Let’s Send Trump to The Hague: A Call to Action for Accountability

Preserve the evidence. Investigate the abuses. Protect international justice.

Morning, kitties. The demand to send Trump to The Hague deserves more than a slogan. It deserves evidence, legal precision, and a campaign that tells people exactly what to do.

Since this article first appeared in May 2025, investigators have published substantial findings about people transferred to El Salvador. Courts have addressed unlawful removals. The administration has expanded its campaign against the International Criminal Court, while human rights advocates have challenged those sanctions.

We have records worth examining and institutions worth defending.

Our demand: Independently investigate Donald Trump and other responsible officials, preserve evidence of alleged international crimes, and pursue accountability wherever jurisdiction and evidence support it.

What Has Changed

Investigators Documented Torture at CECOT

Human Rights Watch and Cristosal’s November 2025 report examined the treatment of 252 Venezuelans transferred by the United States to El Salvador in March and April 2025.

Researchers interviewed 40 former detainees and another 150 relatives, lawyers, and others with relevant knowledge. They reviewed documents and injury photographs, consulted forensic experts, and corroborated accounts.

The organizations found arbitrary detention, enforced disappearance, torture, and other abuses, including reported sexual violence. They concluded that the abuse was systematic.

These are documented investigative findings. They are not an ICC conviction of Trump or any other official.

They warrant independent examination of who authorized the transfers, what officials knew about detention risks, and what responsibility followed from their decisions.

The Supreme Court Addressed an Improper Removal

The Supreme Court’s April 10, 2025 order in Noem v. Abrego Garcia upheld the requirement that the government facilitate Kilmar Abrego Garcia’s release from custody in El Salvador and handle his case as it would have without his improper removal.

The Court required clarification of part of the district court’s directive concerning how the government would accomplish relief.

That order supports a specific claim about improper removal. It does not establish an international criminal offense. Accurate descriptions make our demands stronger.

Human Rights Groups Are Challenging ICC Sanctions

Human Rights Watch’s September 25, 2026 litigation update describes support for a challenge brought by the American Friends Service Committee, Center for Constitutional Rights, Human Rights Watch, and Open Society Institute.

Supporting briefs address interference with human rights work, judicial independence, constitutional rights, and the limits of presidential sanctions authority.

The September 2026 development in Smith v. Trump allowed the advocates’ central claims to proceed. It did not finally invalidate the sanctions.

Defending international justice is part of this campaign. Alleging that sanctions are unlawful and proving that claim in court are distinct steps.

What “Send Trump to The Hague” Actually Requires

The ICC’s explanation of its work describes a court that prosecutes individuals accused of genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and aggression, subject to legal requirements.

A submission does not open a prosecution automatically. Judges decide whether to issue warrants. The Court relies on states to make arrests.

This article does not report an existing ICC arrest warrant against Trump.

Jurisdiction Comes First

Articles 12 and 13 of the Rome Statute establish jurisdictional routes involving territory, nationality, acceptance by a nonmember state, or a UN Security Council referral.

The United States has not joined the treaty. Alleged conduct occurring entirely within the United States and committed by U.S. nationals faces a major jurisdictional obstacle. A Security Council referral faces the U.S. veto.

The ICC’s Bangladesh and Myanmar decision demonstrates that an essential element occurring in a member state can establish a territorial connection even when other conduct originates in a nonmember state.

That makes cross border conduct important to assess. It does not make every removal criminal.

The Crime and Individual Responsibility Must Be Proven

The ICC’s Elements of Crimes requires evidence of the specific offense and its context. Crimes against humanity require a widespread or systematic attack against a civilian population, the relevant policy, and the required knowledge.

Possible allegations such as torture, persecution, deportation, or enforced disappearance have additional elements.

Articles 25 and 28 of the Rome Statute address individual and superior responsibility. Investigators must connect particular people to particular conduct through an applicable basis of liability.

Orders, approvals, funding decisions, warnings, and responses matter. A title alone does not establish guilt.

What Evidence Should Be Preserved?

Evidence	What it could help establish
Transfer orders and passenger records	Who was moved, when, where, and under whose authority
Detention agreements and payment records	Funding, arrangements, and allocation of responsibility
Briefings and warnings	What officials knew about foreseeable harm
Communications and approvals	Links between decision makers and conduct
Medical records and corroborated testimony	Injuries, treatment, and consequences
Court filings and compliance records	Findings, government representations, and responses to orders

An evidence packet should identify the source and limits of every item. Preserve originals, document acquisition, and work from copies.

Witness identities and health information belong in protected channels with appropriate consent. Survivors owe us neither publicity nor their trauma.

Step by Step Guide

Step 1: Contact All Three Congressional Offices

Find your elected officials and contact your representative and both senators. Request investigations, preservation of records, and action against ICC sanctions.

