Comparative (in)equalities: CEDAW, the jurisdiction of gender, and the heterogeneity of transnational law production

International Journal of Constitutional Law

Volumn 10, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 531-550

  Resnik, Judith ^a  

^a YALE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84865372923     PISSN: 14742640     EISSN: 14742659     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/icon/mor064     Document Type: Article

References (72)

1. Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, Dec. 18, 1249 U.N.T.S. 20378 (entered into force Sept. 3, 1981) [hereinafter CEDAW].1979
2. Judith Resnik, Law ' s Migration: American Exceptionalism, Silent Dialogues, and Federalism ' s Multiple Ports of Entry, 115 Y ALE L.J. 1564 (2006).
3. Vienna Convention on the Laws of Treaties, art. 19©, May 23, 1969, 1155 U.N.T.S. 331. Both case law and commentary debate the import and wisdom of reservations. See R ESERVATIONS TO H UMAN R IGHTS T REATIES AND THE V IENNA C ONVENTION R EGIME C ONFLICT, H ARMONY OR R ECONCILIATION (Ienat Ziemele ed., 2004) [hereinafter H UMAN R IGHTS T REATIES R ESERVATIONS]; Edward T. Swaine, Reserving, 31 Y ALE J. I NT ' L L. 307 (2006).
4. Antoine Garapon, Three Challenges for International Criminal Justice, 2 J. I NT ' L C RIM. J UST. 716-716 (2004
5. The term, variously used, is associated with Immanuel Kant. See C OSMOPOLITICS AND THE E MERGENCE OF A F UTURE (Diane Morgan and Gary Banham eds., 2007).
6. C ONG. R ESEARCH S ERV ., R EPORT N O. 96-736 H UMAN R IGHTS T REATIES S OME I SSUES FOR U.S. R ATIFICATION ("The U.S. civil rights movement has been largely a domestic movement not linked to the international human rights movement.") 4 (1996)
7. M ARGARET E. K ECK and K ATHRYN S IKKINK, A CTIVISTS B EYOND B ORDERS A DVOCACY N ETWORKS IN I NTERNATIONAL P OLITICS (1998).
8. I AN T YRRELL, W OMAN ' S W ORLD, W OMAN ' S E MPIRE T HE W OMAN ' S C HRISTIAN T EMPERANCE U NION IN I NTERNATIONAL P ERSPECTIVE 1880-1930, at 6 (1991).
9. John Markoff, Margins, Centers, and Democracy: The Paradigmatic History of Women ' s Suffrage, 29 S IGNS 85 (2003).
10. Judith Resnik, Categorical Federalism: Jurisdiction, Gender, and the Globe, 111 Y ALE L.J. 619, 624-625 (2001
11. Reva Siegel, She the People: The Nineteenth Amendment, Sex Equality, Federalism, and the Family ,115 H ARV. L. R EV. 997-1005 (2002).
12. See D UANE TA NANBAUM, THE BR ICKER AM ENDMENT CO NTROVERSY A TE ST OF EI SENHOWER ' S PO LITICAL LE ADERSHIP 222 (1988).
13. Louis Henkin, U.S. Ratifi cation of Human Rights Conventions: The Ghost of Senator Bricker, 89 AM. J. IN T ' L L. 341 (1995).
