The European Convention on Human Rights is one of the world's most important and influential human rights documents. It owes its value mainly to the European Court of Human Rights, which applies the Convention rights in individual cases. This book offers insight into the concepts and principles that are key to understanding the European Convention and the Court's case law. It explains how the Court approaches its cases and its decision-making process, illustrated by numerous examples taken from the Court's judgments. Core issues discussed include types of Convention rights (such as absolute rights); the structure of the Court's Convention rights review; principles and methods of interpretation (such as common-ground interpretation and the use of precedent); positive and negative obligations; vertical and horizontal effect; the margin of appreciation doctrine; and the requirements for the restriction of Convention rights.

The book examines in detail the essence, nature and scope of artistic freedom as a human right. It explains the legal problems associated with the lack of a precise definition of the term 'art' and discusses the emergence of a distinct 'right' to artistic freedom under international law. Drawing on a variety of case-studies primarily from the field of visual arts, but also performance, street art and graffiti, it examines potentially applicable 'defences' for those types of artistic expression that are perceived as inappropriate, ugly, offensive, disturbing, or even obscene and transgressive. The book also offers a view on global controversies such as Charlie Hebdo and the Danish Cartoons, attempting to explain the subtleties of offenses related to religious sensibilities and beliefs. It also examines the legitimacy of restrictions on extremist expressions in the case of arts involving criminal artsm such as child pornography in the case of Loli manga.

This book looks at transatlantic jurisdictional conflicts in data protection law and how the fundamental right to data protection conditions the EU's exercise of extraterritorial jurisdiction. Governments, companies and individuals are handling ever more digitised personal data, so it is increasingly important to ensure this data is protected. Meanwhile, the Internet is changing how territory and jurisdiction are realised online. The EU promotes personal data protection as a fundamental right. Especially since the EU's General Data Protection Regulation started applying in 2018, its data protection laws have had strong effects beyond its territory. In contrast, similar US information privacy laws are rooted in the marketplace and carry less normative heft. This has provoked clashes with the EU when their values, interests and laws conflict. This research uses three case studies to suggest ways to mitigate transatlantic jurisdictional tensions over data protection and security, the free flow of information and trade.

Citizenship 2.0 focuses on an important yet overlooked dimension of globalization: the steady rise in the legitimacy and prevalence of dual citizenship. Demand for dual citizenship is particularly high in Latin America and Eastern Europe, where more than three million people have obtained a second citizenship from EU countries or the United States. Most citizenship seekers acquire EU citizenship by drawing on their ancestry or ethnic origin; others secure U.S. citizenship for their children by strategically planning their place of birth. Their aim is to gain a second, compensatory citizenship that would provide superior travel freedom, broader opportunities, an insurance policy, and even a status symbol. Drawing on extensive interviews and fieldwork, Yossi Harpaz analyzes three cases: Israelis who acquire citizenship from European-origin countries such as Germany or Poland; Hungarian-speaking citizens of Serbia who obtain a second citizenship from Hungary (and, through it, EU citizenship); and Mexicans who give birth in the United States to secure American citizenship for their children. Harpaz reveals the growth of instrumental attitudes toward citizenship: individuals worldwide increasingly view nationality as rank within a global hierarchy rather than as a sanctified symbol of a unique national identity. Citizenship 2.0 sheds light on a fascinating phenomenon that is expected to have a growing impact on national identity, immigration, and economic inequality.

This book explores the comparative historical evolution of the European, Inter-American and African regional human rights systems. The book devotes attention to various factors that have shaped the systems: the different circumstances in which they were founded; the influence of major states and inter-state politics within their respective regions; gradual processes of institutional evolution; and the impact of human rights advocates and claimants. Throughout, the book devotes careful attention to the impact of institutional and procedural choices on the functioning of human rights systems. Overarchingly, the book explores the contextually-generated differences between the three systems, suggesting that human rights practice is less unitary than it might at times appear. Prescriptively, the book proposes that, contrary to the received wisdom in some quarters, the Inter-American system's dual-track approach may provide the most promising model in regards to future human rights system design.

