Josh Riley Protects War Criminals From Prosecution
Welcome to Josh Riley Watch, a podcast that covers the legislative record of a new U.S. Representative who was elected to represent Ithaca and Tompkins County in Congress. Electoral statistics show that Congressman Riley’s victory over Republican Marc Molinaro in 2024 was due to the support of liberal Democrats in Ithaca and the rest of Tompkins County, who delivered a wider margin of victory than all the other Democratic-leaning counties in the district combined.
If Representative Riley stayed true to these roots, he would vote as one of the most progressive members of the US House of Representatives. So far, however, that’s not what’s happening. In his first two votes on standalone bills in Congress, Josh Riley has taken a hard turn to the right in what looks like a capitulation to the extremism of Donald Trump’s MAGA fascism.
In this episode, we’re going to discuss the newest failure by Josh Riley to represent the liberal values of Ithaca, in the form of a pro-fascist vote that has sent shockwaves through the Democratic Party of Tompkins County. Ithaca voters have been known for decades for their strong opposition to war crimes and other human rights abuses. Nonetheless, just a few days ago, Josh Riley voted in favor of H.R. 23, a bill that has drawn widespread condemnation from human rights organizations and legal experts alike.
H.R. 23, also known as the Illegitimate Court Counteraction Act, is designed to defund the International Criminal Court (ICC) and impose sanctions on any individual or organization that supports the court's efforts to prosecute war criminals. The ICC was established in response to the atrocities of World War II and the brutal Balkan Wars of the 1990s, and it plays a vital role in holding perpetrators of the most heinous crimes accountable.
Of course the International Criminal Court is not perfect. No organization is. A reasonable way to deal with the shortcomings of the ICC would be for the United States to work with its allies to reform the court while increasing its funding so that it has the resources it needs to do its job properly. H.R. 23 does exactly the opposite of that. It cuts off funding for the International Criminal Court while alienating the United States from its allies.
Democratic Congressman Jim McGovern, a staunch opponent of the bill, delivered a powerful speech on the House floor, arguing that H.R. 23 represents a dangerous departure from America's commitment to human rights and the rule of law. McGovern praised the ICC, saying:
“If the United States of America stands for anything, we need to stand out loud and foursquare for human rights. That means we have to hold ourselves accountable. We have to hold our allies accountable, and we have to hold our adversaries accountable where they don't live up to those standards. The International Criminal Court is there to hold countries accountable and to hold entities accountable when they commit human rights crimes."
Congressman McGovern criticized the sweeping scope of H.R. 23, which could potentially sanction American allies and even individuals providing basic services to the ICC. He highlighted the hypocrisy of the bill, pointing out that it would sanction the leaders of countries like the UK, France, Germany, Italy, and Japan, who are among the largest funders of the ICC.
McGovern continued:
“The International Criminal Court exists to hold the world accountable, to prevent atrocities and to serve as a reminder that no one is above the law. Abandoning the ICC, as HR 23 proposes, undermines our values, undermines our alliances and undermines our credibility on the world stage. This is a moment to reaffirm our commitment to human rights, to international law, and to the partnerships that have defined American leadership. This bill fails that test.
By sanctioning officials of the ICC and anyone who has done business with them, this bill would have a chilling effect on America's work to support human rights and rule of law around the world. It would hamper the ICC’s efforts to prosecute serious atrocities that have wrecked lives and destabilized countries around the world from Ukraine to Uganda, in countries around the world, from Ukraine to Uganda to Darfur. NGOs would be chilled from sharing evidence of the great crimes committed this these places.
Many of us celebrated in March of 2023 when the ICC 's judges issued arrest warrants for Vladimir Putin and another senior Russian official for abducting thousands of Ukrainian children. Congress even passed legislation to enable the united states to provide financial support to and share information with the ICC to investigate and prosecute Putin and his regime for their heinous crimes in Ukraine. This bill we are considering today would undermine that work and rob it of its legitimacy.
If passed, this misguided legislation would bluntly curtail our ability to engage the ICC to advance our interests in supporting justice and accountability and, crucially, to share relevant information with our partners and allies. Speaking of our al least. This bill is so absurdly broad it would sanction our own allies. This would sanction our own allies. Read the bill. Our allies would be sanctioned for supporting the ICC if this were to pass. The largest funders of the ICC are America's closest allies, the UK, France, Germany, Italy, and Japan. As drafted the leaders of these countries would be sanctioned for providing material assistance to the ICC that's truly nuts. It doesn't make any sense to me.
The legislative bodies of these bodies could also be sanctioned for appropriating funds to the ICC and by some interpretations, interparliamentary travel to Europe could become a sanctionable activity. Did anybody think this through? Is sanctioning the leaders of our closest friends and allies really the best we can do here? This sanction over 900 members from approximately 100 countries at the court from judges, prosecutors, to administrative staff, including nationals of close US allies and partners, who collectively work to prosecute war criminals around the globe. The language in this bill is so broad even cafeteria workers and janitors, even their families could be construed as having, quote, supported or materially assisted in these prosecutions by providing services to the I.C.C.
