| UNITED STATES The United States of America The United States of America Joined United Nations: 24 October 1945 Human Rights as assured by their constitution Click here Updated 11/04/10 |
| CAPITAL |
| POPULATION |
| CHIEF OF STATE |
| SELECTION PROCESS |
Washington DC
310,232,863 (July 2010 est.)
Barack Hussein Obama
President since 20 January 2009
President since 20 January 2009
President and vice president elected on the same ticket by a
college of representatives who are elected directly from each
state; president and vice president serve four-year terms
(eligible for a second term); election last held 4 November 2008
Next scheduled election: 6 November 2012
college of representatives who are elected directly from each
state; president and vice president serve four-year terms
(eligible for a second term); election last held 4 November 2008
Next scheduled election: 6 November 2012
HEAD OF GOVERNMENT
Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr.
Vice President since 20 January 2009
Vice President since 20 January 2009
The president is both the chief of state and head of government
| DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS |
| ETHNIC GROUPS |
White 79.96%, black 12.85%, Asian 4.43%, Amerindian and Alaska native 0.97%, native Hawaiian and other Pacific
islander 0.18%, two or more races 1.61% (July 2007 estimate)
NOTE: a separate listing for Hispanic is not included because the US Census Bureau considers Hispanic to
mean a person of Latin American descent (including persons of Cuban, Mexican, or Puerto Rican origin) living
in the US who may be of any race or ethnic group (white, black, Asian, etc.)
islander 0.18%, two or more races 1.61% (July 2007 estimate)
NOTE: a separate listing for Hispanic is not included because the US Census Bureau considers Hispanic to
mean a person of Latin American descent (including persons of Cuban, Mexican, or Puerto Rican origin) living
in the US who may be of any race or ethnic group (white, black, Asian, etc.)
| RELIGIONS |
Protestant 51.3%, Roman Catholic 23.9%, Mormon 1.7%, other Christian 1.6%, Jewish 1.7%, Buddhist 0.7%, Muslim
0.6%, other or unspecified 2.5%, unaffiliated 12.1%, none 4% (2007 est.)
0.6%, other or unspecified 2.5%, unaffiliated 12.1%, none 4% (2007 est.)
| GOVERNMENT STRUCTURE |
Federal Republic with strong democratic traditions, 50 states, 1 district, 14 territorial dependents, 4 Trust Territories,
Federal court system based on English common law; each state has its own unique legal system, of which all but one
(Louisiana's) is based on English common law; judicial review of legislative acts , Does not accept compulsory ICJ
jurisdiction
Executive: President and Vice President elected for four year term,; eligible for second term; election last held 4 November 2008
(next to be held on 6 November 2012)
Legislative: Bicameral Congress consists of the Senate (100 seats, one-third are renewed every two years; 2 members
are elected from each state by popular vote to serve six-year terms) and the House of Representatives (435 seats;
members are directly elected by popular vote to serve two-year terms)
Last election: 2 November 2010; Next scheduled election 6 November 2012
Judicial: Supreme Court (its nine justices are appointed for life on condition of good behavior by the president with
confirmation by the Senate); United States Courts of Appeal; United States District Courts; State and County Courts
Federal court system based on English common law; each state has its own unique legal system, of which all but one
(Louisiana's) is based on English common law; judicial review of legislative acts , Does not accept compulsory ICJ
jurisdiction
Executive: President and Vice President elected for four year term,; eligible for second term; election last held 4 November 2008
(next to be held on 6 November 2012)
Legislative: Bicameral Congress consists of the Senate (100 seats, one-third are renewed every two years; 2 members
are elected from each state by popular vote to serve six-year terms) and the House of Representatives (435 seats;
members are directly elected by popular vote to serve two-year terms)
Last election: 2 November 2010; Next scheduled election 6 November 2012
Judicial: Supreme Court (its nine justices are appointed for life on condition of good behavior by the president with
confirmation by the Senate); United States Courts of Appeal; United States District Courts; State and County Courts
| LANGUAGES |
English 82.1%, Spanish 10.7%, other Indo-European 3.8%, Asian and Pacific island 2.7%, other 0.7% (2000 census)
| BRIEF HISTORY |
| ECONOMIC OVERVIEW |
The US has the largest and most technologically powerful economy in the world, with a per capita GDP of $48,000. In
this market-oriented economy, private individuals and business firms make most of the decisions, and the federal and state
governments buy needed goods and services predominantly in the private marketplace. US business firms enjoy greater
flexibility than their counterparts in Western Europe and Japan in decisions to expand capital plant, to lay off surplus
workers, and to develop new products. At the same time, they face higher barriers to enter their rivals' home markets than
foreign firms face entering US markets. US firms are at or near the forefront in technological advances, especially in
computers and in medical, aerospace, and military equipment; their advantage has narrowed since the end of World War
II. The onrush of technology largely explains the gradual development of a "two-tier labor market" in which those at the
bottom lack the education and the professional/technical skills of those at the top and, more and more, fail to get
comparable pay raises, health insurance coverage, and other benefits. Since 1975, practically all the gains in household
income have gone to the top 20% of households. The response to the terrorist attacks of 11 September 2001 showed the
remarkable resilience of the economy. The war in March-April 2003 between a US-led coalition and Iraq, and the
subsequent occupation of Iraq, required major shifts in national resources to the military. The rise in GDP in 2004-07 was
undergirded by substantial gains in labor productivity. Hurricane Katrina caused extensive damage in the Gulf Coast
region in August 2005, but had a small impact on overall GDP growth for the year. Soaring oil prices between 2005 and
the first half of 2008 threatened inflation and unemployment, as higher gasoline prices ate into consumers' budgets.
Imported oil accounts for about two-thirds of US consumption. Long-term problems include inadequate investment in
economic infrastructure, rapidly rising medical and pension costs of an aging population, sizable trade and budget deficits,
and stagnation of family income in the lower economic groups. The merchandise trade deficit reached a record $847
billion in 2007, but declined to $810 billion in 2008, as a depreciating exchange rate for the dollar against most major
currencies discouraged US imports and made US exports more competitive abroad. The global economic downturn, the
sub-prime mortgage crisis, investment bank failures, falling home prices, and tight credit pushed the United States into a
recession by mid-2008. To help stabilize financial markets, the US Congress established a $700 billion Troubled Asset
Relief Program (TARP) in October 2008. The government used some of these funds to purchase equity in US banks and
other industrial corporations. In January 2009 the US Congress passed and President Barack OBAMA signed a bill
providing an additional $787 billion fiscal stimulus - two-thirds on additional spending and one-third on tax cuts - to create
jobs and to help the economy recover. On 21 March 2010, the U.S. Congress voted for comprehensive health care
reform. It was signed into law by President Obama on 23 March, 2010.
