French President Emmanuel Macron has asked President Donald Trump to lift US sanctions imposed on several Europeans — notably former EU commissioner Thierry Breton and International Criminal Court judge Nicolas Guillou. In a mid‑February letter, Macron called the measures “unjust restrictions,” arguing they intrude on individual freedoms and threaten the independence of European institutions.
The dispute has quickly become a diplomatic sore spot. Both Breton and Guillou reportedly face US travel bans and limits on certain American financial and digital services. Macron’s appeal contends the sanctions rest on faulty assumptions and could curtail the EU’s ability to set its own regulatory agenda.
Macron’s letter asked Washington to reconsider the specific travel bans and other penalties affecting those two French nationals. He described the actions as poorly targeted, urging the US to “reconsider these decisions and lift the sanctions unjustly imposed on Nicolas Guillou and Thierry Breton.” The letter warned that keeping the restrictions in place risks fraying transatlantic cooperation across trade, security and technology.
Breton’s case has been cast by US officials as a response to so‑called “extraterritorial censorship,” accusing him of supporting speech restrictions that could harm American companies. French officials reject that interpretation. They say the EU’s digital rules are designed to govern activity inside Europe and apply to companies operating in or serving European users — not to assert control over US firms.
Macron framed the sanctions as effectively extraterritorial measures that could interfere with the EU’s regulatory sovereignty. He cautioned that such steps set a dangerous precedent, one that might invite tit‑for‑tat reprisals and erode long‑term collaboration on standards for trade, security and technology.
Nicolas Guillou, a senior French legal adviser, stressed the importance of judicial independence and the role of courts in resolving these disputes. He pointed out that EU rules are implemented by national authorities and are subject to review by domestic courts and the European Court of Justice. Increasingly, he noted, these digital conflicts are settled through legal channels rather than diplomatic punishments — and court rulings, not sanctions, tend to drive compliance.
Guillou also spelled out practical consequences businesses could face: disruption to transatlantic partnerships, complications enforcing contracts, and added headaches for content‑moderation practices. His advice to companies was pragmatic — review compliance procedures and update legal risk assessments to cope with a more contentious regulatory environment.
Behind the scenes, French and US officials have opened technical talks intended to contain the dispute and preserve cooperation on shared priorities. Those conversations aim to resolve particular differences without widening sanctions or imposing broader travel restrictions — a diplomatic effort to prevent a local spat from becoming a lasting rupture.