United States’ Compliance with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights

The U.S. government is engaged in targeted killings through drone strikes (and other aircraft) in Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia and elsewhere, which have resulted in the deaths of thousands of people. U.S. practice is characterized by secrecy and an unwillingness even to engage directly with concerns about civilian harm, let alone to provide accountability for civilian deaths and injury. Despite calls for disclosure from UN experts and non- governmental organizations, the U.S. government uses vague and shifting legal standards, and fails to disclose the basis for strikes or the steps it takes to minimize harm to civilians and investigate reported violations of international humanitarian law and human rights law

Joint Submission to the Human Rights Committee: Draft General Comment 36 on Article 6, on the Right to Life

Columbia Law School’s Human Rights Clinic, the International Commission of Jurists, the Open Society Justice Initiative, the American Civil Liberties Union, and Rights Watch (UK) welcome the opportunity to provide the Human Rights Committee (the Committee) with the following observations on its draft General Comment on Article 6 (the draft) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (the Covenant) on the right to life, ahead of its second reading

Public Acknowledgement and Investigations of U.S. “Targeted Killings” and Drone Strikes

The United Nations, local and international human rights organizations, and journalists have investigated and reported numerous cases in which there is credible evidence of harm to Yemeni, Pakistani, and other civilians from U.S. strikes carried out in secret, often using drones. The families of those individuals are still seeking redress and accountability, and the continued refusal of your administration even to officially acknowledge their losses compounds their sufferin

Possible Changes to U.S. Policies on the Use of Force in Counterterrorism Operations

We write today to express our deep concern regarding reports that the administration is considering weakening current policy standards for the use of force in counterterrorism operations

NGO Statement on Reported Changes to U.S. Policy on Use of Armed Drones and Other Lethal Force

The Trump administration’s failure thus far to release and explain the changes it has made to a previously public policy is a dangerous step backwards. Transparency around the use of lethal 2 force is critical to allowing independent scrutiny of the lawfulness of operations and to providing accountability and redress for victims of violations of international law. Transparency also helps governments identify and address civilian harm. It enables the public to be informed about some of the most important policy choices the government makes in its name – ones that involve life and death decisions. While transparency can enhance the legitimacy of government actions, secrecy, by contrast, heightens existing concerns and creates new ones

Period and Cohort Changes in Americans’ Support for Marijuana Legalization: Convergence and Divergence across Social Groups

We cast fresh light on how and why Americans’ views on marijuana legalization shifted between 1973 and 2014. Results from age-period-cohort models show a strong negative effect of age and relatively high levels of support for legalization among baby boom cohorts. Despite the baby boom effect, the large increase in support for marijuana legalization is predominantly a broad, period-based change in the population. Additional analyses demonstrate that differences in support for legalization by education, region, and religion decline, that differences by political party increase, and that differences between whites and African Americans reverse direction. We conclude by discussing the implications of these findings and by identifying promising directions for future research on this topic

United States’ Compliance with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights

The U.S. government is engaged in targeted killings through drone strikes (and other aircraft) in Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia and elsewhere, which have resulted in the deaths of thousands of people. U.S. practice is characterized by secrecy and an unwillingness even to engage directly with concerns about civilian harm, let alone to provide accountability for civilian deaths and injury. Despite calls for disclosure from UN experts and non- governmental organizations, the U.S. government uses vague and shifting legal standards, and fails to disclose the basis for strikes or the steps it takes to minimize harm to civilians and investigate reported violations of international humanitarian law and human rights law

Colonial lives of the carceral archipelago: rethinking the neoliberal security state