this market-oriented economy, private individuals and business firms make most of the decisions, and the federal and state
governments buy needed goods and services predominantly in the private marketplace. US business firms enjoy greater
flexibility than their counterparts in Western Europe and Japan in decisions to expand capital plant, to lay off surplus
workers, and to develop new products. At the same time, they face higher barriers to enter their rivals' home markets than
foreign firms face entering US markets. US firms are at or near the forefront in technological advances, especially in
computers and in medical, aerospace, and military equipment; their advantage has narrowed since the end of World War
II. The onrush of technology largely explains the gradual development of a "two-tier labor market" in which those at the
bottom lack the education and the professional/technical skills of those at the top and, more and more, fail to get
comparable pay raises, health insurance coverage, and other benefits. Since 1975, practically all the gains in household
income have gone to the top 20% of households. The response to the terrorist attacks of 11 September 2001 showed the
remarkable resilience of the economy. The war in March-April 2003 between a US-led coalition and Iraq, and the
subsequent occupation of Iraq, required major shifts in national resources to the military. The rise in GDP in 2004-07 was
undergirded by substantial gains in labor productivity. Hurricane Katrina caused extensive damage in the Gulf Coast
region in August 2005, but had a small impact on overall GDP growth for the year. Soaring oil prices between 2005 and
the first half of 2008 threatened inflation and unemployment, as higher gasoline prices ate into consumers' budgets.
Imported oil accounts for about two-thirds of US consumption. Long-term problems include inadequate investment in
economic infrastructure, rapidly rising medical and pension costs of an aging population, sizable trade and budget deficits,
and stagnation of family income in the lower economic groups. The merchandise trade deficit reached a record $847
billion in 2007, but declined to $810 billion in 2008, as a depreciating exchange rate for the dollar against most major
currencies discouraged US imports and made US exports more competitive abroad. The global economic downturn, the
sub-prime mortgage crisis, investment bank failures, falling home prices, and tight credit pushed the United States into a
recession by mid-2008. To help stabilize financial markets, the US Congress established a $700 billion Troubled Asset
Relief Program (TARP) in October 2008. The government used some of these funds to purchase equity in US banks and
other industrial corporations. In January 2009 the US Congress passed and President Barack OBAMA signed a bill
providing an additional $787 billion fiscal stimulus - two-thirds on additional spending and one-third on tax cuts - to create
jobs and to help the economy recover. On 21 March 2010, the U.S. Congress voted for comprehensive health care
reform. It was signed into law by President Obama on 23 March, 2010.
| POLITICAL CLIMATE |
Politics of the United States of America takes place in a framework of a federal presidential representative democratic
republic, whereby the President of the United States is both head of state and head of government, and of a two-party
legislative and electoral system. Executive power is exercised by the government, which is headed by the President and
independent of the legislature. Legislative power is vested in the two chambers of congress, the Senate and the House of
Representatives. Judicial power is exercised by the judicial branch (or judiciary), comprised of the United States Supreme
Court and lower federal courts. The function of the judiciary is to interpret the United States Constitution as well as the
federal laws and regulations. This includes resolving disputes between the executive and legislative branches. The federal
government of the United States was established by the United States Constitution. American politics has been dominated
by two major parties, the Democratic Party and the Republican Party, ever since the American Civil War, though there
have also always existed other minor parties of marginal political significance. Major differences between the political
system of the United States and that of most other developed democracies are the power of the U.S. Senate as the upper
house of the legislature, the wide scope of power of the U.S. Supreme Court, the separation of power between the
legislature and the executive government, and the dominance of the two main parties - the United States being the only
developed democracy without a major third party.
Click here to read more »
republic, whereby the President of the United States is both head of state and head of government, and of a two-party
legislative and electoral system. Executive power is exercised by the government, which is headed by the President and
independent of the legislature. Legislative power is vested in the two chambers of congress, the Senate and the House of
Representatives. Judicial power is exercised by the judicial branch (or judiciary), comprised of the United States Supreme
Court and lower federal courts. The function of the judiciary is to interpret the United States Constitution as well as the
federal laws and regulations. This includes resolving disputes between the executive and legislative branches. The federal
government of the United States was established by the United States Constitution. American politics has been dominated
by two major parties, the Democratic Party and the Republican Party, ever since the American Civil War, though there
have also always existed other minor parties of marginal political significance. Major differences between the political
system of the United States and that of most other developed democracies are the power of the U.S. Senate as the upper
house of the legislature, the wide scope of power of the U.S. Supreme Court, the separation of power between the
legislature and the executive government, and the dominance of the two main parties - the United States being the only
developed democracy without a major third party.
Click here to read more »
| INTERNATIONAL DISPUTES |
The U.S. has intensified domestic security measures and is collaborating closely with its neighbors, Canada and Mexico,
to monitor and control legal and illegal personnel, transport, and commodities across the international borders; abundant
rainfall in recent years along much of the Mexico-US border region has ameliorated periodically strained water-sharing
arrangements; 1990 Maritime Boundary Agreement in the Bering Sea still awaits Russian Duma ratification; managed
maritime boundary disputes with Canada at Dixon Entrance, Beaufort Sea, Strait of Juan de Fuca, and around the
disputed Machias Seal Island and North Rock; The Bahamas and US have not been able to agree on a maritime
boundary; US Naval Base at Guantanamo Bay is leased from Cuba and only mutual agreement or US abandonment of
the area can terminate the lease; Haiti claims US-administered Navassa Island; US has made no territorial claim in
Antarctica (but has reserved the right to do so) and does not recognize the claims of any other states; Marshall Islands
claims Wake Island; Tokelau included American Samoa's Swains Island among the islands listed in its 2006 draft
constitution
to monitor and control legal and illegal personnel, transport, and commodities across the international borders; abundant
rainfall in recent years along much of the Mexico-US border region has ameliorated periodically strained water-sharing
arrangements; 1990 Maritime Boundary Agreement in the Bering Sea still awaits Russian Duma ratification; managed
maritime boundary disputes with Canada at Dixon Entrance, Beaufort Sea, Strait of Juan de Fuca, and around the
disputed Machias Seal Island and North Rock; The Bahamas and US have not been able to agree on a maritime
boundary; US Naval Base at Guantanamo Bay is leased from Cuba and only mutual agreement or US abandonment of
the area can terminate the lease; Haiti claims US-administered Navassa Island; US has made no territorial claim in
Antarctica (but has reserved the right to do so) and does not recognize the claims of any other states; Marshall Islands
claims Wake Island; Tokelau included American Samoa's Swains Island among the islands listed in its 2006 draft
constitution
| REFUGEES AND INTERNALLY DISPLACED PERSONS (IDP) |
Refugees (country of origin): the US admitted 62,643 refugees during FY04/05 including; 10,586 (Somalia); 8,549
(Laos); 6,666 (Russia); 6,479 (Cuba); 3,100 (Haiti); 2,136 (Iran) (2006)
(Laos); 6,666 (Russia); 6,479 (Cuba); 3,100 (Haiti); 2,136 (Iran) (2006)
| TRAFFICKING IN PERSONS |
None reported.
| HUMAN RIGHTS STATEMENTS, ANALYSIS AND CRITIQUES |
The U.S. State Department does not issue an annual Country Report regarding U.S. Human Rights practices. It does,
however, assess the Human Rights condition of foreign countries. The U.S. Human Rights Network publishes an annual
"Shadow Report" on human rights in the United States.
