ABSTRACT How do authoritarian attitudes affect public support for international intervention against human rights abuses? Does U.S. residents’ support for human rights actions against perpetrators depend on the type of regime committing human rights violations? These questions are important for understanding how U.S. residents form opinions on U.S. actions toward foreign regimes that perpetrate human rights abuses. We conducted a survey experiment to determine whether support for actions against human rights violators are influenced by the type of regime that committed the human rights violations, repetition of repression, and their preexisting personal authoritarian attitudes. We find that individuals with high personal authoritarianism, which we define as favorable attitudes toward centralized power and appeals to authority for cultural preservation, are less likely to support symbolic actions like naming and shaming or humanitarian aid. They are more likely, however, to support sending peacekeeping troops. We find little evidence that the regime type of the perpetrator or the perpetrator’s past behavior affects support. International audiences generally support action in favor of human rights, but the kind of action they prefer is shaped by their preexisting views about authority.