Mass incarceration, police brutality, and border controls are part and parcel of the everyday experiences of marginalized and racialized communities across the world. Recent scholarship in international relations, sociology, and geography has examined the prevalence of these coercive practices through the prism of “disciplinary,” “penal,” or “authoritarian” neoliberalism. In this collective discussion, we argue that although this literature has brought to the fore neoliberalism's reliance on state violence, it has yet to interrogate how these carceral measures are linked to previous forms of global racial ordering. To rectify this moment of “colonial unknowing,” the collective discussion draws on decolonial approaches, Indigenous studies, and theories of racial capitalism. It demonstrates that “new” and “neoliberal” forms of domestic control must be situated within the global longue durée of racialized and colonial accumulation by dispossession. By mapping contemporary modes of policing, incarceration, migration control, and surveillance onto earlier forms of racial–colonial subjugation, we argue that countering the violence of neoliberalism requires more than nostalgic appeals for a return to Keynesianism. What is needed is abolition—not just of the carceral archipelago, but of the very system of racial capitalism that produces and depends on these global vectors of organized violence and abandonment. L'incarcération de masse, la brutalité policière et les contrôles aux frontières constituent une partie intégrante des expériences quotidiennes des communautés marginalisées et racialisées du monde entier. Des études récentes en relations internationales, en sociologie et en géographie ont examiné la prévalence de ces pratiques coercitives par le prisme du néolibéralisme « disciplinaire », « pénal » ou « autoritaire ». Dans cet article, nous soutenons que bien que cette littérature ait mis en évidence la dépendance du néolibéralisme à la violence étatique, elle ne s'est pas encore interrogée sur le lien entre ces mesures carcérales et les formes précédentes d'ordre racial mondial. Cet article s'appuie sur le féminisme noir, les approches décoloniales, les études indigènes et les théories de capitalisme racial pour rectifier cette « ignorance coloniale » marquante. Il démontre que les formes « nouvelles » et « néolibérales » de contrôle national doivent se situer dans la longue durée globale de l'accumulation racialisée et coloniale par dépossession. Nous associons les modes contemporains de maintien de l'ordre, d'incarcération, de contrôle migratoire et de surveillance à des formes antérieures d'assujettissement racial/colonial pour soutenir que contrer la violence du néolibéralisme exige davantage que des appels nostalgiques au retour du keynésianisme. Ce qu'il faut, c'est une abolition : non seulement de l'archipel carcéral, mais aussi du système de capitalisme racial en lui-même qui produit et dépend de ces vecteurs globaux de violence organisée et d'abandon. El encarcelamiento masivo, la brutalidad policial y los controles fronterizos forman parte de las experiencias cotidianas de las comunidades marginadas y racializadas de todo el mundo. Estudios recientes en RI, Sociología y Geografía han examinado la prevalencia de estas prácticas coercitivas a través del prisma del neoliberalismo “disciplinario,” “penal” o “autoritario.” En este artículo, sostenemos que, si bien esta literatura puso en primer plano la dependencia del neoliberalismo de la violencia estatal, aún tiene que cuestionar la manera en que estas medidas carcelarias se vinculan a formas anteriores de ordenamiento racial global. Para rectificar este momento de “desconocimiento colonial,” el artículo recurre al feminismo negro, a los abordajes descoloniales, a los estudios indígenas y a las teorías del capitalismo racial. Demuestra que las formas “nuevas” y “neoliberales” de control interno se deben situar dentro de la longue durée global de la acumulación por desposesión racializada y colonial. Al trazar un mapa de los modos contemporáneos de vigilancia policial, encarcelamiento, control de la migración y vigilancia sobre las formas anteriores de subyugación racial-colonial, sostenemos que contrarrestar la violencia del neoliberalismo requiere algo más que apelaciones nostálgicas de retorno al keynesianismo. Lo que se necesita es la abolición, no solo del archipiélago carcelario, sino también del propio sistema de capitalismo racial que produce y depende de estos vectores globales de violencia y abandono organizados

Joint Submission to the Human Rights Committee: Draft General Comment 36 on Article 6, on the Right to Life

Columbia Law School’s Human Rights Clinic, the International Commission of Jurists, the Open Society Justice Initiative, the American Civil Liberties Union, and Rights Watch (UK) welcome the opportunity to provide the Human Rights Committee (the Committee) with the following observations on its draft General Comment on Article 6 (the draft) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (the Covenant) on the right to life, ahead of its second reading