Zohran Mamdani has been elected Mayor of New York City.
During his campaign, he made headlines (e.g., here, here and here) by declaring that he would order the arrest of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu if the latter were ever to set foot in New York.
This statement carries political weight, as the International Criminal Court (ICC) issued an arrest warrant for Netanyahu in 2024.
The ICC is a permanent international tribunal based in The Hague, created by the Rome Statute, a treaty with 125 state parties (i.e., countries that have agreed to be bound by its terms).
It prosecutes individuals accused of the gravest international crimes — including war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide.
An arrest warrant from the ICC means that any state party to the Rome Statute is legally obligated to detain and transfer the named individual to The Hague if that person enters its territory (see Rome Statute, Article 89(1)).
Netanyahu travels to New York every year to address the United Nations General Assembly (check out his last intervention here, where many diplomats left the room in protest), so the scenario isn’t far-fetched.
But could Mayor Mamdani actually have him arrested?
… Probably not.
The U.S. is not a state party to the Rome Statute (Bill Clinton signed it on 31 Dec 2000 to show the U.S. wanted to join, but the country never completed the official approval process to make it legally binding).
U.S. officials aren’t legally required to enforce ICC arrest warrants; cooperation would be a political choice, not a legal duty.
But even if Mayor Mamdani wanted to arrest Netanyahu, U.S. federal authorities would probably step in to prevent it, on at least two grounds.
First, they’d say (and I’m no expert in U.S. law) that foreign relations and international law are federal responsibilities (see e.g., U.S. Constitution Article I Section 8 and Article II Sections 2 & 3).
So, any ICC-related arrest would need federal law enforcement and government approval, not a city or state official.
They’d probably also bring up the Hague Invasion Act, which ensures that ‘‘covered allied persons’’ (including working on behalf of Israel – see section 15(3)) are prohibited from arrest, detention, prosecution, or imprisonment by or on behalf of the ICC (yes, this is real!).
Still, we could use more world leaders with Mayor Mamdani’s courage and commitment to uphold international law!
Other SAIL posts you might enjoy:
When Your Friend Asks Whether Trump can Block Venezuela’s Airspace, Here is Your 1 Minute Answer
Unpacking the Law Behind the Trump-South Africa Drama in 2 Minutes
Why U.S. Missile Strikes on ISIS in Nigeria Don’t Violate International Law (in 2 minutes)
The US Capture of Venezuela’s Maduro: A 3-Minute International Law Breakdown
Venezuela II: Answering Your Top International Law Questions After the Maduro Capture (in 3 minutes)
3 Ways the Cuban Situation Violates International Law (in 2 minutes)



What's the scope of Netanyahu's immunity, post-PM, would the UK's House of Lords decision in Pinochet hold?
Isn't suggesting that Mamdani can't arrest Netanyahu a dicey move considering the arrests the feds make these days and their justification for doing so? But my real question is about federal law superseding international law. What?! Please say more about legal resistance to illegal 'laws', i.e., what do IL critical thinking groundbreakers say on how Mamdani CAN comply with the ICC arrest warrant and confront the self-serving idiocy of those who would stop him?
Otherwise what seems argued is interpreting legal - and moral - compliance as illegality. What are real alternatives to enable the good guys to hold accountable these bad guys of the worst kind?
(And what does Uganda-born have to do with this?)