The Helms-Burton Act: The Legislative Backbone of the Blockade Against Cuba for 30 Years

Image via the PCC

By Katherin Hormigó Rubio, translated from the Spanish

On March 12, 1996, U.S. President Bill Clinton signed and enacted the Cuban Liberty and Democratic Solidarity Act of 1996, or the Liberty Act, better known for the names of its main driving forces: North Carolina Republican Sen. Jesse Helms and the Republican Rep. Dan Burton of Indiana. It was passed in response to the downing of the Brothers to the Rescue planes on February 24, 1996.

Amid escalating geopolitical tensions, the Helms-Burton Act continues to be a contentious cornerstone in U.S.-Cuba relations. This legislation, which codified and expanded the economic, commercial and financial blockade against the Caribbean island, has been criticized for its extraterritorial scope and for what the Cuban government describes as its genocidal character as it has imposed prolonged collective suffering.

This law serves as the legislative foundation of the blockade against Cuba. It set forth particular political conditions for its removal, tied to internal changes in Cuba based on criteria established by Washington. "As long as this law remains in force, no tariff adjustment can be interpreted as the end of the embargo," says the legal analysis of reference.

Among its key provisions, Title III allows U.S. citizens to sue entities that "traffic" in expropriated property, a mechanism whose application was suspended by presidents from Bill Clinton to Barack Obama to avoid conflicts with international allies. Trump, however, activated it in 2019 during his first term, unleashing some 40 lawsuits that remain before the courts. Other sections include the exclusion of foreign U.S. executives and opposition to Cuban membership in global financial institutions.

Extraterritorial Reach: An International Conflict

The extraterritoriality of the Helms-Burton Act is one of its most controversial aspects, as it extends US sanctions to foreign companies and governments. By penalizing investments, they force third parties to choose between the Cuban and U.S. markets, which has generated friction with the European Union, Canada and Mexico. In 1996, the EU sought a panel at the World Trade Organization (WTO) against the US, claiming breaches of international law.

The Trump administration has defended Title III as an "invaluable foreign policy tool" to hold Cuba accountable for illegal expropriations, arguing that it does not require additional exceptions under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act. Critics, however, see this as an attempt to intimidate global investors, exacerbating Cuba's economic isolation.

Genocide Accusations: The Humanitarian Impact

From the Cuban point of view, the Helms-Burton Act and the blockade as a whole amount to an economic genocide, in line with the 1948 Convention that describes the term as actions resulting in severe injuries or living conditions that contribute to the physical destruction of a group.

The First Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Cuba and President of the Republic, Miguel Díaz-Canel, has described the blockade as a "policy of asphyxiation" that prevents access to medicines, fuel and food, and has impacted the lives of millions for decades.

In 2026, this situation becomes more intense due to the ongoing crisis. The kidnapping of President Nicolas Maduro by U.S. forces in January has cut off the flow of Venezuelan oil, Cuba's main energy mainstay, leading to emergency measures such as rationing and mass blackouts.

In the midst of this situation, Donald Trump has issued executive orders threatening tariffs on countries that supply fuel to the island, which analysts describe as an "effective blockade" similar to that of the Missile Crisis. The Cuban Ministry of Foreign Affairs has condemned these measures, stating that they negatively impact the private sector and residents in the United States, infringing on human rights.

What is clear is that the Helms-Burton Act embodies the ideological rift between Washington and Havana. for the U.S. it is a tool to promote democracy and protect property rights; for Cuba, an act of economic aggression with genocidal overtones.

This work was translated and shared via a License CC-BY-NC