Article Audio

Audio Content

Comprehension Quiz

8 questions

What is the report's central claim about the US sanctions?

They are a routine budget measure with no legal impact.

They permanently abolish the ICC’s authority worldwide.

They only aim to help the ICC prosecute more cases.

They target ICC officials and raise questions about judicial independence and power politics.

Which officials were sanctioned, according to the report?

Two defense ministers and two ambassadors.

Two ICC judges and two ICC prosecutors.

Four heads of state from ICC member countries.

One judge, one prosecutor, and two military officers.

What immediate consequence do the sanctions have on the targets?

Their assets in US jurisdictions are frozen.

They lose their citizenship.

They are detained by Interpol.

They must resign from the ICC.

Which reaction is correctly matched in the report?

France welcomed the sanctions as necessary.

Canada stayed silent while the UN praised the decision.

Israel condemned the sanctions as harmful to justice.

The ICC and the UN denounced or expressed concern about the sanctions.

What justification did the US give for the penalties?

The ICC agreed to US requests to pause investigations.

The ICC failed to prosecute any cases in Africa.

ICC officials pursued investigations of Americans and Israelis without those countries’ consent.

The ICC refused to freeze assets of suspects.

Which specific ICC actions were highlighted as reasons for sanctions?

Authorizing arrest warrants for NATO commanders in Europe only.

Authorizing an Afghanistan investigation and warrants for Netanyahu and Gallant.

Refusing to cooperate with Interpol’s Red Notices.

Blocking humanitarian aid deliveries to Gaza.

What does the UN spokesperson warn the sanctions could do?

Sanctions were imposed under Trump, rescinded by Biden in 2021, and now revived.

The US has always fully funded the ICC.

The ICC previously sanctioned US judges during Biden’s term.

US policy on the ICC has never changed since 2000.

Choose the best summary:

The US sanctioned four ICC officials to increase cooperation on global justice and speed up prosecutions.

The ICC sanctioned US officials for interfering in cases, and the UN supported the US response.

The US froze assets and sanctioned four ICC officials over investigations touching Americans and Israelis, prompting condemnation from the ICC, concern from the UN and France, and praise from Israel.

France and the UN led sanctions against the ICC, while the US asked the court to expand probes into Gaza.

Audio Transcript

Complete all audio multiple choice exercises to unlock the transcript and review the audio content.

Discussion Questions

💡 How AI Discussion Works

• Share your thoughts and get personalized feedback on your English
• The AI will help improve your grammar, vocabulary, and critical thinking
• You can have back-and-forth conversations on each question
• Limited to 5 AI requests per hour to ensure fair usage

If investigations need a suspect’s “consent,” what is left of an independent court—due process or public relations?

When a superpower freezes a judge’s assets, is that rule of law—or rule by leverage? Where is the line for you?

France calls the move a contradiction of an independent judiciary; Israel praises it. Who gains and who loses from each stance, and why?

The UN warns of “severe impediments” to the prosecutor’s office. What practical effects might that create for victims seeking justice?

US policy swung from sanction to rescind to sanction again. Is this strategy, domestic politics, or message-sending—and how could other states respond?

Danya Chaikel frames this as a test for 125 member states. If you were advising a midsize democracy, would you publicly defend the ICC or quietly step back?

Should courts investigating atrocity crimes be insulated from financial pressure the way central banks are insulated from politics? How?

My Notes

Loading notes...

Sanctioning the Referee: The US vs. the ICC

October 25, 2025•5 min read•International•Upper Intermediate

Sanctioning the Referee: The US vs. the ICC

Article Audio

Audio Comprehension Questions

Comprehension Quiz

What is the report's central claim about the US sanctions?

Which officials were sanctioned, according to the report?

What immediate consequence do the sanctions have on the targets?

Which reaction is correctly matched in the report?

What justification did the US give for the penalties?

Which specific ICC actions were highlighted as reasons for sanctions?

What does the UN spokesperson warn the sanctions could do?

Choose the best summary:

Audio Transcript

Match Words to Their Contextual Definitions

Words

Definitions

Match Words to Their Contextual Synonyms

Words

Definitions

Discussion Questions

💡 How AI Discussion Works

If investigations need a suspect’s “consent,” what is left of an independent court—due process or public relations?

When a superpower freezes a judge’s assets, is that rule of law—or rule by leverage? Where is the line for you?

France calls the move a contradiction of an independent judiciary; Israel praises it. Who gains and who loses from each stance, and why?

The UN warns of “severe impediments” to the prosecutor’s office. What practical effects might that create for victims seeking justice?

US policy swung from sanction to rescind to sanction again. Is this strategy, domestic politics, or message-sending—and how could other states respond?

Danya Chaikel frames this as a test for 125 member states. If you were advising a midsize democracy, would you publicly defend the ICC or quietly step back?

Should courts investigating atrocity crimes be insulated from financial pressure the way central banks are insulated from politics? How?

My Notes

Sanctioning the Referee: The US vs. the ICC

Article Audio

Audio Comprehension Questions

Comprehension Quiz

What is the report's central claim about the US sanctions?

Which officials were sanctioned, according to the report?

What immediate consequence do the sanctions have on the targets?

Which reaction is correctly matched in the report?

What justification did the US give for the penalties?

Which specific ICC actions were highlighted as reasons for sanctions?

What does the UN spokesperson warn the sanctions could do?

Choose the best summary:

Audio Transcript

Match Words to Their Contextual Definitions

Words

Definitions

Match Words to Their Contextual Synonyms

Words

Definitions

Discussion Questions

💡 How AI Discussion Works

If investigations need a suspect’s “consent,” what is left of an independent court—due process or public relations?

When a superpower freezes a judge’s assets, is that rule of law—or rule by leverage? Where is the line for you?

France calls the move a contradiction of an independent judiciary; Israel praises it. Who gains and who loses from each stance, and why?

The UN warns of “severe impediments” to the prosecutor’s office. What practical effects might that create for victims seeking justice?

US policy swung from sanction to rescind to sanction again. Is this strategy, domestic politics, or message-sending—and how could other states respond?

Danya Chaikel frames this as a test for 125 member states. If you were advising a midsize democracy, would you publicly defend the ICC or quietly step back?

Should courts investigating atrocity crimes be insulated from financial pressure the way central banks are insulated from politics? How?

My Notes