20 August 2010
Human Rights Council
Working Group on the Universal Periodic Review
Ninth session
Geneva, 1-12 November 2010
The present report is a summary of 103 stakeholders’ submissions1 to the universal periodic review. It follows the structure of the
general guidelines adopted by the Human Rights Council. It does not contain any opinions, views or suggestions on the part of the
Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), nor any judgement or determination in relation to
specific claims. The information included herein has been systematically referenced in endnotes and, to the extent possible, the original
texts have not been altered. Lack of information or focus on specific issues may be due to the absence of submissions by
stakeholders regarding these particular issues. The full texts of all submissions received are available on the OHCHR website. The
report has been prepared taking into consideration the four-year periodicity of the first cycle of the review.
I. Background and framework
A. Scope of international obligations
1. Amnesty International (AI) recommended embarking upon a programme of ratification, and ensure implementation into domestic
law, of human rights and other instruments, including CEDAW, CRC, ICESCR, OPCAT, the International Convention for the
Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance, the Rome Statute of the International court, the American Convention on
Human Rights, and the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.2 The Inter-American Commission of Human Rights (IACHR)
informed that the United States (US) has not yet ratified any of the regional human rights instruments.3
2. Four Freedoms Forum (FFF) recommended accepting the optional protocols and articles that allow for individual communications.4
3. First Peoples Human Rights Coalition (FPHRC), US Human Rights Network (USHRN) and Episcopal Diocese of Maine (EDM)
recommended endorsing the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples without qualification and, in partnership with
Indigenous peoples, fully implement it.5 USHRN called on the US to use the Declaration as a guide for interpretation of legally binding
obligations vis-à-vis Indigenous Peoples.6
4. USHRN and AI recommended withdrawing all reservations, understandings and declarations that serve to undermine compliance
with the treaties or undermine their object and purpose.7
5. AI and International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) recommended recognizing and giving effect to the extra-territorial application of
international human rights law to actions by US personnel vis-à-vis territories and individuals over which they exercise effective
control, at all times,8 and; the dual applicability of human rights and international humanitarian law in case of armed conflicts.9
Click here to read more »
however, assess the Human Rights condition of foreign countries. The U.S. Human Rights Network publishes an annual
"Shadow Report" on human rights in the United States.
20 August 2010
Human Rights Council
Working Group on the Universal Periodic Review
Ninth session
Geneva, 1-12 November 2010
The present report is a summary of 103 stakeholders’ submissions1 to the universal periodic review. It follows the structure of the
general guidelines adopted by the Human Rights Council. It does not contain any opinions, views or suggestions on the part of the
Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), nor any judgement or determination in relation to
specific claims. The information included herein has been systematically referenced in endnotes and, to the extent possible, the original
texts have not been altered. Lack of information or focus on specific issues may be due to the absence of submissions by
stakeholders regarding these particular issues. The full texts of all submissions received are available on the OHCHR website. The
report has been prepared taking into consideration the four-year periodicity of the first cycle of the review.
I. Background and framework
A. Scope of international obligations
1. Amnesty International (AI) recommended embarking upon a programme of ratification, and ensure implementation into domestic
law, of human rights and other instruments, including CEDAW, CRC, ICESCR, OPCAT, the International Convention for the
Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance, the Rome Statute of the International court, the American Convention on
Human Rights, and the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.2 The Inter-American Commission of Human Rights (IACHR)
informed that the United States (US) has not yet ratified any of the regional human rights instruments.3
2. Four Freedoms Forum (FFF) recommended accepting the optional protocols and articles that allow for individual communications.4
3. First Peoples Human Rights Coalition (FPHRC), US Human Rights Network (USHRN) and Episcopal Diocese of Maine (EDM)
recommended endorsing the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples without qualification and, in partnership with
Indigenous peoples, fully implement it.5 USHRN called on the US to use the Declaration as a guide for interpretation of legally binding
obligations vis-à-vis Indigenous Peoples.6
4. USHRN and AI recommended withdrawing all reservations, understandings and declarations that serve to undermine compliance
with the treaties or undermine their object and purpose.7
5. AI and International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) recommended recognizing and giving effect to the extra-territorial application of
international human rights law to actions by US personnel vis-à-vis territories and individuals over which they exercise effective
control, at all times,8 and; the dual applicability of human rights and international humanitarian law in case of armed conflicts.9
Click here to read more »
12 February 2010
Human Rights Council
Thirteenth session
Agenda item 3
Promotion and protection of all human rights, civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights, including the right to
development
Report of the Special Rapporteur on adequate housing as a component of the right to an adequate standard of living, and
on the right to non-discrimination in this context, Raquel Rolnik*
Mission to the United States of America**
VI. Conclusions and recommendations
79. The Special Rapporteur acknowledges the high quality of the majority of housing in the United States, as well as the availability
and quality of utilities and services. However, she expresses her deep concern about the millions of people living in the United States
today who face serious challenges in accessing affordable and adequate housing, issues long faced by the poorest people and today
affecting a greater proportion of society. A new face of homelessness is appearing, with increasing numbers of working families and
individuals finding themselves on the streets, or living in shelters or in transitional housing arrangements with friends and family.
Federal funding for low-income housing has been cut over the past decades, leading to a reduced stock and quality of subsidized
housing. In addition, several cities have experienced a real estate boom which has led to increased housing prices. The subprime
mortgage crisis has increased an already large gap between the supply and demand of affordable housing, and the economic crisis
which followed has led to increased unemployment and an even greater need for affordable housing.
80. The Special Rapporteur noted throughout the visit that there is a long-standing commitment to provide adequate housing within
their means for all Americans and an acknowledgement that the history of housing policy in the United States has been problematic.
HUD Secretary Shaun Donovan has stated that in many cases neighbourhoods of concentrated poverty were the result of government
policy.62
81. Housing is not simply about bricks and mortar, nor is it simply a financial asset. Housing includes a sense of community, trust and
bonds built between neighbours over time; the schools which educate the children; and the businesses which support the local
economy and provide needed goods and services. Government policy has sometimes resulted in tearing apart this important sense of
community, removing a source of stability for subsidized housing residents, and engendering a sense of mistrust of Government
regard for their interests.
