• rayyy@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    7 days ago

    SO? Hasn’t this country gone way beyond, “legal authority” today? If shooting innocent people is okay, arresting a criminal should be totally fine.

    • luciferofastora@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 days ago

      It would be politically stupid to violate diplomatic immunity of a guest of the UN when your country doesn’t even officially recognise the authority of the ICC. The federal government already doesn’t like him; they’d be creaming their pants at the opportunity to get his ass over violating federal and international law. Hell, they’d be obliged to, and every other signatory to the UN that guaranteed this diplomatic immunity would have to back them up.

      Besides, it’s not like he’d achieve much. Briefly jailing Netanyahu would make him look like a martyr, but it’s only a question of time until Trump busts his buddy out of there.

      Much as we might love to see it happen, Mamdani has to pick his battles. He can do more good by staying in office than by picking a fight with the world.

      And ultimately, isn’t Trump shitting on international agreements one of the things sabotaging the US’ diplomatic standing?

  • HubertManne@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    6 days ago

    Yeah sure. Can’t happen so no worries Netanyahoo. Come right over to new york. You will be totally safe. No arrest. No siree. Nope.

  • Kwakigra@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    6 days ago

    For practical purposes, this being illegal means the City of New York cannot unilaterally extradite the international fugitive Benjamin Netanyahu for processing at the ICC facility. The federal government and likely the state of New York would impede the extradition through force of arms. The NYPD can’t win a battle against the US military.

  • Davel23@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    58
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    7 days ago

    While I would have loved to see it happen, arresting a world leader while in the country for a UN General Assembly dangerously undermines that body’s function.

    • ryannathans@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      29
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      7 days ago

      The UN headquarters agreement grants immunity to world leaders when travelling to New York for these events

          • BrikoX@lemmy.zipOPM
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            5 days ago

            True, but it does have Permanent Observer State status. But it’s a moot argument either way as the immunity given by treaty explicitly extends to anyone invited by the UN to conduct “official business”.

        • ryannathans@aussie.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          7 days ago

          It is unclear, however, if the US move to deny or revoke visas complies with that document

          • BrikoX@lemmy.zipOPM
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            17
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            7 days ago

            Use full quote from the article and see how stupid that sounds.

            It is unclear, however, if the US move to deny or revoke visas complies with that document, which outlines that foreign officials’ attendance in New York should not be impeded by the US, “irrespective of the relations” between their respective governments and the US.

            • ryannathans@aussie.zone
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              5
              ·
              7 days ago

              Your argument is that if the US govt breaks their own law to prosecute their ally who has immunity then they can do it?

              Sure, people can do whatever they want at the end of the day and this is meaningless time waste

    • krashmo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      7 days ago

      I get what you’re saying but I don’t think another letter from the UN is going to accomplish anything so that feels like an empty ideal to hold to

      • luciferofastora@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 days ago

        The federal government wouldn’t write a letter though. They’d jump on the opportunity to selectively enforce international agreements against their enemy and point to the pressure from all the other countries as justification.

        Better not to risk it for the sake of briefly locking up one guy and instead keep working on things he can affect.

    • FishLake@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      7 days ago

      But capturing them from within their own country and charging them with crimes in your country’s legal system is okay.

      • brewery@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        7 days ago

        So is waiting for them to return home and bombing their whole family, or rigging their devices with bombs and having them all go at once even if you don’t know who’s nearby

    • venusaur@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 days ago

      What about UHC CEO and conservative podcast guy. Somehow the Trump assassination attempts were all failures though. Makes you wonder. Maybe secret service is just that good.

  • DdCno1@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    7 days ago

    This was extremely obvious even when he announced this ridiculous idea during his campaign. I suspect he knew this, but kept at it to boost his popularity - until he couldn’t do it anymore and had to find a way out.

    • luciferofastora@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      6 days ago

      It’s a show of intent. He wouldn’t have announced it if he thought he could get away with it; he’d just have done it. But by expressing that he’d like to arrest this guy, he signals a political stance that he knows will make him unpopular with a certain influential political activism group.