Ilhan Omar introduces resolution urging U.S. to join the International Criminal Court, as lawmakers weigh response to Trump pledge on war-crimes tribunal

Rep. Ilhan Omar of Minnesota introduced a congressional resolution calling on the United States to join the International Criminal Court, according to The Guardian, marking what the outlet described as the first congressional counter to a Trump administration pledge to undermine the war-crimes tribunal. Omar’s proposal was introduced Wednesday, the outlet said, in the wake of remarks from Sen. Marco Rubio describing an effort to dismantle the tribunal.

The resolution’s text, as described by The Guardian, is intended to direct U.S. policy toward ICC membership rather than the Trump administration’s approach. The outlet reported that Omar’s filing comes two days after Rubio vowed to “dismantle” the tribunal, situating the measure within a broader dispute over U.S. participation in international war-crimes enforcement.

The administration’s position, as characterized by The Guardian, is that the United States can take steps to “systematically disable” the ICC, including through sanctions. The resolution introduced by Omar is therefore positioned by the outlet as an attempt to shift leverage back to Congress through an explicit statement of policy preference.

Omar’s measure is a congressional resolution, not a statute, and its practical effect would depend on whether it advances to the next stage of House or Senate consideration, including committee action and any floor scheduling. The Guardian did not describe any vote as of the time of publication.

The dispute has also played out against a backdrop of long-running concerns from U.S. lawmakers and officials about ICC jurisdiction and the potential for politically motivated prosecutions. Those concerns have been cited in prior debates over U.S. engagement with the court, and this current exchange is again focusing attention on the balance between U.S. sovereignty and international criminal accountability mechanisms.

The Guardian’s report described the timing as politically and procedurally linked to Trump administration messaging. However, it did not provide a primary official record, such as the text of the resolution, or an official response from the White House or the Department of State within the information provided here.

Next steps include obtaining the formal resolution number and text from, along with any accompanying sponsor statements, which would clarify what, if any, policy directives it includes for specific agencies and timing of implementation.

If the resolution is referred to committee, lawmakers would then determine whether it proceeds for consideration by the full House or Senate, while the administration’s parallel actions would continue on the executive branch timeline described by officials and reported by news outlets. At this stage, The Guardian’s account is the only source in the supplied record for the resolution’s introduction and framing.