82. The present Government is actively pursuing policy change to better meet the housing needs of its population. The Special
Rapporteur strongly urges the Government to increase opportunities for dialogue with civil society and tenant organizations. The town
hall format which was used during her visit was met with broad support from civil society organizations, and she recommends that it
be explored for interaction between local public housing authorities and residents. Real participation of those affected by the housing
crisis is essential for a successful outcome to current efforts to change and reform.
Click here to read more »
Human Rights Council
Thirteenth session
Agenda item 3
Promotion and protection of all human rights, civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights, including the right to
development
Report of the Special Rapporteur on adequate housing as a component of the right to an adequate standard of living, and
on the right to non-discrimination in this context, Raquel Rolnik*
Mission to the United States of America**
VI. Conclusions and recommendations
79. The Special Rapporteur acknowledges the high quality of the majority of housing in the United States, as well as the availability
and quality of utilities and services. However, she expresses her deep concern about the millions of people living in the United States
today who face serious challenges in accessing affordable and adequate housing, issues long faced by the poorest people and today
affecting a greater proportion of society. A new face of homelessness is appearing, with increasing numbers of working families and
individuals finding themselves on the streets, or living in shelters or in transitional housing arrangements with friends and family.
Federal funding for low-income housing has been cut over the past decades, leading to a reduced stock and quality of subsidized
housing. In addition, several cities have experienced a real estate boom which has led to increased housing prices. The subprime
mortgage crisis has increased an already large gap between the supply and demand of affordable housing, and the economic crisis
which followed has led to increased unemployment and an even greater need for affordable housing.
80. The Special Rapporteur noted throughout the visit that there is a long-standing commitment to provide adequate housing within
their means for all Americans and an acknowledgement that the history of housing policy in the United States has been problematic.
HUD Secretary Shaun Donovan has stated that in many cases neighbourhoods of concentrated poverty were the result of government
policy.62
81. Housing is not simply about bricks and mortar, nor is it simply a financial asset. Housing includes a sense of community, trust and
bonds built between neighbours over time; the schools which educate the children; and the businesses which support the local
economy and provide needed goods and services. Government policy has sometimes resulted in tearing apart this important sense of
community, removing a source of stability for subsidized housing residents, and engendering a sense of mistrust of Government
regard for their interests.
82. The present Government is actively pursuing policy change to better meet the housing needs of its population. The Special
Rapporteur strongly urges the Government to increase opportunities for dialogue with civil society and tenant organizations. The town
hall format which was used during her visit was met with broad support from civil society organizations, and she recommends that it
be explored for interaction between local public housing authorities and residents. Real participation of those affected by the housing
crisis is essential for a successful outcome to current efforts to change and reform.
Click here to read more »
FREEDOM IN THE WORLD REPORT 2009
Political Rights Score: 1
Civil Liberties Score: 1
Status: Free
Explanatory Note
The numerical ratings and status listed above do not reflect conditions in Puerto Rico, which is examined in a separate
report.
Overview
Democratic Party candidate Barack Obama won the November 2008 presidential election, which was held under the cloud of the
country’s most serious economic crisis since the Great Depression of the 1930s. Obama, the first black candidate to win the
presidency, ran on a platform of comprehensive change from the policies of the outgoing Republican president, George W. Bush. The
Democrats also performed well in congressional elections, ensuring that the new president would have the benefit of substantial
majorities in both houses of Congress.
As with other recent elections, campaigns for the party presidential nominations got under way well in advance of the election itself, in
early 2007. By mid-2008, after an intense struggle, Senator Barack Obama had defeated several rivals for the Democratic nomination,
including the early favorite, Senator Hillary Clinton, the wife of former president Bill Clinton (1993–2001). Obama’s Republican
opponent was Senator John McCain, a highly respected veteran of the Vietnam War who had won his party’s nomination after a
similarly grueling selection process.
Obama triumphed in the November general election amid fears of economic collapse, triggered by a major decline in the stock market,
a housing crisis that saw hundreds of thousands of home-mortgage foreclosures, and a major increase in the unemployment rate.
Obama ultimately secured 53 percent of the popular vote, with McCain receiving 46 percent. In the Electoral College balloting, which
determines the presidential election outcome, Obama and his vice presidential nominee, Senator Joseph Biden, received 365 votes,
compared with 173 for McCain and his running mate, Governor Sarah Palin of Alaska. Although McCain did well among white men,
Obama scored substantial majorities among several groups, including black, Hispanic, and younger voters. The voter turnout rate, at
over 61 percent of eligible voters, was one of the highest recorded in recent years. In concurrent legislative elections, the Democrats
increased their majorities in both the House of Representatives and the Senate.
During the campaign, both Obama and McCain had distanced themselves from a number of the more controversial counterterrorism
policies initiated by President Bush since the September 2001 terrorist attacks on the United States. The two candidates pledged to end
interrogation policies that amounted to torture, and Obama promised to shut down the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba,
where hundreds of terrorism suspects were held. However, Obama was unclear on how the remaining detainees—classified by the
Bush administration as enemy combatants—would be dealt with. In June, the Supreme Court had dealt a major blow to Bush’s
policies on the issue, finding that Guantanamo detainees had the right to challenge their detention in federal court. Separately, in July,
Congress voted to substantially expand the federal government’s surveillance authority, effectively endorsing another of Bush’s
counterterrorism initiatives; the measure included a provision that granted legal immunity to telephone companies for their cooperation
with the government’s wiretapping efforts in the years after the 2001 attacks.
As the Bush administration neared its end, some human rights advocates and members of the political opposition called for
investigations into its activities. Some argued that Bush officials should face criminal prosecution for their role in formulating
counterterrorism policy, while others favored congressional probes or independent “truth commissions” to uncover the full extent of
the government’s activities without necessarily launching criminal cases.
Click here to read more »
Political Rights Score: 1
Civil Liberties Score: 1
Status: Free
Explanatory Note
The numerical ratings and status listed above do not reflect conditions in Puerto Rico, which is examined in a separate
report.
Overview
Democratic Party candidate Barack Obama won the November 2008 presidential election, which was held under the cloud of the
country’s most serious economic crisis since the Great Depression of the 1930s. Obama, the first black candidate to win the
presidency, ran on a platform of comprehensive change from the policies of the outgoing Republican president, George W. Bush. The
Democrats also performed well in congressional elections, ensuring that the new president would have the benefit of substantial
majorities in both houses of Congress.
As with other recent elections, campaigns for the party presidential nominations got under way well in advance of the election itself, in
early 2007. By mid-2008, after an intense struggle, Senator Barack Obama had defeated several rivals for the Democratic nomination,
including the early favorite, Senator Hillary Clinton, the wife of former president Bill Clinton (1993–2001). Obama’s Republican
opponent was Senator John McCain, a highly respected veteran of the Vietnam War who had won his party’s nomination after a
similarly grueling selection process.
