Special Topics

Question 1

Albisa (2011)

Answer 1

Albisa (2011) argues these are relatively “solid” constitutive commitments:
* Education: 1954 Brown v. Board of Ed decision rules “racially segregated public school systems unconstitutional”
○ But 1972 case upholds property-tax-based education financing
○ And a 1982 case preserves access of undocumented children to education while emphasizing that there is not a constitutionally guaranteed right to education nor are these children a ‘protected class’ (Albisa 2011, 71-73)
Right to nondiscrimination: protected under US Civil Rights Act of 1964 and reinforced with ratification of ICERD

Albisa (2011) argues these are not yet constitutive commitments:
* Public assistance: Supreme Court rulings from 1960 onward (through 2000) characterize public assistance as ‘privilege’ and not a ‘right’ (see quoted in Albisa 2011, 72); access is not universal
* Housing: rulings in the mid-1970s determine there to be no constitutional right to housing in USA and 1990s ruling strengthens grounds for drug-related eviction from public housing
* Right to join a labor union: not universally protected (i.e., civil servants excluded; agricultural and domestic workers are not protected under the Fair Labor Standards Act; USA has not ratified ILO 87 or ILO 98: https://normlex.ilo.org/dyn/normlex/en/f?p=1000:12000
* Right to old age pension (Social Security)
* Minimum wage (see shift from 1927 to 1937): regarded by Supreme Court initially as an unfair burden to employers; see shift to interpretation that the community should not subsidize employers
Healthcare

Question 2

Freedom of Religion is Protected In…

Answer 2

UDHR, ICCPR (Article 18) - protects conversion of religion, Gen. Comment 22 (on ICCPR) re: freedom of religion

Question 3

Pluralism

Answer 3

Balance between different religious groups

Question 4

In religion State is responsible to:

Answer 4

1). Create an environment of “societal openness and tolerance”
2). Create a netural environment in interest of ensuring non-discrimination. But state should NOT simply be passive
3). If state religion exists, ensure non-discrimination of those who aren’t members of it
4). Create “reasonable” accommodations (ie., dietary, military, etc.)

Question 5

Bielefeldt

Answer 5

Argument: essential human right of freedom, religion, belief, is in jeopardy. Misrepresentations of these rights and conflation of them often occcur. FREEDOM OF RELIGION IS MISUNDERSTOOD

ICCPR, ICERD, UDHR, General Comment 2022 of ICCPR

• Bielefeldt argues HR protect PEOPLE, not religions
  
  • Protecting freedom of religion is grounded in “respecting the self-understanding of human beings” (2013, p. 37)
    example of Star Wars religion I think
  • Restrictions on religious practice are acceptable only if they are:
    1). Legally prescribed
    2). Clearly needed to protect public safety, health, etc.
    3). Proportionate
    4). Non-discriminatory

Question 6

Key sources of tension in religion HR:

Answer 6

Anti-defamation” lawss that threaten people who dissent
Protecting religious identity at the expense of personal choice/autonomy
Religious identity isn’t fixed; it constantly evolves
Peaceful competition and intellectual controversies are integral to the evolution of religion

Question 7

Rabat Plan of Action

Answer 7

Soft Law. On the prohibition of advocacy of national, racial, or religious hatred that constitutes encitement to discrimination, hosility, or violence

Question 8

Faith for Rights Framework

Answer 8

OHCHR created in 2017 for policy action and outreach

Question 9

Beruit Declaration

Answer 9

Soft law. Calls for:
○ …identification of common ground among all religions and belief
○ …to uphold dignity and worth of all human beings

Question 10

Konstantinos & MacNaughton

Answer 10

Boston as an HR City.
Argument: there is a knowledge gap about Boston being an HR City and thus is not having a big impact on human rights in the city.

ICCPR, ICESCR, CAT, ICERD

Qualitative Interviews: more anthropological and interviewed people working with human rights (members of city staff, UMass Boston faculty, NGO representatives)

Question 11

Crawford

Answer 11

Analyzes ILO 182 (aims to eliminate the worst forms of child labor, slavery, trafficking, hazardous work) and proposes that it has the potential to make change, but takes more than just ratification. Has to work in conjunction with government systems and others.

