By Randolph Borges on May 13, 2026
Francesca Albanese
The measures against Francesca Albanese constitute an unconstitutional restriction on freedom of expression
A federal court in Washington on Wednesday issued an injunction suspending sanctions imposed in 2025 by the Donald Trump administration against the UN special rapporteur for the Palestinian territories, Francesca Albanese.
Federal Judge Richard León ruled that the coercive measures applied against the international official constitute an unconstitutional restriction on freedom of expression. This judicial decision immediately reverses the total financial blockade and the entry ban imposed on the Italian jurist.
The court ruling highlights that the actions taken by the US government violate the First Amendment, as they are specifically directed against the content of Albanese’s speech regarding the situation in Gaza.
The ruling emphasizes that freedom of expression is always in the public interest and cannot be curtailed by government displeasure with critical viewpoints. This suspension halts the effects of the sanctions that had left the rapporteur without access to her assets and barred from her own home in the United States.
The lawsuit, filed by the lawyer’s husband and daughter—a U.S. citizen—alleged the misuse of state resources to silence dissenting viewpoints. The legal action argued that the Trump administration systematically violated due process and constitutionally guaranteed rights. Organizations such as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch have welcomed the ruling, describing the government’s previous actions as unnecessary harassment and an attempt at global censorship.
The failure of Marco Rubio’s harassment policy
The court’s decision represents a direct setback for Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who in July 2025 spearheaded the offensive to sanction the rapporteur. Under Rubio’s leadership, a smear campaign was waged accusing Albanese of supporting terrorism and antisemitism, based solely on her reports of war crimes committed by Israel in the Gaza Strip.
Rubio had declared that the expert’s work would not be tolerated, attempting to justify the use of economic sanctions as a tool of political punishment.
Although the State Department insisted in early 2026 that the sanctions were “legal and appropriate,” federal courts have made it clear that the Executive Branch cannot use the financial system to persecute United Nations officials for their opinions.
The suspension of these measures dismantles the “legal warfare” strategy that Washington sought to normalize against voices demanding respect for international law and an end to attacks against the Palestinian civilian population.
A precedent against the abuse of power and the violation of rights
UN Secretary-General António Guterres had already described the Trump administration’s actions as a “dangerous precedent” and an unacceptable move in the context of international relations.
Judge León’s ruling confirms that the use of sanctions against individuals who do not pose a criminal or terrorist threat, but rather exercise a human rights mandate, is an abuse of power. This legal victory for Albanese restores his right to freedom of movement and access to basic resources in Washington.
The rapporteur stated that this ruling is a crucial step in halting a harassment campaign she described as “truly unnecessary.” The temporary resolution will remain in effect until the court rules on the merits of the case, although the judge’s forceful invocation of constitutional protection suggests a definitive defeat for the foreign policy of indiscriminate sanctions.
This case highlights the deplorable actions of a government that, under the leadership of figures like Rubio, attempted to prioritize its geopolitical interests over the fundamental freedoms guaranteed by its own Constitution.
Source: Ultimas Noticias