He didn’t say he can’t do anything. He said he can’t independently execute the warrant. He also said that “we can examine every tool we have to defend the humanity and dignity of all people”. That leaves a lot of something.
International extraditions are defacto foreign policy. That's federal, no matter how bad Bibi is. Diplomats are guaranteed by a treaty* unencumbered access to and from the UN. And number of other solemn obligations that the US is committed to grants diplomatic immunity to diplomats coming from the United Nations. It's actually so ironclad that diplomats coming to the United Nations can rack up hundreds of thousands of dollars of parking tickets and nothing can happen. Anyone who actually tried to take Bibi and ship them off to Canada or the ICC would be looking at a felony conviction for kidnapping of an internationally protected person. Mamdani conspiracy charges and deprivation of rights under color of law.
None of this is to say that he shouldn't be sent to the ICC. He should. He's a fucking monster. But between all the different kinds of immunity and the fact that it's foreign policy and foreign policy is the sole purview of the federal government, there is no legal path for the mayor of New York City to extradite someone to The Hague.
So it's not really a treaty because the United Nations isn't an actual nation. Treaties have to be between two nation states. But it was an agreement between the United Nations being the United States which was then passed by both houses of Congress and signed into law by the president. It's called the United Nations headquarters agreement. And it actually establishes the United Nations as an extra-territorial enclave. It's also why the United Nations can use the East River, I think it's the East River, for cooling even though that's super illegal in NYC.
So this might be crazy to understand but Israel is a country and New York City is a city. And Israel having the mossad do a thing has no bearing on the legality of nyc doing a thing
That is easy to understand, what you failed to understand is Mossad did it within someone else's country. So what the suggestion was is that NYC could just let it happen, not have its own agency. There are plenty of countries that would happily kidnapped Bibi.
Eichmann was a private fugitive living under a false name in a country that had stonewalled extradition. Argentina still hauled Israel before the Security Council, which passed Resolution 138 declaring the abduction a violation of Argentine sovereignty; Israel apologized and Argentina expelled the ambassador anyway. That was the cost for grabbing an unprotected civilian. Netanyahu is a sitting head of government traveling on UN business with a federal protective detail. Different universe entirely.
Visiting heads of government at UNGA are protected by the Diplomatic Security Service, the Secret Service, and Israeli security, with NYPD in a supporting role. Trump has flatly ruled out any arrest on US soil. The mayor cannot order the NYPD to stand down. Ordering one would be obstruction, would trigger immediate federal supersession, and under the NY Constitution the governor can remove a NYC mayor. Obstruction is a federal felony.
Netanyahu is an "internationally protected person" under the 1973 IPP Convention, which obligates the US to prosecute or extradite anyone who attacks or abducts him. Domestically that's 18 U.S.C. §§ 112, 1116, and 1201. The UN Headquarters Agreement separately binds the US to permit and protect transit to the General Assembly. And under DRC v. Belgium (ICJ, 2002), sitting senior officials have absolute personal immunity from the criminal jurisdiction of other states.
A foreign intelligence service abducting a protected official on American soil is an act of war against the United States. Not "a diplomatic incident." An armed covert operation by a foreign state on US territory, producing a firefight in midtown Manhattan with dead agents, dead cops, and dead bystanders. It is simultaneously an act of war against Israel, kidnapping a sitting prime minister is about as clean a casus belli as exists in the modern world. The perpetrating state gets severed relations, sanctions, and a credible risk of military retaliation from at least two countries at once.
Even if they still did, The ICC has no mechanism to accept custody from the kidnappers; the Netherlands would have to take him, and delivery by abduction hands the defense a textbook abuse-of-process motion. Meanwhile the American Service-Members' Protection Act authorizes the president to use "all means necessary and appropriate" to free US or allied personnel detained at the ICC's request. Israel is a designated major non-NATO ally. There is a US statute on the books pointing a gun at exactly this scenario, and an administration currently working to dismantle the ICC outright would jump at the chance to force a multilateral military attack. Hell we could probably even invoke article 5.
Every state with the capability has vastly more to lose than to gain; every state with the motive lacks the reach into a US-secured perimeter. Wanting something and being willing to trade your economy and your sovereignty for it are not the same.
Also the image of dead cops and feds and civilians in Manhattan gives Israel the best PR they've had in years, and kills the pro-Palestinian movement in the US for basically ever.
as mayor, he is the largest landlord in the city ... and the worst. it would be great if examined every tool for making the people in public housing feel safe and have running utilities year round.
26
u/mister_nixon 17h ago
He didn’t say he can’t do anything. He said he can’t independently execute the warrant. He also said that “we can examine every tool we have to defend the humanity and dignity of all people”. That leaves a lot of something.