Utilising International Human Rights Law to Promote Civil Liberties in the US: A Case Study on the UN UPR and the ACLU's campaign for smart justice

利用国际人权法促进美国的公民自由：联合国普遍定期审议和美国公民自由联盟明智司法运动的案例研究

• 批准号: 2750380
• 金额: --
• 依托单位: Birmingham City University
• 依托单位国家: 英国
• 项目类别: Studentship
• 财政年份: 2022
• 资助国家: 英国
• 起止时间: 2022 至 无数据
• 项目状态: 未结题
• 来源: https://gtr.ukri.org/projects?ref=studentship-2750380
• 关键词: Utilising; International; Human; Rights; Law

Since 1920, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), a Civil Society Organisation (CSO), has been the United States' (US) defender of civil liberties, (Zackin, 2006). Their "highly esteemed" Amicus briefs and US Supreme Court litigation (Lynch, 2004) helped establish various constitutional protections in criminal procedure, including rights upon arrest, (Miranda v. Arizona 1966) and jury unanimity (Ramos v. Louisiana 2020).In 2010, they launched their 'Campaign for Smart Justice' (CSJ), distributing state-specific 'blueprints' seeking to halve the US incarcerated population through statutory reforms across six areas: mass incarceration, prosecution, bail, parole, sentencing and re-entry. Blueprints can be mapped against international human rights law (IHR) the US is legally bound to implement yet does not, (Gainsborough, 2004) (e.g., International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights).My research has identified three 'eras' in the ACLU's approach towards IHR: disinterest (1920-1939), mirroring, (1940-2003) and supportive (2004-present). Since 2004, the ACLU has engaged with the Universal Periodic Review (UPR), (Bronstein, 2004), which reviews UN member states' treaty commitments, (Res.60/251). To date, the US has had three reviews (2010, 2015, 2020) within which the ACLU submitted reports implicitly advocating CSJ ideas.Applying IHR further legitimises the US criminal justice system, (Rehman, 2002). Storey (2021) contends that the UPR can translate IHR into US legal reform. Yet, there is no systematic, qualitative review of how to utilize IHR to further protect US civil liberties. My project will fill this gap using the CSJ.Research Questions1.What is the ACLU, and how has it impacted criminal-justice-based-rights in the US?2.To what extent does the ACLU engage with IHR, including the UPR?3.How has the ACLU referenced (implicitly and explicitly) the CSJ in its submissions to the US UPRs?4.How can the ACLU use IHR and the UPR to strengthen its CSJ blueprints?Method1.Doctrinal legal inquiry into the ACLU's activities pertaining to criminal justice, mapping findings to IHR and CSJ, whilst assessing the impact of American Exceptionalism.2.Employ Storey's (2021) method to collate UPR data by identifying and thematically analysing implicit and explicit references to CSJ issues in the US' UPR documents, assessing impacts, and forming conclusions.3.Use the data to generate six 'blueprints' for each CSJ issue, layering them with IHR, providing a framework for the ACLU to use the UPR as a vehicle to strengthen the CSJ.Impacts- Contribute to scholarship on the ACLU and the relationship between IHR and American Exceptionalism.- Generate blueprints to be disseminated to US ACLU offices to inform national and local CSJ initiatives.- Advance the methodology developed by Storey; replicating it across a different aspect of criminal justice. Structure- Introduction- The ACLU and its Influence on US criminal justice- The ACLU and IHR (interwoven with American Exceptionalism)- US UPR Record Analysis- Findings- Blueprint Model(s)- ConclusionsTimelineYear 1:- Map cases that contributed to essential criminal doctrines to IHR.- Define the ACLU's 'eras' pertaining to IHR.Year 2:- Collect and analyse US' UPR data,- Establish thesis structure.Year 3:- Write up the blueprints,- Complete thesis.

自1920年以来，美国公民自由联盟（ACLU），一个民间社会组织（CSO），一直是美国（美国）公民自由的捍卫者（Zackin，2006）。他们“备受推崇”的法庭之友陈述和美国最高法院诉讼（Lynch，2004）帮助建立了刑事诉讼中的各种宪法保护，包括逮捕时的权利，（米兰达诉亚利桑那州，1966年）和陪审团独立性（拉莫斯诉路易斯安那州，2020年）。2010年，他们发起了“聪明正义运动”（CSJ），分发各州具体的“蓝图”，寻求通过六个领域的法定改革将美国被监禁人口减半：大规模监禁、起诉、保释、假释、判刑和重返社会。蓝图可以根据美国在法律上有义务实施但没有实施的国际人权法（IHR）绘制（Gainsborough，2004）（例如，我的研究确定了美国公民自由联盟对待《国际卫生条例》的三个“时代”：漠不关心（1920-1939）、镜像（1940-2003）和支持（2004年至今）。自2004年以来，美国公民自由联盟参与了普遍定期审议（Bronstein，2004年），该审议审查了联合国成员国的条约承诺（第60/251号决议）。迄今为止，美国已经进行了三次审查（2010年、2015年和2020年），ACLU提交的报告含蓄地支持CSJ的想法。Storey（2021）认为，普遍定期审议可以将《国际卫生条例》转化为美国的法律的改革。然而，对于如何利用《国际卫生条例》进一步保护美国公民自由，没有系统的定性审查。我的项目将填补这一空白使用CSJ。研究报告1。什么是美国公民自由联盟，它如何影响刑事司法为基础的权利在美国？2. ACLU在多大程度上参与《国际卫生条例》，包括普遍定期审议？3.美国公民自由联盟在提交给美国普遍定期审议的材料中是如何（含蓄和明确地）引用CSJ的？4.美国公民自由联盟如何利用《国际卫生条例》和普遍定期审议来加强其CSJ蓝图？方法1.对美国公民自由联盟有关刑事司法的活动进行理论上的法律的调查，将调查结果与《国际卫生条例》和《司法界委员会》相对应，同时评估美国例外主义的影响。2.采用Storey（2021）的方法整理普遍定期审议数据，通过识别和专题分析美国普遍定期审议文件中对司法界委员会问题的隐含和明确引用，评估影响，并形成结论。3.使用这些数据为每个CSJ问题生成六个“蓝图”，将它们与IHR分层，为美国公民自由联盟提供一个框架，以利用普遍定期审议作为加强法官委员会的工具。影响-有助于对美国公民自由联盟以及《国际卫生条例》与美国例外主义之间关系的研究。生成蓝图分发给美国公民自由联盟办事处，通知国家和地方CSJ倡议。推进Storey开发的方法;在刑事司法的不同方面复制它。结构-介绍-美国公民自由联盟及其对美国刑事司法的影响-美国公民自由联盟和《国际卫生条例》（与美国例外论交织在一起）-美国普遍定期审议记录分析-调查结果-蓝图模型-结论时间表第一年：-将有助于基本刑事理论的案件映射到《国际卫生条例》。定义美国公民自由联盟关于《国际卫生条例》的“时代”。第二年：-收集和分析美国的普遍定期审议数据，-建立论文结构。第三年：-撰写蓝图，-完成论文。