> You as an individual are not sovereign, and when you come to the land over which the US is sovereign, you are subject to US law.

And if an american, whom ICC have found guilty on crimes, visits a country which upholds ICC rulings they should be arrested, no?

Nobody talked about kidnapping people in the US or doing anything similar. In contrast, the US is in a habit on (among others)

1. kidnapping

2. bombing

3. otherwise assassinating

4. sanctioning

5. demanding extradition (the only actual "legal" part)

foreign citizens that they do not like. We can also say that no other, non american citizen has actually agreed to these practices either, nor to US authority to be the world serif. So these arguments more like read like monopoly of global violence/authority than "sovereignty".

The main part of the argument is that the US is very happy to apply their laws to foreign citizens for things they have done on foreign soil and are also happy to legally or illegally extract those citizens from the foreign states. That does in fact directly violate those other states sovereignty.

Conversely, American individuals are also not sovereign so when they come to a sovereign land where they are sought (by the state or its partners through treaties) for crimes, they are subject to the the state's laws and treaties.

This would more persuasive if the US didn’t have a long history of prosecuting, even kidnapping, foreign nationals on foreign soil for violations of US law.

> The US never ratified a treaty establishing the authority of the ICC, so it has not consented to that diminution of sovereignty.

True, they could ignore the ICC, but they shouldn't go around sanctioning and punishing and threatening its judges.

So it should be no surprise to USA that sovereign countries that abide to ICC rulings take actions against individual USA citizens.

> a sovereign state governs itself and is not governed by others

Hence, if anyone commits a crime in another country, they fall under the jurisdiction of that country. So while the US doesn't have to recognize the ICC, listen to it, or follow its verdicts, other countries are free to do so.

But now the US is threatening the judges of the ICC, which is hypocritical to say the least. It's more of a mafia thing, really. Not surprising, given Trump's background.

It’s not hypocrisy. Don’t follow them. But when your interests conflict with ours, then we will exert our influence.

[flagged]