From Paradox to Subsidiarity: The United States and Human Rights Treaty Bodies

doi:10.1017/CBO9780511819759.009

8 - From Paradox to Subsidiarity: The United States and Human Rights Treaty Bodies

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 June 2012

Tara J. Melish

Edited by

Cesare P. R. Romano

Show author details

Cesare P. R. Romano: Affiliation:
Loyola Marymount University, California

Book contents

Get access

Summary

In the battle for democracy and human rights, words matter, but what we do matters much more.

It is frequently said that the United States has a paradoxical human rights policy. On the one hand, the United States embraces human rights principles as a founding national ideology and has supported the enhancement of human rights and democracy as a core premise of its foreign policy since the end of World War II, when it played a leading role in birthing the international human rights regime. Indeed, the promotion of human rights and democracy abroad is a central motivating tenet of U.S. foreign policy, manifested in the nation's extensive foreign assistance commitments, political and financial support of international human rights bodies, linking of bilateral aid to human rights improvements, and annual reporting on the human rights situation of 194 nations of the world. National public opinion polls, moreover, suggest that roughly eighty percent of Americans believe that human rights inhere in every human being, whether the government formally recognizes those rights or not. Equal numbers express not only their support for U.S. ratification of human rights treaties but also their belief that international supervision over those treaty commitments, by a court or other independent body, is necessary.

Yet despite strong external and internal human rights commitments, the United States has appeared to flinch, even recoil, when it comes to direct domestic application of human rights treaty norms, especially as those norms are interpreted by international supervisory bodies.

Type: Chapter
Information: The Sword and the Scales
The United States and International Courts and Tribunals
, pp. 210 - 296

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511819759.009 [Opens in a new window]

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Print publication year: 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Moravcsik, Andrew, “The Paradox of U.S. Human Rights Policy,” in Ignatieff, Michael, ed., American Exceptionalism and Human Rights (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2005), 147–97Google Scholar

Glendon, Mary Ann, A World Made New: Eleanor Roosevelt and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (New York: Random House, 2001)Google Scholar

Carozza, Paolo G., Subsidiarity as a Structural Principle of International Human Rights Law, 97 Am. J. Int'l L.38, 38 n.1 (2003)CrossRef Google Scholar

Bickel, Alexander, The Least Dangerous Branch 112 (Bobbs-Merrill 1962)Google Scholar

Hathaway, Oona A., Do Human Rights Treaties Make a Difference?, 111 Yale L.J.1935 (2002)CrossRef Google Scholar

Bermann, George A., Taking Subsidiarity Seriously: Federalism in the European Community and the United States, 94 Colum. L. Rev.332 (1994)CrossRef Google Scholar

Vause, W. Gary, The Subsidiarity Principle in European Union Law – American Federalism Compared, 27 Case W. Res. J. Int'l L.61 (1995)Google Scholar

Neuman, Gerald L., Subsidiarity, Harmonization, and Their Values: Convergence and Divergence in Europe and the United States, 2 Colum J. Eur. L.573 (1996)Google Scholar

Coglianese, Cary and Nicolaidis, Kalypso, “Securing Subsidiarity: The Institutional Design of Federalism in the United States and Europe,” in The Federal Vision: Legitimacy and Levels of Governance in the United States and the European Union (Nicolaidis, K. & Howse, R., ed., New York: Oxford University Press, 2001)Google Scholar

MacCormick, Neil, Questioning Sovereignty: Law, State, and Nation in the European Commonwealth151–55 (New York: Oxford University Press, 2000)Google Scholar

Swaine, Edward T., Subsidiarity and Self-Interest: Federalism at the European Court of Justice, 41 Harv. Int'l L. J.1 (2000)Google Scholar

Sander, Florian, Subsidiarity Infringements before the European Court of Justice: Futile Interference with Politics or a Substantial Step Towards EU Federalism, 12 Colum. J. Eur. L.517 (2006)Google Scholar

Linnan, J. E., Subsidiarity, Collegiality, Catholic Diversity, and Their Relevance to Apostolic Visitations, 49 The Jurist399, 403 (1989)Google Scholar

Shelton, Dinah, “Subsidiarity, Democracy and Human Rights,” in Broadening the Frontiers of Human Rights: Essays in Honour of Asbjorn Eide43 (Gomien, Donna ed., Oslo: Scandinavian University Press, 1993)Google Scholar

Vischer, Robert K., Subsidiarity as a Principle of Governance: Beyond Devolution, 35 Ind. L. Rev.103 (2001)Google Scholar

Bradley, Curtis A., The Treaty Power and American Federalism, 97 Mich. L. Rev.390 (1998)CrossRef Google Scholar

Bradley, Curtis A. and Goldsmith, Jack L., Treaties, Human Rights, and Conditional Consent, 149 U. Pa. L. Rev.399, 468 (2000)CrossRef Google Scholar

Goldsmith, Jack, Should International Human Rights Law Trump U.S. Domestic Law? 1 Chi. J. Int'l L.327, 338–39 (2000)Google Scholar