This is nuts. This is nuts, and what would happen next? I can tell you, Mr. Speaker. American companies would be banned from doing business with the ICC if its top officials are sanctioned. Their Chinese competitors would rush in to fill the gap. Not only does this undermine America's interests, it bolsters Russia and it helps China. Mr. Speaker, this is a bad bill.”
The majority of Democrats in the US House did the right thing. They voted against H.R. 23. Josh Riley, however, broke with the Democratic Party and joined MAGA extremists like Marjorie Taylor Greene and Lauren Boebert in their attack against the International Criminal Court.
Josh Riley's vote goes beyond a simple disagreement on policy. It raises serious questions about his understanding of his constituents' values and his commitment to upholding basic principles of justice. The people of Ithaca are solidly on the side of democracy, against militant authoritarianism, but in supporting H.R. 23, Josh Riley took sides with the autocrats of the world, against democracy and the rule of law.
By siding with those seeking to dismantle the ICC, Riley has aligned himself with a position that is fundamentally at odds with the beliefs of those he represents. Already, it looks like Josh Riley is becoming out of touch with the progressive values of New York’s 19th congressional district.
The graphic that accompanies this podcast article on the Josh Riley Watch web site superimposes Congressman Josh Riley on top of a picture of Adolf Hitler giving his infamous stiff-armed salute in front of a parade of marching Nazi stormtroopers. This is a harsh image, but it is unfortunately appropriate. First Josh Riley voted for H.R. 29, legislation that will help Donald Trump funnel millions of people living in America into gigantic prison camps. Now, Congressman Riley has voted for a bill that protects war criminals from prosecution.
The Third Reich is infamous for its concentration camps and for its war crimes, and the new administration of Donald Trump is moving rapidly in the same direction. This week, the US Senate is debating whether to approve of Donald Trump’s nomination of Pete Hegseth to become the next Secretary of Defense. Hegseth called for the withdrawal of the United States from the Geneva Conventions, a body of international law designed to prevent atrocities such as the mass killing of civilians during wartime. Hegseth has specifically defended American soldiers who committed war crimes such as torture, the purposeful killing of civilians, and the execution of prisoners of war.
As a member of the US House, Josh Riley does not have a formal role to play in the confirmation of Pete Hegseth. By voting for H.R. 23, however, Riley signaled his support for Pete Hegseth’s plans to allow American soldiers to commit violent atrocities. Josh Riley’s willingness to protect soldiers who commit war crimes is especially disturbing given Donald Trump’s plans to deploy the United States military within the United States in order to suppress political dissent. H.R. 23 has more in common with the values of Nazi Germany than with the values of Upstate New Yorkers living in the 19th congressional district.
We are witnessing the rapid erosion of international safeguards against the worst forms of human rights violations. Instead of doing his part to confront this problem, Josh Riley is taking the easy way out. Congressman Riley is voting to make the problem even worse. War crimes include acts of unspeakable cruelty such as genocide and the use of weapons of mass destruction. By voting to incapacitate the International Criminal Court, Riley is voting to weaken the very mechanisms that were put in place to prevent the atrocities of World War I and World War II from happening again.
Voters in Ithaca are also deeply concerned by Josh Riley’s failure to confront serious procedural irregularities surrounding the passage of H.R. 23. The Republican leadership, led by Speaker Mike Johnson, pushed the bill through the House without any committee review, without public hearings, and without the opportunity for amendments. Adding insult to injury, the Republicans scheduled the debate on H.R. 23 to coincide with the funeral of former President Jimmy Carter, a well-known advocate for human rights. This maneuver was a purposeful display of antagonism to organizations that hold war criminals accountable, and Josh Riley went along with it.
Josh Riley's decision to vote for this bill under such dubious circumstances calls into question his judgment and integrity. As a lawyer, he should be aware of the importance of due process and the dangers of rushing through legislation without proper scrutiny. Congressman Riley’s willingness to overlook these procedural flaws suggests a troubling disregard for democratic norms.
Josh Riley's vote for H.R. 23 represents a betrayal of his constituents' values, an undermining of international justice, and a dangerous step towards normalizing military atrocities. It remains to be seen how Representative Riley will justify his actions to his constituents and whether he will continue to align himself with such extremist policies throughout his term. One thing is clear, however: This vote has seriously damaged Josh Riley’s reputation in Ithaca, and has raised serious doubts about his commitment to the principles of human rights and the rule of law.
It’s not too late for Josh Riley to turn around his slide into right wing extremism. He could apologize to the voters of the 19th congressional district, and recommit to supporting the values of democracy and the rule of law.
Will Congressman Riley have the strength of character to admit that he made a mistake, or will he allow his pride to get in the way of restoring the trust of the voters who elected him to office just a few weeks ago?
