The Guardian probably didn’t set out to make Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s point when it critiqued the secretary of state’s searing condemnation of the International Criminal Court, but it did.

Putin Has Lost the War in Ukraine

The Left Goes After Marco Rubio

Celebrated Historian’s Book Knocking Abolitionists Got Rave Reviews. Now It’s Being Pulled from Shelves

The progressive venue scoffed at Rubio’s invocation of “images of US border patrol agents and elected leaders being ‘dragged before an international court’ and tried by judges from around the world,” which Trump’s chief diplomat warned the ICC “now claims the power to do.”

“The ICC is not claiming jurisdiction over conduct in the United States,” Human Rights Watch’s onetime executive director Kenneth Roth explained. Rubio not only misstated the court’s role, but he’s also “dressing up his quest for impunity for American war crimes,” Roth added. “Trump wants to be able to commit war crimes on the territory of countries that have accepted the court’s jurisdiction — that’s what this is about.”

But CBP and ICE do, on occasion, operate on foreign soil in investigative, screening, security roles. And the ICC does claim the authority to prosecute alleged violations of human rights and war crimes conducted inside the territory of member states, even when the accused is a non-member. That’s one of the foremost reasons........

© National Review