Obama triumphed in the November general election amid fears of economic collapse, triggered by a major decline in the stock market,
a housing crisis that saw hundreds of thousands of home-mortgage foreclosures, and a major increase in the unemployment rate.
Obama ultimately secured 53 percent of the popular vote, with McCain receiving 46 percent. In the Electoral College balloting, which
determines the presidential election outcome, Obama and his vice presidential nominee, Senator Joseph Biden, received 365 votes,
compared with 173 for McCain and his running mate, Governor Sarah Palin of Alaska. Although McCain did well among white men,
Obama scored substantial majorities among several groups, including black, Hispanic, and younger voters. The voter turnout rate, at
over 61 percent of eligible voters, was one of the highest recorded in recent years. In concurrent legislative elections, the Democrats
increased their majorities in both the House of Representatives and the Senate.
During the campaign, both Obama and McCain had distanced themselves from a number of the more controversial counterterrorism
policies initiated by President Bush since the September 2001 terrorist attacks on the United States. The two candidates pledged to end
interrogation policies that amounted to torture, and Obama promised to shut down the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba,
where hundreds of terrorism suspects were held. However, Obama was unclear on how the remaining detainees—classified by the
Bush administration as enemy combatants—would be dealt with. In June, the Supreme Court had dealt a major blow to Bush’s
policies on the issue, finding that Guantanamo detainees had the right to challenge their detention in federal court. Separately, in July,
Congress voted to substantially expand the federal government’s surveillance authority, effectively endorsing another of Bush’s
counterterrorism initiatives; the measure included a provision that granted legal immunity to telephone companies for their cooperation
with the government’s wiretapping efforts in the years after the 2001 attacks.
As the Bush administration neared its end, some human rights advocates and members of the political opposition called for
investigations into its activities. Some argued that Bush officials should face criminal prosecution for their role in formulating
counterterrorism policy, while others favored congressional probes or independent “truth commissions” to uncover the full extent of
the government’s activities without necessarily launching criminal cases.
Click here to read more »
DEADLY DELIVERY
THE MATERNAL HEALTH CARE CRISIS IN THE USA
12 March 2010
More than two women die every day in the USA from complications of pregnancy and childbirth. Approximately half of these deaths
could be prevented if maternal health care were available, accessible and of good quality for all women in the USA.
Maternal mortality ratios have increased from 6.6 deaths per 100,000 live births in 1987 to 13.3 deaths per 100,000 live births in 2006.
While some of the recorded increase is due to improved data collection, the fact remains that maternal mortality ratios have risen
significantly.
The USA spends more than any other country on health care, and more on maternal health than any other type of hospital care.
Despite this, women in the USA have a higher risk of dying of pregnancy-related complications than those in 40 other countries. For
example, the likelihood of a woman dying in childbirth in the USA is five times greater than in Greece, four times greater than in
Germany, and three times greater than in Spain.
African-American women are nearly four times more likely to die of pregnancy-related complications than white women. These rates
and disparities have not improved in more than 20 years. During 2004 and 2005, more than 68,000 women nearly died in childbirth in
the USA. Each year, 1.7 million women suffer a complication that has an adverse effect on their health.
This is not just a public health emergency – it is a human rights crisis. Women in the USA face a range of obstacles in obtaining the
services they need. The health care system suffers from multiple failures: discrimination; financial, bureaucratic and language barriers
to care; lack of information about maternal care and family planning options; lack of active participation in care decisions; inadequate
staffing and quality protocols; and a lack of accountability and oversight.
MATERNAL HEALTH AND HUMAN RIGHTS
Maternal health is a human rights issue. Preventable maternal mortality can result from or reflect violations of a variety of human
rights, including the right to life, the right to freedom from discrimination, and the right to the highest attainable standard of health.
Governments have an obligation to respect, protect and fulfil these and other human rights and are ultimately accountable for
guaranteeing a health care system that ensures these rights universally and equitably.
Click here to read more »
THE MATERNAL HEALTH CARE CRISIS IN THE USA
12 March 2010
More than two women die every day in the USA from complications of pregnancy and childbirth. Approximately half of these deaths
could be prevented if maternal health care were available, accessible and of good quality for all women in the USA.
Maternal mortality ratios have increased from 6.6 deaths per 100,000 live births in 1987 to 13.3 deaths per 100,000 live births in 2006.
While some of the recorded increase is due to improved data collection, the fact remains that maternal mortality ratios have risen
significantly.
The USA spends more than any other country on health care, and more on maternal health than any other type of hospital care.
Despite this, women in the USA have a higher risk of dying of pregnancy-related complications than those in 40 other countries. For
example, the likelihood of a woman dying in childbirth in the USA is five times greater than in Greece, four times greater than in
Germany, and three times greater than in Spain.
African-American women are nearly four times more likely to die of pregnancy-related complications than white women. These rates
and disparities have not improved in more than 20 years. During 2004 and 2005, more than 68,000 women nearly died in childbirth in
the USA. Each year, 1.7 million women suffer a complication that has an adverse effect on their health.
This is not just a public health emergency – it is a human rights crisis. Women in the USA face a range of obstacles in obtaining the
services they need. The health care system suffers from multiple failures: discrimination; financial, bureaucratic and language barriers
to care; lack of information about maternal care and family planning options; lack of active participation in care decisions; inadequate
staffing and quality protocols; and a lack of accountability and oversight.
MATERNAL HEALTH AND HUMAN RIGHTS
Maternal health is a human rights issue. Preventable maternal mortality can result from or reflect violations of a variety of human
rights, including the right to life, the right to freedom from discrimination, and the right to the highest attainable standard of health.
Governments have an obligation to respect, protect and fulfil these and other human rights and are ultimately accountable for
guaranteeing a health care system that ensures these rights universally and equitably.
Click here to read more »
US: Groups Urge End to Military Commissions Case Against Child Soldier
Omar Khadr Should be Repatriated to Canada or Tried in US Federal Court
March 12, 2010
(Washington, DC) - Three leading civil liberties, human rights, and juvenile justice organizations today issued a letter urging Attorney
General Eric Holder and Secretary of Defense Robert Gates to end military commission proceedings against Omar Khadr, the
Canadian national apprehended in Afghanistan in 2002 when he was 15-years-old.
The American Civil Liberties Union, Human Rights Watch, and the Juvenile Law Center called on Holder and Gates to drop military
commission charges against Khadr, and to either repatriate him to Canada or transfer him to federal court and prosecute him in
accordance with international juvenile justice and fair trial standards.