The article highlights examples like the garment industry in Bangladesh, where poorly planned interventions initially worsened children’s conditions but later led to successful education and support programs.

Targeted projects should focus on hazardous sectors, ensuring meaningful participation of children and their families in designing interventions.
(RIGHTS BASED APPROACH)

Multi-level, policy integration focus.

Question 12

Sok & Neubeck

Answer 12

HR local is possible. CEDAW, ICERD.

Focus on experiences of HR cities in San Francisco, NYC, and Eugene OR

Although the U.S. has played a leading role in shaping global human rights frameworks, it has neglected to fully implement these standards domestically. The authors highlight the importance of grassroots efforts in bridging this gap, using the example of San Francisco’s pioneering adoption of a local ordinance based on the UN’s Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW).

Key points include:

U.S. Hypocrisy on Human Rights: Despite promoting human rights abroad, the U.S. selectively ratifies international treaties, failing to address systemic issues such as racial discrimination, gender inequality, and violations like torture and the shackling of women during childbirth domestically.
San Francisco’s CEDAW Ordinance: Activists in San Francisco successfully implemented a local version of CEDAW in 1998. This ordinance proactively addresses gender and racial discrimination by requiring systemic reviews of city agencies, mandating gender analyses, and integrating human rights principles into public policies.
Impacts of the Ordinance: The ordinance led to significant changes, such as family-friendly work policies, requirements for gender equity in city-funded projects, and the collection of disaggregated data to identify patterns of discrimination.
Inspirations for Broader Movements: San Francisco’s example has inspired similar initiatives in cities like New York and Eugene, Oregon, demonstrating the potential for localized human rights implementation to drive change nationwide.
The authors conclude that local actions can catalyze a stronger U.S. human rights movement, emphasizing the importance of adapting international principles to local contexts to create equitable and sustainable communities.

Question 13

Dennis

Answer 13

Argument: law advances through compromise.

discusses two optional protocols to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), both adopted in May 2000. These protocols address the involvement of children in armed conflict and the sale of children, child prostitution, and child pornography.

Key Points:
Purpose of the Protocols:
The first protocol limits the involvement of children under 18 in armed conflicts, emphasizing protection from conscription and direct participation in hostilities.
The second protocol targets the sexual exploitation of children, including trafficking, prostitution, and pornography, establishing legal obligations for states to criminalize such activities.
Protocol on Armed Conflict:
Raises the minimum age for compulsory recruitment and direct participation in hostilities to 18.
Allows voluntary recruitment at 16 but imposes safeguards to ensure informed consent and prevent exploitation.
Highlights the need for rehabilitation programs for child soldiers and stricter international measures to prevent their use.
Protocol on Sexual Exploitation:
Requires states to criminalize and penalize acts like selling children, exploiting them for sex, and creating or distributing child pornography.
Emphasizes cross-border cooperation to combat trafficking and other transnational crimes.
Calls for support systems for victims, including legal, social, and psychological assistance.
Implementation and Challenges:
The protocols rely on ratifying states to align domestic laws with these international standards.
Enforcement mechanisms depend on international cooperation, transparency in reporting, and monitoring by the CRC Committee.
U.S. Involvement:
The U.S. played a significant role in drafting these protocols, despite its earlier reservations about the CRC itself.
This involvement demonstrates a shift towards addressing global issues affecting children, while still navigating domestic political concerns.
Significance and Limitations:
The protocols represent critical steps in strengthening child protection globally.
However, challenges remain in ensuring universal ratification, effective implementation, and addressing root causes like poverty and lack of education.
Dennis concludes that these protocols enhance the legal framework for protecting children’s rights but underscores the need for robust international cooperation and national commitment to achieve their goals.

