Human Rights at Home Blog

Let's Not Erase Women From The Abortion Discussion

By Prof. Margaret Drew, UMass Law School

This is the time that women need allyship.  

Advocates for women cannot afford to be apologists.  In the world of intimate partner violence, advocates found themselves speaking in gender-neutral terms.  This is appropriate when including the high abuse rate suffered by gay men.  Lesbian and trans women are included in the victim population when advocates discuss violence against women.   But when advocates discuss violence against women in heterosexual relationships, they typically begin with this caveat or its equivalency: "While most victims of IPV are women, we acknowledge that men can be victims also."  True enough but the percentage is small. This form of gender "neutrality" is a  significant tool of female gender erasure.  When discussing cisgender male-female relationships, the insistence on using gender-neutral language in IPV discussions is part of the trend to erase women as the primary focus of intimate partner violence in heterosexual violence.  

I am concerned that an even more significant erasure of women is happening as part of the abortion discussion.  The Dobbs decision was an exercise in misogyny.  The majority opinion makes this clear.  The celebration of those with strong religious ties stems from the misogyny of many organized Christian religious sects and their doctrine. When advocates argue that Dobbs was an anti-female decision, trans women are included, as the decision further reduces the status of all women.

The insistence on including references to trans men and others distracts the audience by limiting the discussion to those with uteruses.  This deflects from the focus on the deep hatred of women by oppressive jurists and others who are unwilling to recognize misogyny as the driving issue. Male control of women is the underlying social and cultural problem driving the abortion ruling and restrictive statutes.   

While some trans, non-binary, and other gender-expansive individuals may and do need abortions, the number is a small minority of those needing abortion services in any given year.  While recognizing the numbers may reflect under-reporting, one study reports, "The best approximation, from all known abortion-providing facilities in the United States, estimated that there were between 462 and 530 transgender and nonbinary abortion patients nationwide in 2017."  By contrast, another study by the same organization (Guttmacher) reported that in 2017, "862,320 abortions were provided in clinical settings..."   

The numbers evidence the problem.  If Dobbs discussions were about the procedures of abortion only, then gender language would be inclusive of all with uteruses.  But this discussion is much bigger than that.  This is about the efforts of men, the male state, and religions, to control women beginning when white Europeans arrived in the US.  

Women need the support of trans men and other gender expansive individuals and their organizations to support all women in their anti-discrimination struggles.   Our trans brothers, please stand with women.

New Article: Hidden Burdens: Household Water Bills, “Hard-to Reach” Renters, and Systemic Racism

Martha F. Davis, Hidden Burdens: Household Water Bills, “Hard-to Reach” Renters, and Systemic Racism, 52 Seton Hall Law Review 1461 (2022). Excerpted below (citations removed).

        “It is not just far away locales where water access is wielded in this way. In the United States, Black and Brown people often bear the brunt of such policies and practices. For example, for decades, a predominantly African American neighborhood in Zanesville, Ohio, was denied a connection to the city’s water system—an abuse of power that jeopardized public health and demeaned the community until a 2002 civil rights complaint and a federal lawsuit forced a change. In Detroit, Michigan, beginning in 2014, tens of thousands of low income people, primarily Black, found their water shut off for nonpayment; many of those affected speculated that the city’s goal was not merely to collect outstanding funds, but to compel low income residents to leave their homes and make way for new, more lucrative (and whiter) development.

        Sometimes the control of water—and the racial impacts of that control—are more subtle, reflected in administrative inaction, buried in complex bureaucratic structures, or even framed as positive environmental initiatives. The diffusion of responsibilities for water administration between different levels of government can further obscure discriminatory impacts that would be more visible in a unified system. Neutral-sounding terminology may also hide the racial realities.

        This Article argues that the complexities of household water billing combined with the indifference of utilities and government authorities to the needs of “hard-to-reach” water consumers—primarily renters in multi-family dwellings—have left many low income, disproportionately minority tenants, excluded from programs designed to help with rising water and wastewater expenses.”

Event 7/28: Climate Change, Equity and Just Transitions: A Legal Perspective

On July 28, 2022, starting at 1:30pm EDT, the American Bar Association will host a webinar to address the economic, political and legal issues encountered, both as opportunities and obstacles, in the movement to ensure just transitions as we progress to achieving net zero carbon emissions. It will include discussions of the commitments incumbent on wealthy countries to provide resources that enable developing countries to mitigate and adapt to coming environmental challenges; and it will explore the obligations of governments, the private sector and international financial institutions to provide the means for achieving decarbonizing objectives in ways that are consistent with environmental justice, international human rights and labor standards and that support those who are most vulnerable to environmental impacts and immediate climate threats such as sea-level rise, extreme weather, and biodiversity loss.

Click here for more information and to register for this webinar. The ABA does charge for this webinar, but provides a discounted rate for ABA members and zero charge for the ABA Section on Environment members.