14. Texts and methods varied across Alabama, Arizona, Indiana, Missouri, South Dakota, Texas, and Wyoming (constitutional amendments) and Alaska, Arkansas, Georgia, Kansas, Mississippi, Nebraska, South Carolina, and Tennessee (statutes, with some referencing Sharia, "religious laws," "foreign religious code," the "legal precepts of other nations or cultures," and/or "international law"). See S.B. 62, 2011 S., Reg. Sess. (Ala. 2011); H.B. 88, 27th Leg., 1st Sess. (Alaska 2011); S. Con. Res. 1010, 50th Leg., 1st Reg. Sess. (Ariz. 2011); S.B. 97, 88th Gen. Assemb., Reg. Sess. (Ark. 2011); H.B. 45, 151st Gen. Assemb., 2011 Reg. Sess. (Ga. 2011) l S.J. Res. 16, 117 Gen. Assemb., 1st Reg. Sess. (Ind.); H.B. 2087, 84th Leg., Reg. Sess. (Kan. 2011); H.B. 301, 126th Leg., Reg. Sess. (Miss. 2011); H.J. Res. 31, 96th Gen. Assemb., 1st Reg. Sess. (Mo. 2011); Leg. B. 647, 102nd Leg., 1st Reg. Sess. (Neb. 2011); S.B. 444, 119th Gen. Assemb., 1st Reg. Sess. (S.C. 2011); H.J. Res. 1004, 86th Leg. Assemb., Reg. Sess. (S.D. 2011); H.J. Res. 57, 82nd Leg., Reg. Sess. (Tex. 2011); H.J. Res. 8, 61st Leg., Gen. Sess. (Wyo. 2011). Some provisions specifi cally apply to "natural persons" and not to corporations. See, e.g ., Tenn. Pub. Ch. 983 (H.B. 3768).2011
15. Monica W. Varsanyi, Neoliberalism and Nativism: Local Anti-Immigration Policy Activism and the Emerging Politics of Scale, 35 I NT ' L J. U RBAN and R EG ' L R ES. 295-296 (2011)
16. David Yerushalmi, A founder of SANE and General Counsel for the Center for Security Policy and Stop Islamization of America, drafted a model statute. See "About Us," Law Offi ces of David Yerushalmi, P.C., available at http://www. davidyerushalmilaw. com/aboutus. php (last visited Apr. 17, 2011). Some funding comes from the William H. Donner and Sarah Scaife Foundations. See IRS Form 990-PF, William H. Donner Foundation (2009); S ARAH S CAIFE F OUNDATION, A NNUAL R EPORT 2 (2009), http://www. s caife. com/sarah09. pdf
17. Jill Marshall, Conditions for Freedom? European Human Rights Law and the Islamic Headscarf Debate, 30 H UM. R TS. Q. 631 (2008
18. JOAN WALLACH SCOTT, T HE P OLITICS OF THE V EIL (2010).
19. Susanna Mancini, Patriarchy as the Exclusive Domain of the Other: The Veil Controversy, False Projection, and Cultural Racism, 10(1) I NT ' L J. C ONST. L. (I·CON) XXX (2011); Karen Knop, International Law and the Disaggregated Democratic State: Two Case-Studies on Women ' s Human Rights and the United States (forthcoming, 2012).
20. S.F. C AL. A DMIN. C ODE § 12K.1 (as amended in 2000).
21. See generally C OUNCIL OF E UROPE, G ROUP OF S PECIALISTS ON M AINSTREAMING, G ENDER M AINSTREAMING C NCEPTUAL F RAMEWORK, M ETHODOLOGY AND P RESENTATION OF G OOD P RACTICE 4-5 (1998).
22. See, e.g., Report on Mexico produced by the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women under article 8 of the Optional Protocol to the Convention, and reply from the Government of Mexico, U.N. Doc. CEDAW/C/2005/Op.8/Mexico (Jan.) (involving abductions, rapes, and murders of 200 women in Ciudad Juarez).2005
23. Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, Oct. 15, 1999, G.A. Res. 4, U.N. GAOR, 54th Sess., Supp. No. 49, U.N. Doc. A/RES/54/4, 2131 U.N.T.S. As of 2011, 103 states were parties. United Nations Treaty Collection, Status, Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, available at http://treaties. un. org/Pages/ViewDetails. aspx ? src = TREATY and mtdsg_no = IV - 8 - b and chapter = 4 and lang = en. As of the spring of 2011, ten cases had resulted in public decisions; four were dismissed for failure to exhaust domestic remedies; one because the alleged violation occurred before the State ratifi ed CEDAW; and fi ve decided on the merits, with violations found in four cases, three of which involved failure to protect from intimate partner violence. See A.T. v. Hungary, Comm'n No. 2/2003, U.N. Doc. CEDAW/C/321D/2/2003 (Jan. 2005); Yildirim v. Austria, Comm'n No. 6/2005, U.N. Doc. CEDAW/C/39/D/6/2005 (Aug. 2007); Goekce v. Austria, Comm'n No. 5/2005, U.N. Doc. CEDAW/C/39/D/5/2005 (Aug. 2007). The fourth case involved a state hospital that had sterilized a woman without her informed consent. A.S. v. Hungary, Comm'n No. 4/2004, U.N. Doc. CEDAW/C/361D/4/2004 (Aug. 2006). One complainant lost becausethe CEDAW Committee concluded that the Netherlands ' Invalidity Insurance (Self-Employed Persons) Act did not violate article 11, paragraph 2(b) of CEDAW. Nguyen v. The Netherlands, Comm ' n No. 3/2004, U.N. Doc. CEDAW/C/36/D/3/2004 (Aug. 2006).