Citizenship within our current international system signifies being fully human, or being worthy of fundamental human rights. For some vulnerable groups, however, this form of political membership is limited or missing entirely, and they face human rights challenges despite a prevalence of international human rights law. These protection gaps are central to hierarchies of personhood, or inequalities that render some people more "worthy" than others for protections and political membership. As a remedy, Lindsey N. Kingston proposes the ideal of "functioning citizenship," which requires an active and mutually-beneficial relationship between the state and the individual and necessitates the opening of political space for those who cannot be neatly categorized. It signifies membership in a political community, in which citizens support their government while enjoying the protections and services associated with their privileged legal status. At the same time, an inclusive understanding of functioning citizenship also acknowledges that political membership cannot always be limited by the borders of the state or proven with a passport. Fully Human builds its theory by looking at several hierarchies of personhood, from the stateless to the forcibly displaced, migrants, nomadic peoples, Indigenous nations, and "second class" citizens in the United States. It challenges the binary between citizen and noncitizen, arguing that rights are routinely violated in the space between the two. By recognizing these realities, we uncover limitations built into our current international system-but also begin to envision a path toward the realization of human rights norms founded on universality and inalienability. The ideal of functioning citizenship acknowledges the persistent power of the state, yet it does not rely solely on traditional conceptions of citizenship that have proven too flawed and limited for securing true rights protection.

Many governments, large institutions, and collective actors rely on the principle of solidarity to embed social policies on firm normative and legal grounds. In this original volume, a multidisciplinary roster of scholars come together to examine the contributions - and challenges -implicit in relying on the idea of solidarity to 'inscribe' this principle in social policies. Chapters explore how the dependence on the solidarity principle, and especially on inclusive understandings of solidarity, can strengthen or weaken institutions and movements. The volume's contributors cover developments across decades with a multilevel approach exploring dynamic interactions between local, national, and supranational arenas in pursuing and adjudicating the solidarity principle. Unique and innovative, Inscribing Solidarity examines the implications and dynamics of solidarity across a variety of terrains to illuminate its concrete limitations and specific advantages. This title is also available via Open Access on Cambridge Core.

Natalie Davidson offers an alternative account of Alien Tort Statute litigation by revisiting the field's two seminal cases, Filartiga (filed 1979) and Marcos (filed 1986), lawsuits ostensibly concerned with torture in Paraguay and the Philippines, respectively. Combining legal analysis, archival research and ethnographic methods, this book reveals how these cases operated as transitional justice mechanisms, performing the transition of the United States and its allies out of the Cold War order. It shows that US courts produced a whitewashed history of US involvement in repression in the Western bloc, while in Paraguay and the Philippines the distance from US courts allowed for a more critical narration of the lawsuits and their underlying violence as symptomatic of structural injustice. By exposing the political meanings of these legal landmarks for three societies, Davidson sheds light on the blend of hegemonic and emancipatory implications of international human rights litigation in US courts.

Today, when a single person can turn an airplane into a guided missile, no one objects to rigorous security before flying. But can the state simply declare some people too dangerous to travel, ever and anywhere? Does the Constitution protect a fundamental right to travel? Should the mode of travel (car, plane, or boat) or itinerary (domestic or international) make a constitutional difference? This book explores the legal and policy questions raised by government travel restrictions, from passports and rubber stamps to computerized terrorist watchlists.

In tracing the history and scope of U.S. travel regulations, Jeffrey Kahn begins with the fascinating story of Mrs. Ruth Shipley, a federal employee who almost single-handedly controlled access to passports during the Cold War. Kahn questions how far national security policies should go and whether the government should be able to declare some individuals simply too dangerous to travel. An expert on constitutional law, Kahn argues that U.S. citizens' freedom to leave the country and return is a fundamental right, protected by the Constitution.

Since "Roe v. Wade," abortion has continued to be a divisive political issue in the United States. In contrast, it has remained primarily a medical issue in Britain and Canada despite the countries' shared heritage. "Doctors and Demonstrators" looks beyond simplistic cultural or religious explanations to find out why abortion politics and policies differ so dramatically in these otherwise similar countries. Drew Halfmann argues that political institutions are the key. In the United States, federalism, judicial review, and a private health care system contributed to the public definition of abortion as an individual right rather than a medical necessity. Meanwhile, Halfmann explains, the porous structure of American political parties gave pro-choice and pro-life groups the opportunity to move the issue onto the political agenda. A groundbreaking study of the complex legal and political factors behind the evolution of abortion policy, "Doctors and Demonstrators" will be vital for anyone trying to understand this contentious issue.