Event 7/26: Privacy After Dobbs Overruled Roe

On Tuesday July 26, 2022, starting at 12:00 pm EDT, the American Bar Association will host a webinar on the major privacy implications of Dobbs overruling Roe. A distinguished panel will address what's next for other precedents and privacy rights, how state and federal legislators may respond or have responded, the implications for enforcement of privacy protections or of abortion restrictions or bans, and the implications for consumer use of apps and the information apps collect.

Moderator:

• David Turetsky – University of Albany

Speakers:

• Michael Gerhardt – University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill
• Jessica Rich – Kelley Drye
• Emma Roth – National Advocates for Pregnant Women

Click here to register and for more information. The ABA will charge for this webinar, but provides a discounted rate for ABA members.

New Article: Professional Indifference?: How One Case Improves Protection for Immigrant Children in United States Detention Centers

Caitlin Fernandez Zamora, Professional Indifference?: How One Case Improves Protection for Immigrant Children in United States Detention Centers, 20 Nw. J. Hum. Rts. 239 (2022). Abstract below.

This Article discusses the case Doe 4 ex rel. Lopez v. Shenandoah Valley Juvenile Center Commission. This case was a class action brought by unaccompanied immigrant children against the Shenandoah Valley Juvenile Center Commission under § 1983 protection for adequate medical care. The plaintiff class alleged that, among other things, the Commission failed to (i) provide adequate mental health care due to punitive practices; and (ii) implement trauma-informed care. The plaintiffs were immigrant children who fled their native countries due to harrowing circumstances, many of whom struggled with severe mental illness. The district court granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment regarding the mental health care claim, which the plaintiffs appealed. On appeal, the Fourth Circuit considered which standard should be applied to analyzing a claim regarding the detention center’s level of mental health care. This Article explores the approach and impact of Doe 4, as a case of first impression for the Fourth Circuit and effectively for all circuits with regard to this class of immigrant children. Specifically, this Article discusses whether the majority opinion followed precedent or broke away from it in a way that properly embodies federal law and Constitutional guarantees. This Article also discusses the role of international law in United States courts, particularly related to protections for migrants and children. The Article ultimately concludes that the Fourth Circuit’s decision in Doe 4 was correct and explains why and how it should be further adopted and adapted by other federal courts, to promote an end to the professional indifference that the United States judicial system has normalized with regard to care for juveniles in detention centers.

Event 7/19-7/21: Using global human rights to strengthen anti-racism organizing and resist ongoing retrenchment of democracy and human rights

The U.S. Human Rights Cities Alliance invites you to its 2022 Convening (hybrid): “Using global human rights to strengthen anti-racism organizing and resist ongoing retrenchment of democracy and human rights” on July 19-21, 2022, in Washington DC/ hybrid.    

Co-Sponsor & Host: Thurgood Marshall Civil Rights Center, Howard University School of Law, Washington DC

Leaders of a national network of human rights city organizers will convene in Washington DC July 19-21, 2022 to meet with U.S. officials as part of the current review of U.S. compliance with its obligations under the Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Racial Discrimination (CERD). We will hear from advocates and government officials preparing for the August 10-11 meeting of the UN CERD Committee to assess the U.S. periodic report on compliance with the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination and make recommendations for change. Community advocates will discuss how we can make better use of the UN CERD reviews and other UN processes to advocate for racial justice and the transformation of structural racism in our cities and communities and will share the Civil Society Shadow Reports submitted by various cities as part of this 2022 review. Participants will hear from organizations in Europe, such as the Fundamental Rights Agency and the European Human Rights Cities Network, where the human rights city movement has been flourishing in recent years. We will discuss ways to connect local struggles over racial and environmental justice, reproductive rights, and related concerns with various UN mechanisms such as the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and Universal Periodic Review process (UPR).

A full schedule and zoom registration are available here.

New Article: Defining Sexual Orientation: A Proposal for a New Definition

Andrew Park, Defining Sexual Orientation: A Proposal for a New Definition, Michigan Journal of Gender and Law, Volume 29 (2022). Abstract below.

Laws prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation are becoming more common in all parts of the world. Few of these laws provide useful definitions of the term sexual orientation. As a result, the meaning and impact of these laws remains unclear. This article reviews past and current definitions of sexual orientation according to how well they incorporate current empirical knowledge of sexual orientation, and how their use in human rights laws impacts the dignity, right to equality, and human development of sexual minorities. The Article gives particular attention to the definition of sexual orientation found in the Yogyakarta Principles which has been adopted by a number of jurisdictions throughout the world. Because this definition views sexual orientation through a heteronormative lens, its use restricts sexual freedoms and undermines the dignity of individuals with non-conforming sexual orientations. The Article proposes a multidimensional definition of sexual orientation grounded in current scientific knowledge of how sexual orientation is manifested in the lives of sexual minorities.

