Macron Demands Trump Lift Sanctions That Cut French Judge From Visa and Amazon

The French President Emmanuel Macron has formally requested that the White House reverse sanctions imposed on two French citizens caught in the crossfire of escalating transatlantic tensions over digital regulation and international justice. The letter, published this weekend in La Tribune Dimanche, targets penalties that have left one official locked out of U.S. soil and the other stripped of basic digital services—from Visa cards to Amazon accounts.

Why This Matters

• Regulatory Autonomy Under Fire: The sanctions against former EU Commissioner Thierry Breton challenge Europe's authority to legislate tech platform conduct within its own borders.

• Banking and Digital Blackout: International Criminal Court (ICC) Judge Nicolas Guillou has lost access to U.S.-based payment networks and online services, raising alarms about financial sovereignty.

• Diplomatic Flashpoint: France has summoned the U.S. Ambassador Charles Kushner to protest what Paris calls "unjustified and unjustifiable" measures that undermine judicial independence and European regulatory power.

Who Is Targeted and Why

Thierry Breton, architect of the EU's Digital Services Act (DSA), was banned from entering the United States in December 2025 after the U.S. State Department accused him of "extraterritorial censorship" against American interests. Washington's accusation: spearheading legislation that compels U.S. tech giants like Meta, X (formerly Twitter), and Google to moderate harmful content and disinformation within European Union territory. The DSA, which imposes fines of up to 6% of global annual turnover for non-compliance, is viewed by American officials as an overreach that effectively exports European speech standards worldwide.

Nicolas Guillou, meanwhile, was sanctioned in August 2025 alongside other ICC magistrates for his role in issuing an arrest warrant for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. The U.S. Treasury froze any American assets and barred him from U.S. territory. In practical terms, his French bank subsequently revoked his Visa card—an American service—and he can no longer access platforms including Airbnb, Amazon, or other U.S.-operated digital infrastructure. In Brussels this week, Guillou told EU officials he could "endure for a long time" without these tools, but warned: "I won't hold out if nothing happens."

Macron's Defense: Sovereignty, Not Censorship

In his letter to President Donald Trump, Macron challenged the legal and factual basis for both sanctions. On Breton, he wrote that the penalties "harm European regulatory autonomy" and rest on flawed analysis: "European digital regulation has no extraterritorial reach and applies without discrimination, within European territory, to all companies involved." The DSA, in other words, governs conduct inside the EU, regardless of where a platform is headquartered—a principle that Macron insists is standard territorial jurisdiction, not extraterritorial coercion.

Regarding Guillou, Macron argued the sanctions "violate the principle of judicial independence and the mandate of the ICC," an institution that operates under a multilateral treaty framework recognized by 123 countries. The French government, backed by statements from EU foreign policy chief Josep Borrell and German officials, views Washington's move as a direct assault on the international rule of law and the independence of tribunals designed to prosecute war crimes and crimes against humanity.

What the Digital Services Act Actually Does

The DSA, which entered full force in February 2024 for all platforms and in August 2023 for Very Large Online Platforms (VLOPs) serving more than 45 million monthly active users in the EU, establishes binding obligations for content moderation, algorithmic transparency, and rapid removal of illegal material. It bans targeted advertising to minors and the use of sensitive data (religion, sexual orientation, ethnicity) for ad targeting. "Dark patterns"—manipulative design tricks—are also outlawed.

Critics in the U.S. House Judiciary Committee and the State Department under Secretary Marco Rubio argue that because American platforms operate globally, complying with the DSA's stringent standards often means adopting uniform policies that affect content visible in the United States—where such speech would be protected under the First Amendment. This dynamic, known as the "Brussels Effect," gives European law de facto global influence, which U.S. officials describe as censorship by proxy.

The European Commission, for its part, insists the DSA applies only to services offered within the EU market and does not mandate global content removal—though platforms may choose that route for operational simplicity.

What This Means for European Infrastructure and Portugal

While everyday residents in Portugal retain full access to Visa, Amazon, and other U.S.-based services, the sanctions demonstrate a critical vulnerability: the continent's reliance on U.S.-controlled financial and digital infrastructure. The fact that a French judge can be cut off from Visa—a private American company—or locked out of cloud services and e-commerce platforms demonstrates how deeply intertwined European daily life is with systems governed by U.S. sanctions policy.

Portugal, as an EU member state bound by the DSA and a signatory to the ICC Rome Statute, is directly affected by this precedent. Portuguese banks, like those across Europe, rely heavily on Visa and Mastercard networks for domestic transactions. Portuguese companies also depend on U.S.-based cloud services and e-commerce platforms. If this sanctions approach expands to broader categories of officials or politicians, the impact could ripple across Portuguese banking, business, and government operations.

In response, the European Parliament has advanced proposals to bolster digital sovereignty, including public procurement reforms favoring EU-based tech firms and increased private investment in homegrown platforms. The bloc has also revisited its 1996 Blocking Statute, a regulation designed to shield European entities from complying with extraterritorial foreign sanctions. Originally aimed at U.S. embargoes on Cuba and Iran, it now faces a test in the realm of digital services and financial networks.

There are also discussions about creating "gateway banks"—intermediary institutions insulated from direct U.S. jurisdiction—and launching a sovereign European payment system to rival Visa and Mastercard. Such initiatives, once theoretical, have gained urgency as American sanctions increasingly weaponize access to dollar-denominated transactions and U.S.-based digital ecosystems. For Portugal and other smaller EU economies, these European-level solutions could determine whether national financial independence becomes possible.

What Comes Next

Macron's appeal represents the most direct diplomatic challenge yet to the Trump administration's use of visa bans and financial blacklisting as tools of regulatory retaliation. French Foreign Minister Jean-Noël Barrot has framed the sanctions as "intimidation and coercion" aimed at forcing Europe to abandon its regulatory standards.

Whether Washington will reconsider remains uncertain. The U.S. position—articulated by Rubio and echoed by congressional Republicans—is that Europe's regulatory ambitions constitute an infringement on American speech rights and a commercial threat to Silicon Valley dominance. For Brussels and national capitals like Lisbon, the deeper question is whether the EU can maintain policy independence without rebuilding the financial and technological infrastructure that underpins modern life—a project that would require years of investment and political will.

In the meantime, Guillou's warning in Brussels encapsulates the stakes: European sovereignty, whether digital or judicial, cannot survive indefinitely if it remains hostage to foreign payment processors and platform gatekeepers. The outcome of this diplomatic clash will set a precedent—not just for France, but for every EU member state navigating the increasingly contested terrain between regulation, security, and technological self-determination.