Abstract
This article discusses the relationship in United States law between State, Federal and international authorities on universal human rights. All U.S. State constitutions and the Federal Constitution recognize the “inherent” or “inalienable” rights of humanity. Yet despite having long accepted the binding force of universal human rights, United States courts and public officials have been hesitant to recognize non-U.S. authorities when identifying, interpreting, or enforcing these rights in practice. The U.S. government and courts view most international treaties and declarations concerning universal human rights as simple restatements of existing constitutional guarantees. United States courts and public officials have generally weighed foreign evidence of the requirements of universal human rights according to the legitimacy, importance, and probative value of the source. The undemocratic and illiberal nature of many international and foreign institutions makes it unlikely that the United States Federal or State legal systems will cede final control over such questions to non-U.S. or multinational authorities at any time in the near future.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.