"Trying Omar Khadr in a discredited military tribunal flies in the face of universally recognized standards of juvenile justice," said Jamil
Dakwar, director of the ACLU's human rights program. "As a former child soldier and victim of abuse in US custody, Omar Khadr
should first and foremost be a candidate for repatriation and rehabilitation, not subject to prosecution in an illegitimate system of
military commission."
Khadr is slated for trial by military commission in July. The groups said that if the trial by military commission goes forward, Khadr
will become the first person in decades to be tried by any western nation for war crimes allegedly committed as a child, which would
undermine efforts by the Obama administration to increase international support for US counterterrorism policies.
"If the Obama administration is truly committed to restoring US credibility on combating terrorism, it should not prosecute Omar
Khadr in a military commission," said Andrea Prasow, senior counterterrorism counsel at Human Rights Watch. "Such a trial would
only further damage US efforts to gain full support from its allies."
Khadr is accused of having thrown a grenade that resulted in the death of US Army Sergeant First Class Christopher Speer during a
firefight in Afghanistan in July 2002, when he was 15-years-old. According to Khadr's lawyers, while in US custody he was forced
into painful stress positions, threatened with rape, confronted with barking dogs, and once used as a "human mop" after he urinated
on the floor during an interrogation session.
Khadr was not allowed to meet with a lawyer until November 2004, more than two years after he was taken into custody, and was
denied basic services mandated by international juvenile justice standards, including access to education, vocational training,
counseling, or any family contact.
Click here to read more »
Omar Khadr Should be Repatriated to Canada or Tried in US Federal Court
March 12, 2010
(Washington, DC) - Three leading civil liberties, human rights, and juvenile justice organizations today issued a letter urging Attorney
General Eric Holder and Secretary of Defense Robert Gates to end military commission proceedings against Omar Khadr, the
Canadian national apprehended in Afghanistan in 2002 when he was 15-years-old.
The American Civil Liberties Union, Human Rights Watch, and the Juvenile Law Center called on Holder and Gates to drop military
commission charges against Khadr, and to either repatriate him to Canada or transfer him to federal court and prosecute him in
accordance with international juvenile justice and fair trial standards.
"Trying Omar Khadr in a discredited military tribunal flies in the face of universally recognized standards of juvenile justice," said Jamil
Dakwar, director of the ACLU's human rights program. "As a former child soldier and victim of abuse in US custody, Omar Khadr
should first and foremost be a candidate for repatriation and rehabilitation, not subject to prosecution in an illegitimate system of
military commission."
Khadr is slated for trial by military commission in July. The groups said that if the trial by military commission goes forward, Khadr
will become the first person in decades to be tried by any western nation for war crimes allegedly committed as a child, which would
undermine efforts by the Obama administration to increase international support for US counterterrorism policies.
"If the Obama administration is truly committed to restoring US credibility on combating terrorism, it should not prosecute Omar
Khadr in a military commission," said Andrea Prasow, senior counterterrorism counsel at Human Rights Watch. "Such a trial would
only further damage US efforts to gain full support from its allies."
Khadr is accused of having thrown a grenade that resulted in the death of US Army Sergeant First Class Christopher Speer during a
firefight in Afghanistan in July 2002, when he was 15-years-old. According to Khadr's lawyers, while in US custody he was forced
into painful stress positions, threatened with rape, confronted with barking dogs, and once used as a "human mop" after he urinated
on the floor during an interrogation session.
Khadr was not allowed to meet with a lawyer until November 2004, more than two years after he was taken into custody, and was
denied basic services mandated by international juvenile justice standards, including access to education, vocational training,
counseling, or any family contact.
Click here to read more »
Report of the United States of America
Submitted to the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights
In Conjunction with the Universal Periodic Review
04 November 2010
I. Introduction
I.1 A more perfect union, a more perfect world
1. The story of the United States of America is one guided by universal values shared the world over—that all are created equal and
endowed with inalienable rights. In the United States, these values have grounded our institutions and motivated the determination of
our citizens to come ever closer to realizing these ideals. Our Founders, who proclaimed their ambition “to form a more perfect
Union,” bequeathed to us not a static condition but a perpetual aspiration and mission.
2. We present our first Universal Periodic Review (UPR) report in the context of our commitment to help to build a world in which
universal rights give strength and direction to the nations, partnerships, and institutions that can usher us toward a more perfect
world, a world characterized by, as President Obama has said, “a just peace based on the inherent rights and dignity of every
individual.”
3. The U.S. has long been a cornerstone of the global economy and the global order. However, the most enduring contribution of the
United States has been as a political experiment. The principles that all are created equal and endowed with inalienable rights were
translated into promises and, with time, encoded into law. These simple but powerful principles have been the foundation upon which
we have built the institutions of a modern state that is accountable to its citizens and whose laws are both legitimated by and limited by
an enduring commitment to respect the rights of individuals. It is our political system that enables our economy and undergirds our
global influence. As President Obama wrote in the preface to the recently published National Security Strategy, “democracy does not
merely represent our better angels, it stands in opposition to aggression and injustice, and our support for universal rights is both
fundamental to American leadership and a source of our strength in the world.” Part of that strength derives from our democracy’s
capacity to adopt improvements based upon the firm foundation of our principled commitments. Our democracy is what allows us to
acknowledge the realities of the world we live in, to recognize the opportunities to progress toward the fulfillment of an ideal, and to
look to the future with pride and hope.
4. The ideas that informed and inform the American experiment can be found all over the world, and the people who have built it over
centuries have come from every continent. The American experiment is a human experiment; the values on which it is based,
including a commitment to human rights, are clearly engrained in our own national conscience, but they are also universal.
5. Echoing Eleanor Roosevelt, whose leadership was crucial to the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR),
Secretary of State that “[h]uman rights are universal, but their experience is local. This is why we are committed to holding everyone
to the same standard, including ourselves.”
Click here to read more »
Submitted to the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights
In Conjunction with the Universal Periodic Review
04 November 2010
I. Introduction
I.1 A more perfect union, a more perfect world
1. The story of the United States of America is one guided by universal values shared the world over—that all are created equal and
endowed with inalienable rights. In the United States, these values have grounded our institutions and motivated the determination of
our citizens to come ever closer to realizing these ideals. Our Founders, who proclaimed their ambition “to form a more perfect
Union,” bequeathed to us not a static condition but a perpetual aspiration and mission.
2. We present our first Universal Periodic Review (UPR) report in the context of our commitment to help to build a world in which
universal rights give strength and direction to the nations, partnerships, and institutions that can usher us toward a more perfect
world, a world characterized by, as President Obama has said, “a just peace based on the inherent rights and dignity of every
individual.”
