Treaties, Human Rights, and Conditional Consent

Bradley and Goldsmith challenge the conventional academic wisdom concerning both the legality and desirability of reservations, understandings and declarations (RUDs) attached to human rights treaties. The RUDs, they argue, reflect a sensible accommodation of competing domestic and international con...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:University of Pennsylvania law review 2000-12, Vol.149 (2), p.399-468
Main Authors: Bradley, Curtis A., Goldsmith, Jack L.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Commercial treaties
Consent
Constitutional law
Federalism
Genocide
Human rights
International aspects
International law
International relations
International relations-US
Laws, regulations and rules
Legal consent
Reservations
Torture
Treaties
United States Senate
Citations: Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Bradley and Goldsmith challenge the conventional academic wisdom concerning both the legality and desirability of reservations, understandings and declarations (RUDs) attached to human rights treaties. The RUDs, they argue, reflect a sensible accommodation of competing domestic and international considerations. They help bridge the political divide between isolationists who want to preserve the US's sovereign prerogatives, and internationalists who want the US to increase its involvement in international institutions.
ISSN:0041-9907
1942-8537
DOI:10.2307/3312731