24. Seo-Young Cho, International Human Rights Treaty to Change Social Patterns-The Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination Against Women, CEGE D ISCUSSION P APER 93 (2010). Using econometrics, Cho found a positive impact of CEDAW on social rights in countries with "higher levels of democracy." See also Frances Raday, Gender and Democratic Citizenship: The Impact of CEDAW, 10(1) I NT ' L J. C ONST. L. (I·CON) XXX (2012).
25. See generally Françoise Gaspard, T he French Parity Movement, in HA S LI BERALISM FA ILED WO MEN ? AS SURING E QUAL R EPRESENTATION IN E UROPE AND THE U NITED S TATES (Jytte Klausen and Charles S. Maier eds., 2001); Blanca Rodriguez-Ruiz and Ruth Rubio-Marin, Constitutional Justifi cation of Parity Democracy, 60 A LA. L. R EV. 1171 (2009).
26. The discussion of Costa Rico is drawn from Aldo Facio and Martha I. Morgan, Equity or Equality for Women? Understanding CEDAW ' s Equality Principles, 60 A LA. L. R EV. 1133, 1160-1165 (2009).
27. Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, July 17, 1998, U.N. Doc. A/Conf. 183/9, art. 7(1) (g)(h), 2©.1998
28. See, e.g., Women ' s Rights Are Human Rights: U.S. Ratifi cation of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Human Rights and the Law of the Committee on the Judiciary, United States Senate, 111th Cong. 2d. Sess. (Nov. 18, 2010) (testimony of Samuel Bagenstos, Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Civil Rights Division, Dep ' t of Justice) [hereinafter 2010 CEDAW Hearings]; Harold Hongju Koh, Why America Should Ratify the Women ' s Rights Treaty (CEDAW), 34 C ASE W. R ES. J. I NT ' L L. 263 (2002).
29. Ricci v. DeStefano, 129 S. Ct. 2658 (2010
30. Reva Siegel, From Colorblindness to Antibalkanization: An Emerging Ground of Decision in Race Equality Cases, 120 Y ALE L.J. 1278 (2011).
31. General Recommendation No. 25, on Article 4, Paragraph 1 of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, on Temporary Special Measures, available at http://www. un. org/womensatch/daw/cedaw/recommendations/index. html
32. Treaty Doc. 95-53: Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, Adopted by the U.N. General Assembly on December 18, 1979, and Signed on Behalf of the United States of America on July 17, 1980: Hearing Before the S. Comm. on Foreign Relations, 107th Cong. 14-15 [hereinafter 2002 CEDAW Hearings] (statement of Senator Enzi).(2002)
33. One doctrine, called foreign affairs preemption, is the basis of Crosby v. Nat'l Foreign Trade Council, 530 U.S. 363 (2000). For criticism, see Judith Resnik, Foreign as Domestic Affairs: Rethinking Horizontal Federalism and Foreign Affairs Preemption in Light of Translocal Internationalism, 57 E MORY L. J. 31 (2007).
34. AN U M ENON, S.F. D EP 'T. ON THE S TATUS OF W OMEN, H UMAN R IGHTS IN A CTION S AN F RANCISCO ' S L OCAL I MPLEMENTATION OF THE U NITED N ATION ' S W OMEN ' S T REATY (CEDAW) (2010).
35. See Caroline Bettinger-Lopez, Human Rights at Home: Domestic Violence as a Human Rights Violation, 40 C OLUM. H UM. R TS. L. R EV. 19 (2008
36. Martha F. Davis, Upstairs, Downstairs: Subnational Incorporation of International Human Rights at the End of an Era, 77 F ORDHAM L. R EV. 411 (2008
37. Cynthia Soohoo and Suzanne Stolz, Bringing Theories of Human Rights Change Home, 77 F ORDHAM L. R EV. 459 (2008).
38. Sally Engle Merry, Peggy Levit, Mihaela Serban Rosen and Diana H. Yoon, Law from Below: Women ' s Human Rights and Social Movements in New York City, 44 L AW and S OC ' Y R EV. 101, 103 (2010) (citing L AW AND G LOBALIZATION FROM B ELOW (Boaventura De Sousa Santos and Cesar A. Rodriguez-Garavito eds., 2005)).
