Patrick Stickney
Patrick Stickney is a Resident Forum Blogger covering recent developments in domestic and international human rights issues.
Last month, the United Nations Working Group “on the issue of discrimination against women in law and in practice” concluded a 10-day visit to the United States to assess the status of women’s rights in the United States. They were invited by the federal government for the visit, and toured Alabama, Oregon, and Texas. The delegates found a storied picture of women’s rights in the United States, and drew particular attention to political representation, economic issues, access to health care (including reproductive rights), and the safety of women.
Along with Iran, Somalia, Sudan, Palau, and Tonga, the United States is one of six nations that have not ratified the primary human rights treaty regarding women’s rights, the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW). However, because the United States signed the treaty in 1980, the United States is obligated to “refrain from acts that would defeat the object and purpose of the treaty.” The Working Group highlighted this obligation in its initial findings by reporting that “many of [the treaty’s] standards are entrenched in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights [,which the United States has ratified,] and in customary international law.”
Among other issues, the Working Group noted that African-American women are four times more likely to die in childbirth, a wage gap exists between workers of different genders, and how the United States is one of only two nations in the world without mandatory paid maternal leave. The Working Group also pointed out discrimination against women-owned businesses, citing the fact that although women own about a third of small-to-medium-sized businesses, the Small Business Administration only has a marginal goal of awarding five percent of federal contracts to these businesses; a goal which, as small as it is, has never been met.
In its initial findings the Working Group also stated that the decision in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc., which allowed a religious exemption to covering certain forms of reproductive health care in company insurance plans for closely-held for-profit corporations, was inconsistent with international human rights standards. Additionally, the Working Group cited Citizens United v. Federal Elections Commission, which resulted in the removal of campaign finance restrictions, as a case that hurt women’s rights to political representation because traditional political funding networks are predominately male. The Working Group’s focus on human rights ramifications of domestic laws is a timely observation because this term the Supreme Court will decide in Whole Woman’s Health v. Cole whether or not states are allowed to enforce law that “in nearly all circumstances . . . cause a significant reduction in the availability of abortion services.” At least one organization has filed an amicus brief in Whole Woman’s that draws upon these human rights standards.
While the Working Group was heavily critical of the United States, it also praised some of the United States’ policies. The Working Group praised the Affordable Care Act for expanding health care coverage and preventing women from being charged more for insurance than men. Subnational efforts were also shown some enthusiasm, particularly the “Cities for CEDAW” campaign.
The “Cities for CEDAW” campaign “is a grassroots effort that provides tools and leadership to empower local women’s, civil and human rights organizations and municipalities to effectively initiate CEDAW within their city, county, town, or state.” A variety of cities have passed or are considering an ordinance to align city governance with human rights standards, though most of the governments that have passed a CEDAW ordinance are in California. The first and primary city to adopt a CEDAW ordinance was San Francisco, which did so in 1998. The CEDAW ordinance required city agencies to undergo a gender analysis and create an action plan to correct any deficiencies which were discovered. The ordinance also required the collection of disaggregated data—data which is broken down by race, sex, and other categories—to further aid in identifying disparities. Some of the ordinance’s successes include the passage of 44 months without a domestic violence homicide, the implementation of the right for parents and caregivers to “request a flexible or predictable work schedule without fear of retaliation, and increased funding for community grants to organizations doing anti-domestic violence work.
The Working Group contextualized its findings by noting that the United States is a major player in developing the very same international human rights standards that are missing in its own domestic context. The Working Group also expressed that it will be difficult to follow up on its findings because the United States has no national human rights institution, a lack which has repeatedly been noted by the international community.
While the Working Group’s statement of findings was broad, it was only a brief overview of its visit to the United States; a full report will be published and discussed before the United Nations Human Rights Council in June 2016.
Published on January 25, 2016