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

点击翻译按钮获取中文摘要

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.