Richard Leon, a federal judge on the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, ordered that Trump administration sanctions on Francesca Albanese, United Nations special rapporteur for the Palestinians, be blocked temporarily, since they likely violated her right to free speech.
The judge said that Albanese, who is not a U.S. citizen or resident, is still entitled to First Amendment protections due to her “extensive connections” to the country, including an American-born daughter and a home that the family owns in Washington.
The U.N. adviser’s husband and daughter filed the lawsuit in district court, alleging that the Trump administration sanctioned her for her speech. The United Nations didn’t allow Albanese to file the lawsuit, due to concerns over immunity.
U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio issued the sanctions last July after Albanese sent harassing and threatening letters to American companies and organizations with ties to Israel. She claimed that they were subject to charges of war crimes and other crimes against humanity in the International Criminal Court, an independent court in The Hague to which the United States is not a signatory.
Multiple governments have cited Albanese for antisemitic remarks and defense of terror organizations. The United Nations has told JNS repeatedly that it considers her an “independent expert” and that it does not dictate to special rapporteurs what they can and cannot say.
“Albanese has done nothing more than speak,” the judge wrote in a 26-page decision. “It is undisputed that her recommendations have no binding effect on the ICC’s actions. They are nothing more than her opinion.” (JNS sought comment from the U.S. State Department.)
The Trump administration argued that though the sanctions isolated Albanese from the international banking network, it issued licenses allowing transactions necessary to support her daughter and to sell the Washington home that she owns with Massimiliano Cali, a World Bank economist who also has a documented history of anti-Israel rhetoric and actions.
The judge said that the scope of the licenses were too murky, and the parental license interferes with Albanese’s “constitutionally protected” relationship with her daughter.
“It is not clear from the record before me how plaintiffs would distinguish between necessary and unnecessary transactions in the context of their family relationships,” he wrote.
