Bipartisan Majorities Oppose US Disengaging from UN Agencies, New UMD Survey Finds

Oppose Sanctioning ICC for Arrest Warrants Against US Allied Leaders

COLLEGE PARK, Md., July 17, 2025 /PRNewswire/ — President Trump has issued executive orders to “reevaluate our commitment” to United Nations (UN) agencies, withdraw from the World Health Organization, and impose sanctions on the International Criminal Court (ICC) to thwart their activities. A new survey by the Program for Public Consultation (PPC) at the University of Maryland’s School of Public Policy finds majorities of both Republicans and Democrats:

• favor the US being part of the eight major UN agencies, including the World Health Organization
• oppose reducing how much the US works through the UN and its agencies
• oppose sanctioning the ICC
• favor joining the ICC.

“An overwhelming majority agrees the UN is a way for the US to share the burden of addressing global problems,” commented PPC Director Steven Kull. “While polls show Americans are not fully satisfied with the performance of the UN, very large majorities of Republicans as well as Democrats favor the US continuing to work through the UN and its major agencies.”

Respondents were given a briefing on the UN and its agencies, including how much money the US tends to contribute, and evaluated arguments for and against US participation. Arguments for and against the US participating in various UN agencies were evaluated, including that the UN is a “bloated bureaucracy,” filled with many authoritarian members that work against US values, and that the US should prioritize working bilaterally because it “can make better deals that exactly match its interests and goals.” Majorities found each of the pro and con arguments convincing, but the arguments for participating did better.

Asked to evaluate eight different UN agencies, for which they were informed of their functions and budgets, large bipartisan majorities favored the US participating in all eight:

• World Health Organization: Overall 79%, Republicans 70%, Democrats 91%
• Department of Peace Operations, which manages UN peacekeeping operations: Overall 81%, Republicans 76%, Democrats 89%
• World Food Program: Overall 81%, Republicans 78%, Democrats 88%
• International Children’s Fund: Overall 83%, Republicans 79%, Democrats 88%
• Development Program: Overall 77%, Republicans 69%, Democrats 87%
• Environment Program: Overall 73%, Republicans 63%, Democrats 85%
• Refugee Agency: Overall 70%, Republicans 59%, Democrats 83%
• International Atomic Energy Agency: Overall 78%, Republicans 77%, Democrats 83%

Asked how much the US should work with the UN and its agencies overall, a very large majority of 84% said the US should work through the UN more (52%) or about the same as it has been (32%). Just 16% said the US should participate in the UN less, including just 27% of Republicans and 6% of Democrats.

For the questions about the International Criminal Court (ICC), respondents were first informed of its mission and activities, that the US played a role in establishing it but did not become a member, and the reasons why it

did not join. Several recent examples of leaders who have been indicted by the ICC were presented, including the Prime Minister of Israel and senior leaders of Hamas.

In response to the ICC issuing an arrest warrant for Israel’s prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu, the Trump administration has imposed sanctions on ICC staff and their family members by freezing their US assets and blocking them from entering the US.

Respondents were asked, in principle, what the US should do in the case that the ICC issues an arrest warrant for a leader of a US ally. One of the options presented was to sanction the ICC by, “punishing individuals who work for or provide any help to the ICC, as well as their family members, by freezing their assets held in the US and blocking them from entering the US.”

Only 29% favored the US sanctioning ICC staff, including 32% of Republicans and 27% of Democrats. Instead, a bipartisan majority of seven-in-ten favored the other two options presented: the US publicly criticizing the ICC (25%) or taking no action (46%).

They were also asked whether the US should join the ICC, and informed that this would mean that if the ICC issues an arrest warrant for a foreign official, and that person enters the US, the US would have a duty to detain them. Arguments for and against joining the ICC were evaluated, including that ICC judges from other countries could file bogus charges to embarrass the US, and that the US arresting a foreign official could risk getting the country into a larger conflict. Both pro and con arguments were found convincing by majorities, but the argument in favor of joining did better. In the end, a majority (62%) favored the US becoming a member of the ICC, including 57% of Republicans and 72% of Democrats. 

About the Survey
The survey was a “public consultation survey” in which respondents were provided briefings and arguments for and against proposals. Content was reviewed by experts from each side of the debate to ensure that the briefings are accurate and balanced and that the arguments presented are the strongest ones being made.

The survey was fielded June 10 – June 16, 2025 with 1,209 adults nationally. Samples were obtained from multiple online opt-in panels, including Cint, Dynata and Prodege. Sample collection and quality control was managed by QuantifyAI under the direction of the Program for Public Consultation. Samples were pre-stratified and weighted by age, race, gender, education, income, geographic region, marital status, and home ownership to match the general adult population. The survey was also weighted by partisan affiliation. The survey was offered in both English and Spanish. The confidence interval is +/- 3.0% and the response rate for the sample was 7.8%.

CONTACT: Katrina Fuller, [email protected] 

SOURCE Program for Public Consultation