Works in Progress Group 21: Justice & Accountability

Go Back

Session Type: Works-in-Progress

Session Capacity: N/A

Hotel: N/A

Room: Union Square 21

Floor: 4th Floor

.
Group #21: Justice & Accountability

Movement Lawyering & the Fight for International Human Rights Accountability
Citlalli Ochoa, American University Washington College of Law

The international human rights law field in the United States (“U.S.”) has evolved in recent decades to include issues and actors more traditionally associated with domestic public interest or social justice lawyering. U.S. advocates have been more willing to engage with the international human rights framework, recognizing that international attention is necessary to hold the U.S. government accountable, and human rights bodies more willing to scrutinize the U.S. for failing to meet its human rights obligations at home. Examples of contemporaneous movements using the international human rights framework to bring domestic social change signal a growing recognition of international human rights law as a tool to address human rights violations in the U.S. This environment, combined with increasing distrust in U.S. domestic courts and legal systems to protect our rights, demands a critical analysis of how international human rights advocacy is currently being conducted. Drawing on theories of movement lawyering, this Article argues that movement lawyering should be a core competency of international human rights advocacy in the U.S., with a particular focus on how the critical theories underlying movement lawyering may help address some of the concerns that are inherent to international human rights lawyering--including but not limited to its roots in imperialism, exceptionalism, and Eurocentric values--and the implications of international human rights lawyering in U.S. movements.

Dred Scott, Military Enslavement, and the Case for Reparations
Hugh McClean, University of Baltimore School of Law

America has never truly accepted responsibility for the institution of slavery. That is evident in the evolution of the institution into other forms, including segregation, Jim Crow, redlining, and the mass incarceration of Black and Brown people. One of the more controversial resolutions to address America’s role in the institution of slavery is the payment of reparations. The federal government has never seriously considered reparations for the institution of slavery and Congress has refused to even study the issue. Despite these barriers, a few individual institutions have succeeded in reflecting on and accepting their role in America’s greatest atrocity. Local governments and institutions, including municipalities, universities, and religious groups have conducted unprecedented studies on their institutions’ role in enslaving people and have begun making reparations for the harms caused by the institution of slavery. This article argues that the U.S. military should be the first federal department to engage in a full-fledged reflective study of its role in the institution of slavery and should be the first to make reparations to those it has harmed. Using the military as an example, the article offers a blueprint for federal institutions to examine their own racist histories and to address past wrongs committed against enslaved persons.