3. The U.S. has long been a cornerstone of the global economy and the global order. However, the most enduring contribution of the
United States has been as a political experiment. The principles that all are created equal and endowed with inalienable rights were
translated into promises and, with time, encoded into law. These simple but powerful principles have been the foundation upon which
we have built the institutions of a modern state that is accountable to its citizens and whose laws are both legitimated by and limited by
an enduring commitment to respect the rights of individuals. It is our political system that enables our economy and undergirds our
global influence. As President Obama wrote in the preface to the recently published National Security Strategy, “democracy does not
merely represent our better angels, it stands in opposition to aggression and injustice, and our support for universal rights is both
fundamental to American leadership and a source of our strength in the world.” Part of that strength derives from our democracy’s
capacity to adopt improvements based upon the firm foundation of our principled commitments. Our democracy is what allows us to
acknowledge the realities of the world we live in, to recognize the opportunities to progress toward the fulfillment of an ideal, and to
look to the future with pride and hope.
4. The ideas that informed and inform the American experiment can be found all over the world, and the people who have built it over
centuries have come from every continent. The American experiment is a human experiment; the values on which it is based,
including a commitment to human rights, are clearly engrained in our own national conscience, but they are also universal.
5. Echoing Eleanor Roosevelt, whose leadership was crucial to the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR),
Secretary of State that “[h]uman rights are universal, but their experience is local. This is why we are committed to holding everyone
to the same standard, including ourselves.”
Click here to read more »
September 30, 2009
Re: U.S. Commission on Civil Rights Review and Report on the Implications of Enforcement Actions in United States v.
New Black Panther Party for Self-Defense, Civ. No. 09-0065 SD (E.D. Pa.) (NBPP case)
Dear Attorney General Holder:
The Commission requests that you instruct Department officials to fully cooperate, as 42 U.S.C. § 1975b(e) requires, with our
overdue information requests in the above-referenced matter. To that end, we also ask you to identify an individual who will exercise
the substantive authority to coordinate the Department’s responses to our current and future requests.
Pursuant to formal proceedings, the Commission initiated an inquiry into the implications of the Department’s enforcement actions in
the NBPP case as reflected in our letters to DOJ of June 16 and 22. We received a largely non-responsive letter from Portia Roberson
in late July and none of the documents we requested. On August 7, the Commission voted 6-0, with two members abstaining, to
expand its investigation by sending a follow-up letter to the Department.
On August 10, the Commission addressed its letter to you, explaining our need for the information. For example, we stressed our need
for information on previous voter intimidation investigations so that we could determine whether the Department’s action in the NBPP
case constitutes a change in policy and, if so, what the implications of that change might be.
At our most recent meeting on September 11, 2009, the Commission voted to make its review of the implications of the NBPP matter
the subject of its annual enforcement report. The Commission was aware that the Department’s Office of Professional Responsibility
(OPR) had initiated an inquiry into some aspects of the NBPP case to determine whether further review is warranted. Although a letter
from Ms. Roberson of September 9 expresses the Department’s desire to delay any response to the Commission until the OPR
investigation is complete, you may rest assured that the Commission will be sensitive to OPR’s internal ethics review as we move
forward with our own inquiry. As the discussion at our recent meeting indicates, the Commission will work to accommodate any
legitimate concerns the Department may have regarding specific requests for information once the Department begins its production.
The Commission has a special statutory responsibility to investigate voting rights deprivations and make appraisals of federal policies
to enforce federal voting rights laws. The Commission must form an independent judgment regarding the merits of the NBPP
enforcement actions (regardless of how the decisions were made) and the potential impact on future voter intimidation enforcement
by the Department. Accordingly, Congress has provided, in a provision with no statutory exceptions, that, “All Federal agencies shall
fully cooperate with the Commission to the end that it may effectively carry out its functions and duties.” 42 U.S.C. § 1975b(e).
Click here to read more »
Re: U.S. Commission on Civil Rights Review and Report on the Implications of Enforcement Actions in United States v.
New Black Panther Party for Self-Defense, Civ. No. 09-0065 SD (E.D. Pa.) (NBPP case)
Dear Attorney General Holder:
The Commission requests that you instruct Department officials to fully cooperate, as 42 U.S.C. § 1975b(e) requires, with our
overdue information requests in the above-referenced matter. To that end, we also ask you to identify an individual who will exercise
the substantive authority to coordinate the Department’s responses to our current and future requests.
Pursuant to formal proceedings, the Commission initiated an inquiry into the implications of the Department’s enforcement actions in
the NBPP case as reflected in our letters to DOJ of June 16 and 22. We received a largely non-responsive letter from Portia Roberson
in late July and none of the documents we requested. On August 7, the Commission voted 6-0, with two members abstaining, to
expand its investigation by sending a follow-up letter to the Department.
On August 10, the Commission addressed its letter to you, explaining our need for the information. For example, we stressed our need
for information on previous voter intimidation investigations so that we could determine whether the Department’s action in the NBPP
case constitutes a change in policy and, if so, what the implications of that change might be.
At our most recent meeting on September 11, 2009, the Commission voted to make its review of the implications of the NBPP matter
the subject of its annual enforcement report. The Commission was aware that the Department’s Office of Professional Responsibility
(OPR) had initiated an inquiry into some aspects of the NBPP case to determine whether further review is warranted. Although a letter
from Ms. Roberson of September 9 expresses the Department’s desire to delay any response to the Commission until the OPR
investigation is complete, you may rest assured that the Commission will be sensitive to OPR’s internal ethics review as we move
forward with our own inquiry. As the discussion at our recent meeting indicates, the Commission will work to accommodate any
legitimate concerns the Department may have regarding specific requests for information once the Department begins its production.
The Commission has a special statutory responsibility to investigate voting rights deprivations and make appraisals of federal policies
to enforce federal voting rights laws. The Commission must form an independent judgment regarding the merits of the NBPP
enforcement actions (regardless of how the decisions were made) and the potential impact on future voter intimidation enforcement
by the Department. Accordingly, Congress has provided, in a provision with no statutory exceptions, that, “All Federal agencies shall
fully cooperate with the Commission to the end that it may effectively carry out its functions and duties.” 42 U.S.C. § 1975b(e).
Click here to read more »
Family Members Ask Court to Reconsider Dismissal of Wrongful Death Claims from Guantánamo
March 17, 2010
March 17, 2010, New York – Last night, the families of two men who died at Guantánamo in June 2006 asked the district court in
Washington, D.C. to reconsider its February 16 ruling dismissing their case, which seeks to hold federal officials and the United
States accountable for their sons’ torture, arbitrary detention, and ultimate deaths. The families’ request is based on newly discovered
evidence from four soldiers, including a decorated Army officer, who describe a cover-up by the authorities and say they were
ordered not to speak out. The soldiers’ accounts were reported in Harper’s Magazine in January. The families are represented by the
Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR).
While the Pentagon has always maintained that the two men, along with a third prisoner, had committed suicide in their cells, the
soldiers’ first-hand accounts raise serious questions about the actual cause and circumstances of the deaths. Their accounts strongly
suggest that the men died as the result of torture at a “black site” at Guantánamo.
