bill establishes a general prohibition on arrest, detention, or cooperation with the ICC by non-federal authorities and requires federal authorization (by Congress or the President) for any ICC-related action in a specific case. It preempts conflicting state or local laws and includes a standard severability clause. The findings emphasize that the U.S. is not a party to the Rome Statute (which established the ICC) and that foreign policy and treatment of foreign nationals are federal questions, with uniform national standards for international law enforcement.

Key Points

1Prohibition on state and local enforcement actions: No state, territory, DC, or political subdivision may arrest, detain, or otherwise deprive a foreign national of liberty based solely on an ICC warrant, indictment, summons, or other ICC process; may not cooperate with or use resources to carry out such actions.
2Exceptions for cooperation: Cooperation with the ICC is allowed only if Congress explicitly authorizes it in a specific case, or if the President certifies to Congress that cooperation is essential to a declared national security interest and issues a written authorization.
3Preemption: The Act overrides any contrary state or local laws, policies, or regulations.
4Severability: If a provision is found unconstitutional, the rest of the Act remains in effect.
5Purpose and findings: The bill notes that the U.S. is not a party to the Rome Statute, asserts exclusive federal control over foreign relations and treatment of foreign nationals, and argues that ICC actions could affect U.S. foreign policy and constitutional principles without federal authorization.

Impact Areas

Primary group/area affected- State and local law enforcement agencies: barred from acting on ICC warrants/indictments without federal authorization; restricted in coordinating with the ICC.- Foreign nationals in the United States: their treatment in ICC-related cases would require federal authorization, potentially limiting local enforcement actions.Secondary group/area affected- U.S. federal government and foreign policy: reinforces federal primacy over international enforcement actions; creates a mechanism (Congress or Presidential authorization) for permissible cooperation with the ICC.- International Criminal Court and allied international actors: would face a higher threshold for cooperation with U.S. jurisdictions; may affect ICC investigations involving U.S. interests.Additional impacts- Legal and constitutional implications: codifies a strong national sovereignty stance over international criminal enforcement, potentially shaping how the United States engages with international judicial mechanisms.- Operational considerations and costs: local law enforcement agencies would need to adjust procedures to ensure ICC actions are not acted upon without federal direction; potential coordination burden with federal authorities.- Diplomatic dynamics: signals a high bar for ICC cooperation, which could influence international perceptions of the U.S. approach to international justice and accountability.

Generated by gpt-5-nano on Oct 16, 2025