Question 14

Cowan & Billaud

Answer 14

UPR less successful. References UDHR, ICCPR
Evidence is specific case studies through participant observation (ground yourself with group, observe, gently participating, watch what is going on); Interviews in the form of casual conversations

Reporting lacks broader historical/cultural context; states are considered in isolation

* Recommendations on HR may clash with recommendations on fiscal austerity (from World Bank or other entities)
* Implementing recommendations is often contingent on \$\$
	○ Concerns related to ICESCR and the capacity of countries to do things if they don't have money
	○ Progressive realization using maximum extent of available resources, non-discrimination, if I am a rich state and signed ICESCR I am obliged to give development assistance to make it possible for other states to do the same
* UPR doesn't address urgent situations outside the countries under review
	○ Has been addressed in some ways, especially looking at the reporting during the pandemic where States would recognize the the importance and effect of COVID-19
* Difficulty of interpreting aims and outcomes of two-level games (Putnam 1988)
	○ Think about how people respond to this UPR process is in part how they are interacting on the international stage, but also what that will do for the perception of those in the home country
	○ Working in an international sphere, but also to pacify at home
* Delegates argue "We cannot totally ignore what some countries are doing abroad" (2015, 1186) nor should we ignore the embedded nature of historical/cultural linkages

Question 15

Only two parts of human rights system where people other than state actors are the ones in charge

Answer 15

ILO
Special Mechanisms for Indigenous People

Question 16

Indigenous Peoples working definition

Answer 16

○ Group descended from original inhabitants
○ Which has preserved its ancestors’ customs differently from the state
Has non-dominant status
○ “…the inheritors and practitioners of unique cultures and ways of relating to other people and to the environment…
○ …have retained social, cultural, economic and political characteristics that are distinct from those of the dominant societies in which they live…
○ Share common problems related to the protection of their rights ass distinct peoples…
○ …are arguably among the most disadvantaged and vulnerable groups of people in the world today…”

Question 17

Berger

Answer 17

Argument: struggle for self-determination is pitted against citizenship rights

examines the complex and paradoxical relationship between U.S. citizenship and Indigenous sovereignty. Berger argues that while citizenship has been historically used to undermine Indigenous self-determination, it has also become a tool for asserting and protecting Indigenous rights.

Key Arguments:
Historical Context:
The U.S. government imposed citizenship on Native peoples in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, often against their will, as part of assimilation policies aimed at eroding tribal sovereignty and cultural distinctiveness.
Acts such as the Dawes Act (1887) linked citizenship to land allotment, forcing Indigenous individuals to accept citizenship as a precondition for receiving land, thereby weakening collective landholdings.
The Dual Nature of Citizenship:
While U.S. citizenship was used to strip tribes of their sovereignty, it also granted Indigenous individuals certain rights, such as access to courts and constitutional protections.
This dual nature creates an “anomaly”: Indigenous peoples are simultaneously citizens of the United States and members of sovereign tribal nations.
Contemporary Implications:
Citizenship has become a resource for Indigenous groups to assert rights against federal and state encroachments.
Legal recognition of dual citizenship allows Indigenous peoples to navigate and challenge colonial structures while maintaining tribal identities and sovereignty.
Citizenship and Sovereignty:
Berger highlights the tension between citizenship and Indigenous sovereignty. While citizenship implies integration into the U.S. polity, Indigenous sovereignty asserts a separate, self-governing identity.
Courts and lawmakers have grappled with this tension, often inconsistently, reflecting the ongoing struggle to balance individual rights as U.S. citizens with collective tribal rights.
Anomalous but Empowering:
Berger concludes that although the imposition of citizenship was a colonial act, Indigenous peoples have redefined it as a platform to fight for self-determination and rights recognition. The “anomaly” of dual citizenship underscores the unique status of Indigenous nations within the U.S. constitutional framework.
Berger’s chapter challenges conventional views of citizenship by showing how Indigenous peoples have navigated and transformed its implications to sustain their sovereignty and cultural identity.