Both the U.S. Supreme Court and the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) claim to advocate minority political interests, yet they disagree over the intent and scope of the Voting Rights Act (VRA), as well as the interpretation of the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment. Whereas the Court promotes color-blind policies, the CBC advocates race-based remedies. Setting this debate in the context of the history of black political thought, Rivers examines a series of high-profile districting cases, from "Rodgers v. Lodge" (1982) through "NAMUDNO v. Holder" (2009). She evaluates the competing approaches to racial equality and concludes, surprisingly, that an originalist, race-conscious interpretation of the 14th Amendment, along with a revised states' rights position regarding electoral districting, may better serve minority political interests.

This book demonstrates the difficulties the law is likely to encounter in regulating the expressive activities of the state, particularly with regard to the stigmatization of vulnerable groups and minorities. Freedom of speech is indispensable to a democratic society, enabling it to operate with a healthy level of debate and discussion. Historically, legal scholars have underappreciated the power of stigmatization, instead focusing on anti-discrimination law, and the implicit assumption that the state is permitted to communicate freely with little fear of legal consequences. Whilst integral to a democratic society, the freedom of a state to express itself can however also be corrosive, allowing influential figures and organizations the possibility to stigmatize vulnerable groups within society. The book takes this idea and, uniquely weaving legal analysis with extant psychological and sociological research, shows that current legal approaches to stigmatization are limited. Starting with a deep insight into what constitutes state expressions and how they can become stigmatizing, the book then goes on to look into the capacity the law currently has to limit these expressions and asks even if it could, should it? This fascinating study of an increasingly topical subject will be of interest to any legal scholar working in the field of freedom of expression and discrimination law.

Emerging neurotechnology offers increasingly individualised brain information, enabling researchers to identify mental states and content. When accurate and valid, these brain-reading technologies also provide data that could be useful in criminal legal procedures, such as memory detection with EEG and the prediction of recidivism with fMRI. Yet, unlike in medicine, individuals involved in criminal cases will often be reluctant to undergo brain-reading procedures. This raises the question of whether coercive brain-reading could be permissible in criminal law. Coercive Brain-Reading in Criminal Justice examines this question in view of European human rights: the prohibition of ill-treatment, the right to privacy, freedom of thought, freedom of expression, and the privilege against self-incrimination. The book argues that, at present, the established framework of human rights does not exclude coercive brain-reading. It does, however, delimit the permissible use of forensic brain-reading without valid consent. This cautionary, cutting-edge book lays a crucial foundation for understanding the future of criminal legal proceedings in a world of ever-advancing neurotechnology.

In Malone v. UK (Plenary 1984), the right to an effective domestic remedy in the European Convention on Human Rights Article 13 was famously described as one of the most obscure clauses in the Convention. Since then, the European Court of Human Rights has reinforced the scope and application of the right. Through an analysis of virtually all of the Court's judgments concerning Article 13, the book exhaustively accounts for the development and current scope and content of the right. The book also provides normative recommendations on how the Court could further develop the right, most notably how it could be a tool to regulate the relationship between domestic and international protection of human rights. In doing so, the book situates itself within larger debates on the enforcement of the entire Convention such as the principle of subsidiarity and the procedural turn in the Court's case law.

With the decline of public funding and new strategies pursued by interest groups, foreign private foundations and donors have become growing contributors to the European human rights justice system. These groups have created their own litigation teams, have increasingly funded NGOs litigating the European Courts, and have contributed to the content and supervision of the European judgements, which all have direct effects on the growth and procedure of human rights. European Human Rights Justice and Privatisation analyses the impacts of this private influence and the resultant effects on international relations between states, including the orientation of European jurisprudence towards Eastern countries and the promotion of private and neo-liberal interests. This book looks at the direct and indirect threat of this private influence on the independency of the European justice and on the protection of human rights in Europe.

In our globalised world, where inequality is deepening and migration movements are increasing, states continue to maintain strong regulatory control over immigration, health and social policies. Arguments based on state sovereignty can be employed to differentiate irregular migrants from other groups and reduce their right to physical and mental health to the provision of emergency medical care, even where resources are available. Drawing on the enabling and constraining factors of human rights law and public health, this book explores the scope and limits of the right to health of migrants in irregular situations, in international and European human rights law. Addressing these peoples' health solely with an exceptional medical paradigm is inconsistent with the special attention granted to people in vulnerable situations and non-discrimination in human rights, the emerging rights-based approach to disability, the social priorities of public health and the interdependence of human rights.