July-August 2022 Deadlines: Calls for Inputs by UN Human Rights Mechanisms

The following calls for inputs have been issued by UN Human Rights Mechanisms with deadlines in July-August 2022 and law professors whose practice, research, and/or scholarship touches on these topics may be interested in submission:

Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination – Accepting shadow reports from Civil Society. Deadline July 15, 2022. Email reports to [email protected]. Read more

Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism – Call for inputs: Report on the Impact of Counter-Terrorism on Peacemaking, Peacebuilding, Sustaining Peace, Conflict Prevention and Resolution. Deadline July 15, 2022. Read more. 

Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights – 71st pre sessional working group (17 - 21 October 2022) – call for submissions. Deadline August 8, 2022.  Read more.

Independent Expert on the effects of foreign debt and other related international financial obligations of States on the full enjoyment of all human rights, particularly economic, social and cultural rights – Call for inputs “New study on a proposed non binding set of practical guidelines for efficient asset recovery (HRC resolution 46/11, paragraph 24)” Deadline August 15, 2022. Read more.

Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights –72nd session (26 September - 14 October 2022) – call for submissions. Deadline August 29, 2022. Read more.

Committee on Enforced Disappearances – Call for inputs/comments on the Draft statement on “Non-State actors and enforced disappearances in the context of the Convention of the Protection of all Persons against Enforced Disappearances”. Deadline August 30, 2022. Read more.

Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights – Call for inputs: Draft guidance on Mental Health, Human Rights, and Legislation published jointly by WHO and OHCHR. Deadline August 31, 2022. Read more.

This information was compiled from https://www.ohchr.org/en/calls-for-input-listing.

New Article: The Right to Remain

Timothy E. Lynch, The Right to Remain, Washington International Law Journal, Volume 31 (June 2022) Abstract below.

Article 12.4 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) states, “No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of the right to enter his own country.” Citizens clearly enjoy Article 12.4 rights, but this article demonstrates that this right reaches beyond the citizenry. Using customary methods of treaty interpretation, including reference to the ICCPR’s preparatory works and the jurisprudence of the Human Rights Committee, this article demonstrates that Article 12.4 also forbids States from deporting long-term resident noncitizens—both documented and undocumented—except under the rarest circumstances. As a result, the ICCPR right to remain in one’s own country is a right that should be particularly valuable to the many people in the world who have lived in, and established a relationship with, a country which is not their country of citizenship—including lawful permanent residents, long-term refugees, Dreamers and other long-term undocumented residents, and people born in countries without birthright citizenship. These people cannot be deported from the countries they call home.

The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights Issued Precautionary Measures for Detained Persons in the U.S. on Death Row so far in 2022

By Manni Jandernoa, rising 2L at St. Louis University School of Law

Since the start of 2022, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) has granted precautionary measures for three Americans sentenced with the death penalty who were at “serious and urgent risk of irreparable harm to [their] rights.” When the IACHR grants precautionary measures, the Commission “aims to safeguard the rights at risk “...until the Commission makes an eventual decision on “whether or not there were violations of human rights. In this regard, precautionary measures enable the State concerned to comply with the final recommendations made by the IACHR.” All three Americans who were granted precautionary measures had execution dates set in 2022. The IACHR also continues to maintain its stance in support of the abolition of the death penalty, as explained in their 2011 report.The three precautionary measures are enumerated below:

Resolution No. 12/22 PM 74-22 – Richard Eugene Glossip, United States

The IACHR issued precautionary measures for Richard Eugene Glossip on March 3, 2022. According to the allegations reported in the related press release, Glossip has been held in Oklahoma  for 23 years in solitary confinement on death row. It is further alleged in the press release that Glossip “was not adequately represented during the criminal trials against him,  claiming negligence by his legal defense in not carrying out an exhaustive investigation into the alleged crimes he was charged with, as well as lack of location of witnesses, non-collection of relevant records and documents, and little performance of cross-examination.”

Resolution No. 10/22 PM 1170-21 – Melissa Lucio, United States

Melissa Lucio’s execution date was set in Texas for April 27, 2022. The IACHR issued precautionary measures for Lucio on February 18, 2022, and further issued a press release on April 22, 2022, urging the United States to withdraw her death penalty. At that time, Lucio had been held in solitary confinement for fourteen years. Ultimately, related or not to the IACHR’s actions, the Texas Criminal Court of Appeals granted Lucio a stay of execution. Following the stay of execution, the IACHR issued a press release welcoming the decision. This decision made by the Texas Criminal Court of Appeals also orders the trial court to review four claims to determine whether a new trial should be granted: “that the conviction is based on the use of false and scientifically invalid testimony by the State, that new scientific evidence undermines her conviction, that the State suppressed information favorable to Lucio, and that she is truly innocent.”

