U.S. Reinstates Sanctions on U.N. Expert Francesca Albanese Amid Legal Battle

The United States has officially restored sanctions against Francesca Albanese, the United Nations special rapporteur on the Palestinian territories, according to an updated notice published by the U.S. Treasury Department on Wednesday. The move marks the latest development in an ongoing legal and political dispute tied to Albanese’s criticism of Israel’s military actions in Gaza and her advocacy at the International Criminal Court (ICC).

Washington first imposed sanctions on Albanese in July 2025, accusing her of encouraging the ICC to pursue investigations and potential legal action against U.S. and Israeli officials, executives, and companies. The sanctions drew widespread attention from human rights groups and international observers, who argued the measures targeted free expression and independent U.N. work.

Earlier this month, Albanese was temporarily removed from the sanctions list after a federal judge in Washington granted an injunction requested by her husband and daughter. U.S. District Judge Richard Leon ruled that the Trump administration likely violated Albanese’s constitutional free-speech protections by sanctioning her following her public criticism of Israel’s war in Gaza.

However, the legal victory proved short-lived. On Friday, a three-judge panel from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit issued an administrative stay that suspended Leon’s ruling. The decision allows the U.S. government to immediately reimpose sanctions on Albanese while the appeal process continues.

The appeals court emphasized that the stay is procedural and should not be interpreted as a final judgment on the broader legal dispute. The panel noted that the order does not determine the merits of the government’s request to permanently block the lower court injunction.

The case has intensified debate over free speech, U.S. foreign policy, sanctions enforcement, and international accountability regarding the Israel-Gaza conflict. Analysts say the outcome could have major implications for relations between the United States, the United Nations, and international human rights institutions.