39. Founded in 1899, the Federation includes thousands of clubs in the United States and more than twenty countries. See General Federation of Women ' s Clubs, http://www. gfwc. org
40. WILD, founded after the 1995 United Nations Fourth World Conference on Women, was designed to support domestic application of human rights principles, a project supported by the Ford Foundation. See Women's Institute for Leadership Development for Human Rights (WILD),; Ford Foundation, Grant Detail for Women ' s Institute For Leadership Development for Human Rights, http://www. fordfoundation. org/grants/grantdetails ? grantid = 796 .http://www. law. berkeley. edu/8227. htm
41. CEDAW: T HE T REATY FOR THE R IGHTS OF W OMEN 16-17, 67-72 (Leila Rassekh Milani, Sarah C. Albert and Karina Purushotma eds., The 2010 CEDAW Task Force listed some 180 national, state and local supporting organizations. See http://www. cedaw2010. org/images/stories/cedaw - supporting - orgs. pdf2004
42. L.A., Cal., Ordinance 175735 (Dec. 24, 2003); Berkeley, Cal., Resolution No. 1021-97 (Nov. 10, 1997). Berkeley reported it was the "third U.S. city to have taken this historic step" supporting the "integration" of CEDAW principles into its municipal code. Berkeley, Cal., Proclamation in Recognition of International Women ' s Day (Mar. 8, 2005). New York City aimed to include aspects of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (CERD) as well as CEDAW. See A Local Law to Amend the Administrative Code of the City of New York in Relation to Auditing and Implementing Diversity and Eradicating Discrimination in All City Operations, Int. No. 512-2004, available at .http://legistar. council. nyc. gov/LegislationDetail. aspx ? ID = 443405 and GUID = D40E082C - 7659-4D23-9B41 - F7985BEBFC70
43. Environmental Code of 1998 (SFS 1998: 811) (Swed.). See, generally, E NVIRONMENTAL P ROTECTION E UROPEAN L AW AND G OVERNANCE (Joanne Scott ed., 2009).
44. San Francisco ' s Precautionary Principle Policy (2003) S.F., Cal., Ordinance 171-03 (July 3, 2003).
45. Cal. Health and Safety Code § 108937 (West 2008). See Judith Resnik, The Internationalism of American Federalism: Missouri and Holland, 73 MO. L. REV. 1105 (2008).
46. Judith Resnik, Joshua Civin, and Joseph Frueh, Ratifying Kyoto at the Local Level: Sovereigntism, Federalism, and Translocal Organizations of Government Actors, 80 A RIZ. L. R EV. 709 (2008).
47. Using Westlaw, we searched for articles published between Jan. 1980 and Apr. in which the word "CEDAW" was used twenty-fi ve times or more2011
48. Grutter v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 306, 344 (Ginsburg, J., concurring).2003
49. Using Westlaw, we searched for published cases decided between the intervals mentioned in the text in which the phrase "International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights" was used.
50. Kalb reported that the aspirational, non-binding UDHR has been cited by state courts less than the ICCPR and more than other ratifi ed treaties and argued that invoking international conventions as persuasive rather than obligatory may invite more judges to turn to them. See Johanna Kalb, Human Rights Treaties in State Court s: The International Prospects of State Constitutionalism after Medillín (forthcoming P ENN S TATE L. R EV. 2011).
51. See http://www. girlscourt. org/mission. html
52. See Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, available at http://www. un. org/womenwatch/daw/cedaw/members. htm
53. JDITH RESNIK and DENNIS CURTIS, REPRESENTING JUSTICE INVENTION, C ONTROVERSY, AND R IGHTS IN C ITY -S TATES AND D EMOCRATIC C OURTROOMS 288-305 (2011).
54. S HAHEEN S ARDAR A LI, C ONCEPTUALISING I SLAMIC L AW, CEDAW AND W OMEN ' S H UMAN R IGHTS IN P LURAL L EGAL S ETTINGS A C OMPARATIVE A NALYSIS OF CEDAW IN B ANGLADESH, I NDIA AND P AKISTAN 77-90 (UNIFEM, 2006).
