Executive Order 13818, signed on December 20, 2017, granted the Secretary of the Treasury sweeping authority to identify and block the property and assets of foreign individuals and entities deemed to have engaged in serious human rights abuses or corruption. The order created an administrative designation process distinct from traditional sanctions regimes, allowing Treasury to freeze assets, prohibit U.S. financial transactions, and compel American financial institutions to comply with blocking orders. The mechanism operates through Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control, which maintains lists of designated persons and enforces compliance through civil penalties against non-compliant institutions and individuals.

The order directly affects designated foreign nationals and their family members, whose U.S. bank accounts are frozen and who cannot conduct transactions through American financial systems. American companies, financial institutions, and citizens conducting business internationally are equally constrained, as they face legal liability for any transactions with designated parties. Beyond the individuals named, the order impacts global financial networks that interconnect with American banking infrastructure, effectively extending U.S. enforcement authority across jurisdictional boundaries.

This executive order sits within a broader pattern of unilateral executive action on foreign policy and sanctions. The related visa restrictions on Sinaloa Cartel members and the continuation of Iran emergency declarations demonstrate escalating reliance on executive designation authorities rather than legislative constraints. The arms sales fast-tracked in 2026 and the troop deployments to the Middle East reflect an administration willing to use economic and military tools without consistent congressional oversight, suggesting that human rights abuser designations operate within a framework that prioritizes executive flexibility over traditional checks and balances.

While Executive Order 13818 has not faced significant court challenges to its constitutionality, it has operated largely outside intensive congressional scrutiny since its enactment. The order remains active and continues to shape financial compliance obligations for American institutions worldwide.