Righting Wrongs or Wronging Rights? The United States and Human Rights Post-September 11

Anthea Roberts
{"title":"Righting Wrongs or Wronging Rights? The United States and Human Rights Post-September 11","authors":"Anthea Roberts","doi":"10.1093/EJIL/15.4.721","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"What impact are US policies having on the fabric of international human rights law in the wake of September 11? This paper examines this question from three largely independent angles. First, US policies embody discrimination against non-citizens and between non-citizens, which is pushing international law to clarify the rights of non-citizens and the relationship between such discrimination and discrimination based on race, nationality and religion. Second, in assessing the impact of US policies, we must consider not only the actions of the United States but also the reactions of the rest of the world. When we broaden our focus in this way, interesting divisions emerge both between states and within states, which are relevant to the formation of customary international human rights law. Finally, the premise that the international terrorist threat is `novel` has been used by the United States to justify picking and choosing between existing laws and to claim that there are legal vacuums in international law. This raises questions about the validity of taking an a la carte approach to international law and whether there are ways to protect against similar legal vacuums arising in the future.","PeriodicalId":202713,"journal":{"name":"SRPN: Legal Issues (Topic)","volume":"10 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2004-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"21","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"SRPN: Legal Issues (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/EJIL/15.4.721","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 21

Abstract

What impact are US policies having on the fabric of international human rights law in the wake of September 11? This paper examines this question from three largely independent angles. First, US policies embody discrimination against non-citizens and between non-citizens, which is pushing international law to clarify the rights of non-citizens and the relationship between such discrimination and discrimination based on race, nationality and religion. Second, in assessing the impact of US policies, we must consider not only the actions of the United States but also the reactions of the rest of the world. When we broaden our focus in this way, interesting divisions emerge both between states and within states, which are relevant to the formation of customary international human rights law. Finally, the premise that the international terrorist threat is `novel` has been used by the United States to justify picking and choosing between existing laws and to claim that there are legal vacuums in international law. This raises questions about the validity of taking an a la carte approach to international law and whether there are ways to protect against similar legal vacuums arising in the future.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
纠正错误还是纠正权利?911事件后的美国与人权
911之后,美国的政策对国际人权法的结构有什么影响?本文从三个基本独立的角度来考察这个问题。首先,美国的政策体现了对非公民和非公民之间的歧视,这推动了国际法澄清非公民的权利以及这种歧视与种族、国籍和宗教歧视的关系。其次,在评估美国政策的影响时,我们不仅要考虑美国的行动,还要考虑世界其他国家的反应。当我们以这种方式扩大我们的焦点时,国家之间和国家内部都出现了有趣的分歧,这些分歧与习惯国际人权法的形成有关。最后,国际恐怖主义威胁是“新奇的”这一前提被美国用来证明在现有法律之间进行选择的正当性,并声称国际法中存在法律真空。这就提出了一些问题,即对国际法采取单点办法是否有效,以及是否有办法防止今后出现类似的法律真空。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Liability for Climate Damage and Shipping Legal Pluralism, Cultural Values, and Post-Disaster Housing Project in a Philippine Municipality Should Corporations have a Purpose? A Real Option Approach to Sustainable Corporate Tax Behavior Sustainable Competition Policy
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1