Question 18

Indigenous Rights do not map simply onto conventional HR law

Answer 18

Individual Rights: claim by someONE on someone for something, essential to human dignity

Group Rights: rights possessed by groups as a whole instead of individuals

The Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples centers on collective rights - which are contentious in theory and practice

Question 19

International Law on cultural rights

Answer 19

• Indigenous and other minority groups require special protection in the exercise of their cultural rights:
  
  • UDHR, Article 22: right to realization of “economic, social, and cultural rights” - for ALL people
  • UDHR, Article 27: right to freely participate in cultural life; right to protection of “moral and material interests” of productions of which he/she is author - for ALL people
  • ICESCR, Article 25: echoes UDHR
    ICCPR, Article 27: safeguards the right of “ethnic, religious, or linguistic minorities… to enjoy their own culture, to profess and practice their own religion, or to use their own language”

Question 20

Unique dimensions of Indigenous Rights

Answer 20

• Broader decolonization struggles (1950s-70s) lent force to indigenous claim-making
  
  • Indigenous advocacy ran parallel to advocacy of other minority group in Civil Rights era (1950s-60s)
  • Indigenous struggles were/are similar, but distinct in key ways:
    ○ Sovereignty is central to indigenous claim-making
    ○ Resistance to asssimilation (ie., move away from trusteeship model)
    ○ Emphasis on self-determination and distinctive rights

Question 21

Resistance on the Route Toward Legal Change for Indigenous Peoples

Answer 21

• 2007: UN General Assembly adopts Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. 143 member states voiced support; USA did not
  
  • Only USA, Canada, New Zealand, and Australia initially did NOT endorse
  • 2010: President Obama announced a shift in US position, in support of the DRIP, following extensive review by US Federal agencies
    All four countries (USA; Canada; New Zealand; Australia) thereafter supported DRIP

Question 22

Challenge(s) with Indigenous Rights

Answer 22

• Balance group AND individual rights
  
  • Ensure special protections and rights afforded to indigenouss people foster equality between them and the rest of society
  • 1992 Nobel Peace Prize for Rigoberta Menchu Tum (Quiche Mayan of Guatemala) for efforts to promote “ethno-cultural reconciliation based on respect for the rights of indigenous peoples”

Question 23

Nayzul Declaration

Answer 23

soft law, supported by Nobel Institute, calls for multi-stakeholder dialogue on indigenous rights

Question 24

Universal Periodic Review (UPR)

Answer 24

• Problem with a lack of HR oversight
  ○ Created in 2006 as a part of reform of UN HR system
  
  • Engages ALL member states
    ○ Lottery system that all member states must go through
  • Seeks to avoid “double standards” and “politicization” of criticism
  • Extremely carefully scripted rules of participation aimed at ensuring equality
  • Not aimed at “shame and blame”
    Instead, aims to “educate” states to improve performance over time

Process
* Randomly selected countries
* Strict rules of procedure for reporting, questions, and response
* Delegations of diplomats and line-staff from key ministries participate in the case of wealthier countries
* Much smaller delegations among poor countries
* Role for NGOs in sharing evidence

Core elements of process:
* National report by State under review (SUR)
* Summary of input from UN agencies, treaty bodies, and special procedures (e.g., rapporteurs, et alia)
* Stakeholders summary (ie., input from civil society groups)
Action-oriented recommendations

Question 25

Evolution of HR Cities

Answer 25

• First emerged conceptually in early 1993 after UN World Conference on HR
  
  • NGOs globally have been the catalyst for action: Peoples’ Decade for HR Action
  • Early examples: Rosario, Argentina (1997)
  • Implementation of HR law is national-level, but cities can pass ordinances and frame policy and conduct evaluation aligned with HR principles
  • See increasing synergy with UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) as companion framework for action
    ○ 17 of them and they often overlap with goals that HR cities are trying to achieve
    Supposed to be achieved by 2030

Question 26

Challenges with HR Cities

Answer 26

• Theoretical:
  ○ Many legal traditions focus on redress for harms ex-post (after the fact)
  ○ Discrimination is often intersectional in nature (ie., includes gender-based and racial discrimination, as well as other forms)
  
  • Practical:
    ○ HR-based approaches to policymaking employ proactive approach to eliminating discrimination AND redressing it, when it occurs
    ○ Need for Disaggregated Data
    § Difficult to collect good data that’s disaggregated
    § AKA separate by different demographical things like race, disability, age, etc.