Melish, Tara J., “Inter-American Court of Human Rights: Beyond Progressivity,” in Langford, Malcolm, ed., Social Rights Jurisprudence: Emerging Trends in Comparative and International Law (New York: Cambridge University Press 2008)Google Scholar

Slaughter, Anne-Marie, A Liberal Theory of International Law, 94 ASIL Proc.240, 246 (2000)Google Scholar

Sunstein, Cass R., The Second Bill of Rights: FDR's Unfinished Revolution and Why We Need it More than Ever (Basic Books 2004)Google Scholar

Forbath, William E., Constitutional Welfare Rights: A History, Critique and Reconstruction, 69 Fordham L. Rev.1821, 1823 (2001)Google Scholar

Forbath, William E., Not So Simple Justice: Frank Michelman on Social Rights, 1969–Present, 39 Tulsa L. Rev.597, 612 (2004)Google Scholar

Holmes, Stephen and Sunstein, Cass R., The Cost of Rights: Why Liberty Depends on Taxes (W.W. Norton 1999)Google Scholar

Melish, Tara J., Rethinking the “Less as More” Thesis: Supranational Litigation of Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights in the Americas, 39 NYU J. Int'l L. & Pol.171 (2006)Google Scholar

Swaine, Edward, Unsigning, 55 Stan. L. Rev.2061 (2003)Google Scholar

Hartmann, Hauke, U.S. Human Rights Policy under Carter and Reagan, 1977-1981, 23 Hum. Rts. Q.402, 417 (2001)CrossRef Google Scholar

Mauro, Tony, “Scalia Tells Congress to Stay Out of High Court Business,” Legal Times, May 19, 2006Google Scholar

Jackson, Vicki, Constitutional Comparisons: Convergence, Resistance, Engagement, 119 Harv. L. Rev.109 (2005)Google Scholar

Calabresi, Steven G. and Zimdahl, Stephani Dotson, The Supreme Court and Foreign Sources of Law: Two Hundred Years of Practice and the Juvenile Death Penalty Decision, 47 Wm. & Mary L. Rev.743 (2005)Google Scholar

Cleveland, Sarah H., Our International Constitution, 31 Yale J. Int'l L.1 (2006)Google Scholar

Johnston, David, “New Judiciary Subcommittee Is to Focus on Civil Liberties,” New York Times, Dec. 14, 2006, A33Google Scholar

Hakimi, Monica, The Media as Participant in the International Legal Process, 16 Duke J. Comp. & Int'l L.24 (2006)Google Scholar

Charnovitz, Steve, The ILO Convention on Freedom of Association and Its Future in the United States, 102 Am. J. Int'l L.90, 92 (2008)Google Scholar

Alston, Philip, U.S. Ratification of the Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights: The Need for an Entirely New Strategy, 84 Am. J. Int'l L.365, 370 (1990)CrossRef Google Scholar

Koh, Harold Hongju, A United States Human Rights Policy for the 21st Century, 46 St. Louis U. L.J.293, 308 (2002)Google Scholar

Melish, Tara J., “The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights: Defending Social Rights through Case-Based Petitions,” in Langford, Malcolm, ed., Social Rights Jurisprudence: Emerging Trends in Comparative and International Law (Cambridge University Press, 2008)Google Scholar

Dudziak, Mary L., Cold War Civil Rights: Race and the Image of American Democracy (Princeton University Press, 2000)Google Scholar

Anderson, Carol, Eyes off the Prize: The United Nations and the African American Struggle for Human Rights, 1944–1955 (Cambridge University Press, 2003)Google Scholar

Morgenthau, Hans, Politics Among Nations: The Struggle for Power and Peace (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1948)Google Scholar

Waltz, Kenneth, Theory of International Politics (McGraw-Hill 1979)Google Scholar

Goldsmith, Jack & Posner, Eric, The Limits of International Law (Oxford University Press, 2005)Google Scholar

Koh, Harold Hongju, Why Do Nations Obey International Law, 106 Yale L.J.2599, 2649 (1997)CrossRef Google Scholar

Keohane, Robert O., After Hegemony: Cooperation and Discord in the World Political Economy (Princeton University Press, 1984)Google Scholar

Guzman, Andrew T., A Compliance-Based Theory of International Law, 90 Cal. L. Rev.1823 (2002)CrossRef Google Scholar

Koh, Harold Hongju, “Why America Should Ratify the Women's Rights Treaty (CEDAW),” 34 Case W. Res. J. Int'l L.263, 269 (2002)Google Scholar

Hathaway, Oona, Do Human Rights Treaties Make a Difference?, 111 Yale L. J.1935 (2002)CrossRef Google Scholar

Lewis, Neil, “Justice Dept. under Obama Is Preparing for Doctrinal Shift in Policies of Bush Years,” New York Times, Feb. 2, 2009, at A14Google Scholar

Satterthwaite, Margaret L., Rendered Meaningless: Extraordinary Rendition and the Rule of Law, 75 Geo. Wash. L. Rev.1333 (2007)Google Scholar