Resolution No. 22/22 PM 331-22 – Clarence Wayne Dixon, United States

Clarence Wayne Dixon was issued precautionary measures on May 10, 2022, with an execution date set for May 11, 2022, in Arizona. The related press release recounted the allegations that Dixon is “a person of Navajo origin, who suffers from multiple mental and physical health conditions, such as paranoid type schizophrenia, major depressive disorder, glaucoma with secondary blindness, among others.” Further, it was alleged in the request for precautionary measures that Dixon faced “violations of several of the American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man particularly in relation to access to justice, due process, and adequate defense.”  Before the IACHR could reach a decision on the allegations, Dixon was executed on May 11^th, 2022, prompting a  from the IACHR. condemnation from the IACHR.

Dobbs and Dignity

The Oxford Human Rights Hub recently published an article by Prof. Rachel Wechsler called Dobbs and Dignity.  The article addresses this fundamental human rights concept of dignity in regard to the decision Dobbs v  Jackson Women's Health Org.  Prof. Wechsler will be joining the University of Missouri School of Law this fall.

The opening paragraph reads:

The principle of human dignity lies at the heart of human rights law. Foundational human rights instruments, including the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, recognise the dignity of human beings as a fundamental value and set out rights aimed at promoting it. The precise meaning of dignity is contested, but one commonly advanced understanding of the concept is the capacity to make “self-defining and self-governing choices.” The U.S. Supreme Court has invoked this conception of dignity in past decisions upholding Roe v Wade, the 1973 case that established a constitutional right to abortion until foetal viability. In Thornburgh v American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the Court recognised that a woman’s decision regarding whether to terminate a pregnancy is “basic to [her] individual dignity and autonomy. Though partially overruling Thornburgh by permitting additional state regulation of abortion so long as it does not impose an undue burden upon a woman’s right to terminate a pre-viability pregnancy, the plurality in Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v Casey reiterated that a woman’s ability to choose whether to continue her pregnancy is “central to personal dignity and autonomy”. The pairing of “autonomy” with “dignity” underscores the Court’s (former) understanding that women are capable of self-determination and interfering with this capacity will significantly and unjustifiably compromise their dignity. In permitting states to ban abortion, Dobbs undermines women’s dignity and autonomy by preventing women from controlling the course of their own reproductive lives.

You may read the entire article here.  

New Article: Localizing Human Rights in Cities

Tamar Ezer, Localizing Human Rights in Cities, Southern California Review of Law and Social Justice (Winter 2022).  Abstract below.

Today, we live in a world where norms can all too easily disintegrate.  Moreover, our realities are increasingly splintered with individually tailored social media, news sources, and search engines.  International human rights can provide a needed moral and legal compass, connecting us to global conversations and standards.  At the same time, to be meaningful, these standards must be localized and interpreted at community level.

Over the last two decades, cities throughout the world have espoused international human rights in various forms.  This development has caught on in the United States with close to a dozen self-designated human rights cities and a vibrant “Cities for CEDAW” movement, focused on protection of women’s rights.  This article probes this growing phenomenon and argues that local human rights implementation is a critical frontier, enabling a human rights approach to governance, strengthening participation and equality.  Closer to communities, human rights cities can democratize rights and move beyond the citizen construct at national level to embrace all inhabitants.  Cities also provide a critical vehicle to negotiate the inherent tension between the universality of human rights and respect for cultural and regional diversity.  Moreover, cities are particularly important as human rights actors in the US context, where federalism limits the reach of international treaties to address issues touching on criminal law, social welfare, and family relations, critical to women’s rights.  Cities can thus play a crucial role in realizing women’s equality, addressing cultural norms, jurisdictional barriers, and disparate impacts. The article further provides recommendations for better engagement with cities as human rights actors, currently in its infancy, at international, national, and local levels.

Protest Through Singing This Fourth of July

by Prof.  Margaret Drew, UMass Law School

 

Independence day has been significant primarily for the powerful minority group.  White Men.

BIPOC, LGBTQ+, women, and religiously oppressed and those oppressed by religion are waiting for their time.  Should these populations want a day that is meaningful for them, it may be that they will need to create their own.  Freedom Day would celebrate when the government and those with power and privilege leave women and others alone to control their own destinies. 

Freedom from oppressors is all that is asked.  That day will come.  United we will succeed.  Don't miss the opportunity to write, revisit or recreate protest songs.

You may be interested in listening to both an interview on protest songs and songs being written or re-written after the Dobbs decision. 

You may have heard Reina Del Cid's protest to the tune of My Country Tis of Thee.  An earlier version by W.E.B. Du Bois may be found here.

And for an indigenous protest song written during the 1960s listen to Buffy St. Marie. This is her anthem to decolonization, updated in 2017.