55. Jennifer Nedelsky, Communities of Judgment and Human Rights, 1 TH EORETICAL IN Q. L. 245 (2000).
56. Additional examples come from F EDERALISM, S UBNATIONAL C ONSTITUTIONS, AND M INORITY R IGHTS (G. Alan Tarr, Robert F. Williams, and Joseph Marko eds., 2004).
57. For example, Norway objected that the United Arab Emirates reservation on several articles raised "doubts" on the fullness of the country ' s commitment. See Norway, With regard to the reservations made by the United Arab Emirates upon accession (Dec. 1, 2005), available at; CEDAW art. 29(2) (specifying that submitting to dispute resolution may itself be reserved).http://www. un. org/womenwatch/daw/cedaw/reservations - country. htm
58. Bangladesh maintained its reservation to article 2 ' s call for implementation by law. Records of reservations and withdrawals are available at .http://treaties. un. org/Pages/ViewDetails. aspx ? src = TREATY and mtdsg_no = IV - 8 and chapter = 4 and lang = en
59. S. E XEC. R EP. No. 103-38, at 51 (1994). See S. E XEC. R EP. No. 107-9, at 8 (2002).
60. For example, Martha Davis and I suggested to U.S. advocates working in 2010 that the 2002 proffered text ? that the "United States understands that this Convention shall be implemented by the Federal Government to the extent that it exercises jurisdiction over the matters covered therein, and otherwise by the State and local governments" ? could be supplemented by encouraging that "all levels of government participate in shaping appropriate measures to ensure the fulfi llment of this Convention." See also Gerald E. Frug and David J. Barron, International Local Government Law, 38 U RB. L. 1 (2006).
61. UN Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), CEDAW General Recommendations No. 19, 11th Sess., U.N. Doc. A/47/38, available at http://www. unhcr. org/refworld/docid/453882a422. html1992
62. Handyside v. United Kingdom, 24 Eur. Ct. H.R. (ser. A) at 47, 49 (1976).
63. The primary vehicle for these precepts is Article 267 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (Dec. 13, 2007, 2008 O.J. C115/47). See generally A NGELA W ARD, J UDICIAL R EVIEW AND THE R IGHTS OF P RIVATE P ARTIES IN EC L AW (2007).
64. Knop, Here and There: International Law in Domestic Courts, 32 N.Y.U. J. IN T ' L L. and PO L. 501-522 (2000).
65. See generally G EORGE L ETSAS, A T HEORY OF I NTERPRETATION OF THE E UROPEAN C ONVENTION ON H UMAN R IGHTS (2007).
66. Lautsi v. Italy, App. No. 30814/06, Eur. Ct. H.R. 56, 73, 74 (2011). Dissenters Judges Malinverni and Kalaydieva objected that the margin ought not "exempt the Court" from its duties to "ensure the observance" of Convention rights. Id. 1. Compare Dahlab v. Switzerland, App. No. 42393/98, 2001-V Eur. Ct. H.R. (2001) ("weighing the right of a teacher to manifest her religion against the need to protect pupils by preserving religious harmony,.. the Geneva authorities did not exceed their margin of appreciation"). See generally Susanna Mancini, The Power of Symbols and Symbols as Power: Secularism and Religion as Guarantors of Cultural Convergence, 30 C ARDOZO L. R EV. 2629 (2009); Cecile Laborde, State Paternalism Code, 10(1) I NT ' L J. C ONST. L. (I·CON) XXX (2012).
67. A, B and C v. Ireland, No. 25579/05, Eur. Ct. H.R. 233-236 (2010).
68. Miguel Poiares Maduro, Three Claims of Constitutional Pluralism, in C ONSTITUTIONAL P LURALISM IN E UROPE AND B EYOND (Matej Avgelj and Jan Komárek eds., 2011).
69. Judith Resnik, Law as Affi liation: "Foreign" Law, Democratic Federalism, and the Sovereigntism of the Nation-State, 6 I NT ' L J. C ON. L. (I·CON) 33-35 (2008).
70. S. AF R. CO NST. art. 39.1996
71. C ONSTITUCI Ó N art. 7 (Costa Rica). See, e.g ., SA BINO C ASSESSE, W HEN L EGAL O RDERS C OLLIDE T HE R OLE OF THE C OURTS (2010
72. Neil Walker, Beyond Boundary Disputes and Basic Grids: Mapping the Global Disorder of Normative Orders, 6 I NT ' L J. C ONST. L. (I·CON) 373 (2008