Balkin, Jack M., “Brown as Icon,” in Balkin, ed., What “Brown v. Board of Education” Should Have Said5 (NYU Press, 2001)Google Scholar

Fleming, William, Danger to America: The Draft Covenant on Human Rights, 37 A.B.A. Journal739, 794–99 (1951)Google Scholar

Holman, Frank E., International Proposals Affecting So-Called Human Rights, 14 Law & Contemp. Probs.479, 483 (1949CrossRef Google Scholar

Eilperin, Juliet, “New Drive Afoot to Pass Equal Rights Amendment,” Washington Post, Mar. 28, 2007, A1, A4Google Scholar

Kennedy, David W., The International Human Rights Movement: Part of the Problem? 15 Harv. Hum. Rts. J.99 (2001)Google Scholar

Goldsmith, Jack, Should International Human Rights Law Trump U.S. Domestic Law? 1 Chi. J. Int'l L.327 (2000)Google Scholar

Brennan, Jr. William J., State Constitutions and the Protection of Individual Rights, 90 Harv. L. Rev.489–504 (1977)CrossRef Google Scholar

Lozner, Stacy Laira, Diffusion of Local Regulatory Innovations: The San Francisco CEDAW Ordinance and the New York City Human Rights Initiative, 104 Colum. L. Rev.768 (2004)CrossRef Google Scholar

Koh, Harold Hongju, International Law as Part of Our Law, 98 Am. J. Int'l L.43, 43–45 (2004)CrossRef Google Scholar

Neuman, Gerald L., The Uses of International Law in Constitutional Interpretation, 98 Am. J. Int'l L.82, 83–84) (2004)CrossRef Google Scholar

Jackson, Vicki, Constitutional Dialogue and Human Dignity: States and Transnational Constitutional Discourse, 65 Mont. L. Rev.15, 21–27 (2004)Google Scholar

Davis, Martha F., The Spirit of Our Times: State Constitutions and International Human Rights, 30 N.Y.U. Rev. L. & Soc. Change359 (2006)Google Scholar

Smith, Wesley J., “A Worthwhile U.N. Initiative! A Welcome Defense of the Disabled from an Unlikely Organization,” Weekly Standard, Jan. 29, 2007, Vol. 12, Issue 19Google Scholar

Justesen, Tracey R. and Justesen, Troy R., An Analysis of the Development and Adoption of the United Nations Convention Recognizing the Rights of Individuals with Disabilities: Why the United States Refuses to Sign this UN Convention, 14(2) Hum. Rts. Brief36, 39–41 (2007)Google Scholar

Melish, Tara J., The UN Disability Convention: Historic Process, Strong Prospects, and Why the U.S. Should Ratify, 14(2) Hum. Rts. Brief37, 46 (2007)Google Scholar

Reisman, W. Michael, Sovereignty and Human Rights in Contemporary International Law, 84 Am. J. Int'l L.866, 869 (1990)CrossRef Google Scholar

Reisman, W. Michael, Unilateral Action and the Transformations of the World Constitutive Process: The Special Problem of Humanitarian Intervention, 11 Eur. J. Int'l L.3, 9–10 (2000)CrossRef Google Scholar

Cogan, Jacob Katz, Noncompliance and the International Rule of Law, 31 Yale J. Int'l L.189, 191 (2006)Google Scholar

Rehnquist, William H., All the Laws but One: Civil Rights in Wartime (Random House, 1998)Google Scholar

Bradley, Curtis A., The Treaty Power and American Federalism, 97 Mich. L. Rev.390 (1998)CrossRef Google Scholar

Alford, Roger P., Misusing Sources to Interpret the Constitution, 98 Am. J. Int'l L.57, 59 (2004)CrossRef Google Scholar

Bradley, Curtis A., International Delegations, the Structural Constitution, and Non-Self-Execution, 55 Stan. L. Rev.1557, 1558 (2002–03)Google Scholar

McGinnis, John O. and Somin, Ilya, Should International Law Be Part of Our Law? 59 Stan. L. Rev.1175 (2007)Google Scholar

Yourow, Howard Charles, The Margin of Appreciation Doctrine in the Dynamics of European Human Rights Jurisprudence (Utrecht: Martinus Nijhoff, 1996)Google Scholar

Reisman, William M., Necessary and Proper: Executive Competence to Interpret Treaties, 15 Yale J. Int'l L.316, 323–30 (1990)Google Scholar

Bell, Koren L., Note, From Laggard to Leader: Canadian Lessons on a Role for U.S. States in Making and Implementing Human Rights Treaties, 5 Yale Hum. Rts. & Dev. L.J.255 (2002)Google Scholar

Saunders, Kenneth L. & Bang, Hyo Eun (April), “A Historical Perspective on U.S. Human Rights Commissions,” Harvard Univ. John F. Kennedy Sch. of Gov't Executive Session on Human Rights Commissions & Criminal Justice, No. 3 (June 2007), at 11Google Scholar