Judge Blocks US Travel and Banking Sanctions on UN Palestine Expert
A federal judge paused US travel and banking sanctions against UN Palestine expert Francesca Albanese.
Why it matters: Sanctions and compliance officers, as well as First Amendment specialists, should note expanding judicial scrutiny of executive action on international human rights advocates. The case signals heightened attention to the constitutional protections of individuals—even non-citizens—impacted by US sanctions.
- Judge Richard Leon issued a preliminary injunction on May 13, 2026.
- The blocked sanctions, imposed July 2025 under Executive Order 14203, barred Albanese from US travel and banking.
- The court found the sanctions likely violate Albanese's First Amendment rights.
- Albanese's US property ownership and her US citizen daughter contributed to the court's analysis.
On May 13, 2026, US District Judge Richard Leon issued a preliminary injunction halting enforcement of travel and financial sanctions against Francesca Albanese, the UN Special Rapporteur for the Occupied Palestinian Territories. The sanctions, enacted under Executive Order 14203 in July 2025 by Secretary of State Marco Rubio, prohibited Albanese from entering the US and accessing US banking services.
Judge Leon wrote that Albanese's statements—critical of Israel's actions in Gaza—amounted to protected speech under the First Amendment, concluding that "Albanese has done nothing more than speak" and "protecting the freedom of speech is 'always' in the public interest." The judge cited Albanese’s US property and her daughter’s citizenship as contributing links giving rise to constitutional protections, even though Albanese herself resides abroad.
The legal challenge was brought in February 2026 by Albanese’s family, arguing that the restrictions left her unable to conduct everyday financial activities—essentially cutting off access to the US banking system. The sanctions followed Albanese's public call for International Criminal Court investigations targeting Israeli and US nationals.
Albanese criticized the measures as part of a broader US attempt to limit international accountability, according to her comments. Secretary Rubio, defending the sanctions in public remarks, alleged that Albanese's statements were antisemitic and reflected contempt toward the US and Israel. These allegations have been contested in legal filings.
Legal practitioners should be alert to the court’s willingness to scrutinize the constitutional implications of sanctions regimes, especially where protected speech and due process for affected individuals and their families are involved.
By the numbers:
- July 2025 — Date US sanctions under EO 14203 imposed on Albanese
- May 13, 2026 — Date preliminary injunction blocking sanctions was issued
Yes, but: The ruling is a preliminary injunction; the sanctions case may proceed further in court or on appeal.
What's next: The US government may appeal the injunction or pursue alternate justifications for the sanctions in ongoing litigation.