Use the script below. Ask for a written response.

Step 2: Make One Specific Follow Up

Record the date, office, and response. Follow up on unanswered questions. Ask whether the office will request hearings, records, or an appropriate investigation.

“Your concerns are important” is lovely stationery. Ask what happens next.

Step 3: Share Verified Evidence

Share original reports and court orders. Identify whether a statement comes from a court, an investigator, a witness, or an advocate.

Avoid duplicate submission campaigns. Useful evidence contributes more than an inbox filled with identical accusations.

Step 4: Arrange Legal Review for Hague Submissions

Current U.S. ICC sanctions can affect communications or assistance involving sanctioned persons. U.S. participants should obtain qualified advice about applicable restrictions, exceptions, and court orders before submitting material.

Do not assume another plaintiff’s injunction protects everyone.

Step 5: Use the Official Channel When Appropriate

OTPLink guidance explains Article 15 communications concerning alleged crimes within ICC jurisdiction. If legal review supports submission, follow the current instructions on the official portal.

Public advocacy and an evidentiary submission serve different purposes. Both should be accurate.

Exactly What to Say on the Phone

Hello, my name is [Name], and I am a constituent in [City, ZIP Code].

I am asking for independent investigations into people transferred to El Salvador and credible allegations of torture, enforced disappearance, and unlawful killings involving U.S. officials.

Please demand preservation of transfer orders, detention agreements, payment records, legal opinions, warnings, and communications identifying who authorized these actions.

I also ask you to support measures ending ICC related sanctions and protecting lawful human rights advocacy.

Please send me a written response identifying the specific oversight action your office will take.

Email to Your Representative and Senators

Subject: Investigate abuses, preserve evidence, and protect international justice

Dear [Representative or Senator Last Name],

I am a constituent in [City, ZIP Code]. I request congressional action concerning documented abuses and credible allegations involving the Trump administration.

Human Rights Watch and Cristosal’s CECOT investigation documents torture and other serious abuses against Venezuelans transferred by the United States to El Salvador.

The Supreme Court’s Abrego Garcia order also addresses an improper removal.

Please:

1. Demand preservation of relevant records held by the White House, DHS, DOJ, State Department, and Defense Department.
2. Obtain complete transfer agreements, payment records, legal analyses, warnings, and authorization records.
3. Seek public hearings and appropriate independent investigations.
4. Protect survivors, witnesses, and whistleblowers from retaliation.
5. Support measures ending ICC related sanctions and protecting lawful international justice work.
6. Publish findings with necessary privacy safeguards and pursue appropriate referrals.

Please investigate individual responsibility, including that of President Donald Trump, wherever the evidence warrants it.

Send me a written response identifying the actions you support and the oversight steps your office will undertake.

Sincerely,

[Name]
[City, State, ZIP Code]

Hague Cover Letter for Legal Review

Subject: Article 15 communication concerning U.S. transfers to El Salvador and subsequent detention abuses

To the Office of the Prosecutor:

I request assessment of the accompanying public source material concerning transfers of Venezuelan nationals from the United States to El Salvador in March and April 2025 and their subsequent detention at CECOT.

Human Rights Watch and Cristosal’s November 12, 2025 report documents findings of arbitrary detention, enforced disappearance, torture, and other abuses. Its methodology includes interviews, documentary review, and forensic assessment.

I request consideration of whether the alleged conduct falls within the Court’s territorial, temporal, and subject matter jurisdiction, satisfies relevant crime elements, and warrants further examination of individual criminal responsibility.

Please assess available evidence concerning authorization, funding, knowledge of detention conditions, warnings, and responses by Donald Trump and other potentially responsible officials.

I recognize that these materials do not themselves establish every jurisdictional requirement, crime element, or individual’s responsibility. I am requesting an independent assessment, not representing that guilt has been adjudicated.

This communication relies on the identified public report and its cited records. It does not claim firsthand knowledge or include private witness information.

[Name or organization]
[Safe contact information]
[Date]

Final Claw From Resistance Kitty

Let’s make “Send Trump to The Hague” a demand backed by records and sustained action.

Call Congress. Demand the documents. Defend independent courts. Support investigations that follow responsibility wherever the evidence leads.

Claws out. Witnesses protected. Evidence preserved. Accountability pursued.

Sources

• ICC: How the Court Works
• United Nations: Rome Statute
• ICC: Elements of Crimes
• ICC: Bangladesh and Myanmar Jurisdiction Decision
• HRW and Cristosal: CECOT Investigation
• Supreme Court: Noem v. Abrego Garcia, April 10, 2025
• HRW: September 2026 ICC Sanctions Litigation Update
• ACLU: September 2026 Smith v. Trump Update
• OFAC: ICC Related Sanctions
• ICC: OTPLink Guidance