Said Talal Al-Zahrani, father of one of the men who died that night, “Mr. President, the killing of my son in the hands of his guards
and under the supervision of the administration of the detention center is a serious and gruesome crime. It is against all human values
and norms, and whoever covers up this gruesome crime or obstructs the criminal and judicial investigations is a co-conspirator with
those who have committed the crime itself.” The full text of Mr. Al-Zahrani’s statement to President Obama, the courts, and the
American People is on the CCR case page.
Said CCR attorney Pardiss Kebriaei, “It took courage for these soldiers to come forward with information that the government had
every intention of keeping secret, and the details that are emerging are disturbing to say the least. The families of these men should
not be barred at the courthouse door without any further inquiry.”
Background
In granting a request by the government and 24 named federal officials, including former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, to
dismiss the families’ case, the district court accepted the defendants’ argument that national security factors should bar the
constitutional claims on behalf of the deceased, and that the alleged torture of the men, even if “seriously criminal,” was within the
officials’ “scope of employment,” thus barring claims asserted under the Alien Tort Statute. The court also dismissed claims under
the Federal Tort Claims Act for breaches of the officials’ basic duty of care toward the deceased and for the emotional distress
suffered by the families, ruling that Guantanamo is a “foreign country” for the purposes of the act and thus outside the scope of its
protection. The dismissal effectively left the families and their sons with no remedy for the violations they asserted again U.S.
officials.
Click here to read more »
March 17, 2010
March 17, 2010, New York – Last night, the families of two men who died at Guantánamo in June 2006 asked the district court in
Washington, D.C. to reconsider its February 16 ruling dismissing their case, which seeks to hold federal officials and the United
States accountable for their sons’ torture, arbitrary detention, and ultimate deaths. The families’ request is based on newly discovered
evidence from four soldiers, including a decorated Army officer, who describe a cover-up by the authorities and say they were
ordered not to speak out. The soldiers’ accounts were reported in Harper’s Magazine in January. The families are represented by the
Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR).
While the Pentagon has always maintained that the two men, along with a third prisoner, had committed suicide in their cells, the
soldiers’ first-hand accounts raise serious questions about the actual cause and circumstances of the deaths. Their accounts strongly
suggest that the men died as the result of torture at a “black site” at Guantánamo.
Said Talal Al-Zahrani, father of one of the men who died that night, “Mr. President, the killing of my son in the hands of his guards
and under the supervision of the administration of the detention center is a serious and gruesome crime. It is against all human values
and norms, and whoever covers up this gruesome crime or obstructs the criminal and judicial investigations is a co-conspirator with
those who have committed the crime itself.” The full text of Mr. Al-Zahrani’s statement to President Obama, the courts, and the
American People is on the CCR case page.
Said CCR attorney Pardiss Kebriaei, “It took courage for these soldiers to come forward with information that the government had
every intention of keeping secret, and the details that are emerging are disturbing to say the least. The families of these men should
not be barred at the courthouse door without any further inquiry.”
Background
In granting a request by the government and 24 named federal officials, including former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, to
dismiss the families’ case, the district court accepted the defendants’ argument that national security factors should bar the
constitutional claims on behalf of the deceased, and that the alleged torture of the men, even if “seriously criminal,” was within the
officials’ “scope of employment,” thus barring claims asserted under the Alien Tort Statute. The court also dismissed claims under
the Federal Tort Claims Act for breaches of the officials’ basic duty of care toward the deceased and for the emotional distress
suffered by the families, ruling that Guantanamo is a “foreign country” for the purposes of the act and thus outside the scope of its
protection. The dismissal effectively left the families and their sons with no remedy for the violations they asserted again U.S.
officials.
Click here to read more »
Originally settled over 12,000 years ago by Asiatic nomads (some archaeological studies indicate even earlier migration,
as long ago at 40,000 BCE) crossing a purported "land bridge" of ice across the Bering Sea and, possibly, by Polynesians
from the south, the land comprising the mainland United States were part of the acquisitions of the great generations of
exploration and colonization by the European empires beginning with Christopher Columbus in 1492. A succession of
wars between the European colonial powers and the indigenous population ensued over the next 284 years as the
European powers wrested to carve out colonial holdings throughout the Americas. Britain's American colonies broke
with the mother country in 1776 and were recognized as the new nation of the United States of America following the
Treaty of Paris in 1783. During the 19th and 20th centuries, 37 new states were added to the original 13 as the nation
expanded across the North American continent and acquired a number of overseas possessions. The two most traumatic
experiences in the nation's history were the Civil War (1861-65) and the Great Depression of the 1930s. Buoyed by
victories in World Wars I and II and the end of the Cold War in 1991, the US remains the world's most powerful nation
state. The economy is marked by steady growth, low unemployment and inflation, and rapid advances in technology.
Sources CIA World Factbook (select United States of America) ; Wikipedia: History of the Americas ; Wayfinders: A Pacific
Odyssey
as long ago at 40,000 BCE) crossing a purported "land bridge" of ice across the Bering Sea and, possibly, by Polynesians
from the south, the land comprising the mainland United States were part of the acquisitions of the great generations of
exploration and colonization by the European empires beginning with Christopher Columbus in 1492. A succession of
wars between the European colonial powers and the indigenous population ensued over the next 284 years as the
European powers wrested to carve out colonial holdings throughout the Americas. Britain's American colonies broke
with the mother country in 1776 and were recognized as the new nation of the United States of America following the
Treaty of Paris in 1783. During the 19th and 20th centuries, 37 new states were added to the original 13 as the nation
expanded across the North American continent and acquired a number of overseas possessions. The two most traumatic
experiences in the nation's history were the Civil War (1861-65) and the Great Depression of the 1930s. Buoyed by
victories in World Wars I and II and the end of the Cold War in 1991, the US remains the world's most powerful nation
state. The economy is marked by steady growth, low unemployment and inflation, and rapid advances in technology.
Sources CIA World Factbook (select United States of America) ; Wikipedia: History of the Americas ; Wayfinders: A Pacific
Odyssey
Click on map for larger view
Click on flag for Country Report
| ILLICIT DRUGS |
World's largest consumer of cocaine, shipped from Colombia through Mexico and the Caribbean; consumer of heroin,
marijuana, and increasingly methamphetamine from Mexico; consumer of high-quality Southeast Asian heroin; illicit
producer of cannabis, marijuana, depressants, stimulants, hallucinogens, and methamphetamine; money-laundering center
marijuana, and increasingly methamphetamine from Mexico; consumer of high-quality Southeast Asian heroin; illicit
producer of cannabis, marijuana, depressants, stimulants, hallucinogens, and methamphetamine; money-laundering center