The electoral successes of right-wing populists since 2016 have unsettled world politics. The spread of populism poses dangers for human rights within each country, and also threatens the international system for protecting human rights. Human Rights in a Time of Populism examines causes, consequences, and responses to populism in a global context from a human rights perspective. It combines legal analysis with insights from political science, international relations, and political philosophy. Authors make practical recommendations on how the human rights challenges caused by populism should be confronted. This book, with its global scope, international human rights framing, and inclusion of leading experts, will be of great interest to human rights lawyers, political scientists, international relations scholars, actors in the human rights system, and general readers concerned by recent developments.

Post-Racial Constitutionalism and the Roberts Court: Rhetorical Neutrality and the Perpetuation of Inequality provides the first comprehensive Critical Race Theory critique of the United States Supreme Court under Chief Justice John Roberts. Since being named to the Court in 2005, Chief Justice Roberts has maintained a position of neutrality in his opinions on race. By dissecting neutrality and how it functions as a unifying feature in all the Court's race jurisprudence, this book illustrates the consequences of this ostensible impartiality. By examining the Court's racial jurisprudence dating back to the Reconstruction, the book shows how the Court has actively rationalized systemic oppression through neutral rhetoric and the elevation of process-based decisional values, which are rooted in democratic myths of inclusivity and openness. Timely and trenchant, the book illustrates the permanence of racism and how neutrality must be rejected to achieve true empowerment and substantive equality.

As the climate emergency intensifies, rights-based climate cases - litigation that is based on human rights law - are becoming an increasingly important tool for securing more ambitious climate action. This book is the first to offer a systematic analysis of the universe of these cases known as human rights and climate change (HRCC) cases. By combining theory, empirical documentation, and strategic debate among preeminent scholars and practitioners from around the world, the book captures the roots, legal innovations, empirical richness, impact, and challenges of this dynamic field of sociolegal practice. It looks specifically at the sociolegal origins and trajectory of HRCC cases, the legal innovations of this type of litigation, and the strategies and impacts of these cases. In doing so, this book equips litigators, researchers, practitioners, students, and concerned citizens with an understanding of an important method of holding governments and corporations accountable for climate harms. This book is also available as Open Access on Cambridge Core.

In Digital Data Collection and Information Privacy Law, Mark Burdon argues for the reformulation of information privacy law to regulate new power consequences of ubiquitous data collection. Examining developing business models, based on collections of sensor data - with a focus on the 'smart home' - Burdon demonstrates the challenges that are arising for information privacy's control-model and its application of principled protections of personal information exchange. By reformulating information privacy's primary role of individual control as an interrupter of modulated power, Burdon provides a foundation for future law reform and calls for stronger information privacy law protections. This book should be read by anyone interested in the role of privacy in a world of ubiquitous and pervasive data collection.

What are citizens of a free country willing to tolerate in the name of public safety? Jon Fasman journeys from the US to London - one of the most heavily surveilled cities on earth - to China and beyond, to expose the legal, political, and moral issues surrounding how the state uses surveillance technology. Automatic licence-plate readers allow police to amass a granular record of where people go, when, and for how long. Drones give the state eyes - and possibly weapons - in the skies. Algorithms purport to predict where and when crime will occur, and how big a risk a suspect has of reoffending. Specially designed tools can crack a device's encryption keys, rending all privacy protections useless. And facial recognition technology poses perhaps a more dire and lasting threat than any other form of surveillance. Jon Fasman examines how these technologies help police do their jobs, and what their use means for our privacy rights and civil liberties, exploring vital questions, such as: Should we expect to be tracked and filmed whenever we leave our homes? Should the state have access to all of the data we generate? Should private companies? What might happen if all of these technologies are combined and put in the hands of a government with scant regard for its citizens' civil liberties? Through on-the-ground reporting and vivid storytelling, Fasman explores one of the most urgent issues of our time.

The book launches with examples, concrete cases, or political confrontations to explain how to conceive the safeguards at stake. It portrays these as embodying principles requiring particular actions and the implementation of policies. For instance, free speech demands permitting seemingly offensive expression plus promoting a diverse and open public debate. The work scrutinizes specific guaranties, such as those pertaining to asylum, citizenship, abortion, due process, self-determination, or the environment. It presents them as engendering problems peculiar to them. Next, the discussion dissects how precepts, like human rights and democracy, may contingently clash despite their overall commensurability. Finally, it underscores the interconnection of negative, substantive, and national entitlements with their positive, procedural, and international counterparts. Throughout, ruminations on the following questions unfold: How may courts and governments respectively contribute to actualizing the liberties at issue? How do these bear upon social justice? How may ideologically opposed states nonetheless collaborate on them?