An ICC thought experiment: Put yourself in the position of a US official who strongly believes it is not legitimate for an international court that the US has not joined to criminally investigate or prosecute U.S. citizens. That will be harder for some than for others.

But if you can manage it, I would be interested to know what kinds of measures (or countermeasures, from the US perspective) are legitimate and appropriate and what kinds are not.

There is a broad bipartisan consensus that ICC investigation of US citizens is unacceptable. There was always going to be some kind of response from any US administration to being investigated. Folks are reacting with horror to the sanctions (and that's my first instinct as well)

But I do think there's a really tough question of how to respond appropriately that critics of the sanctions are not necessarily grappling with