Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Obama Administration Submits Arizona Immigration Law to U.N. Review
CNS News ^ | August 31, 2010 | Patrick Goodenough

Posted on 09/01/2010 1:05:31 AM PDT by RogerFGay


The U.N. Human Rights Council in session in Geneva. (U.N. Photo by Jess Hoffman)
(CNSNews.com) –  The Obama administration’s reference to Arizona’s immigration law in a report to the U.N. Human Rights Council has caused a stir, but its decision to engage with the body in the first place has drawn criticism for a lot longer.
 
During discussions in 2005-6 about creating a replacement for the unwieldy, scandal-ridden U.N. Commission on Human Rights (UNCHR), the Bush administration pushed strongly for a small (preferably 20 member) body with strict membership criteria, including a clear exclusion for any country placed under U.N. Security Council sanctions for rights violations or terrorism.

 
But the U.S. was negotiating at the time with 190 other U.N. member states, and the end result was a 47-seat council “open to all” countries.
 
The resolution creating the Human Rights Council (HRC) said members were merely expected to “uphold the highest standards in the promotion and protection of human rights,” but there was no way to enforce this.
 
The resolution also called on all countries to consider the records of candidates when voting to fill council seats. Yet in the years since then, countries with poor records -- including China, Saudi Arabia, Libya, Russia, Cuba, Pakistan, Tunisia and Egypt -- have been voted onto the council.
 
Moreover, the resolution allowed a country to win a seat by simple majority (96 out of the then 191 member states of the U.N.). Then-U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. John Bolton had pushed unsuccessfully for a two-thirds threshold, or 128 countries.

 
On the other hand, any attempt to suspend a member requires support of two-thirds of members, whereas Bolton had argued for one-third. The outcome means it is considerably easier for a state with a dubious record to be elected to the council than to lose its seat.
 
The mechanism known as the “universal periodic review” (UPR), under which each country submits a report and is assessed by the HRC every four years, was supposedly intended to overcome the concerns.
 
The U.S. had been strongly supportive of the plan to replace the 60-year-old UNCHR. “When Sudan and Zimbabwe sit on it and somehow cast judgment on democratic countries like the United States, it is objectionable and it’s indefensible,” then-Under Secretary of State Nicholas Burns said of the commission in 2005.
 

But in the end the U.S. was one of just four countries to vote against the resolution establishing the new council in March 2006. It argued that the new HRC did not go far enough to avoid the very problems hat had discredited its predecessor.
 
Bolton told Fox News late last week that the universal periodic review was among the reasons behind the U.S. decision not to support the resolution in 2006.
 
“An earlier version of this idea was intended to help keep human rights violators off the Human Rights Council, but in the negotiations that was junked, simply leaving this requirement that all 192 members of the U.N. submit these reports once every four years,” he said.
 
The U.S. participated in the new body as an observer, but later ended even that limited involvement, citing the presence on the council of some countries with poor rights records and its repeated targeting of Israel.
 
But the Obama administration joined the Human Rights Council last year, saying that while the body was imperfect, the U.S. could work to improve it most effectively by being a member.
 

The U.S. is scheduled to go through the UPR process in November, and it was in preparation for that occasion that the State Department last week released a self-assessment of human rights in the U.S.
 
As reported earlier, the report contained a pledge to fix America’s “broken immigration system,” and cited the Arizona immigration law.


Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer walks to the West Wing of the White House for a meeting with President Obama on Thursday, June 3, 2010. (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais)
Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer on Friday wrote to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, calling the reference to the law “downright offensive” and demanding that it be removed from the report.
 

“The idea of our own American government submitting the duly enacted laws of a state of the United States to ‘review’ by the United Nations is internationalism run amok and unconstitutional,” she wrote.
 
Consultation sessions
 
State Department spokesman Philip Crowley said Monday the Arizona law had been included in the report because it came up during a process of consultation with civil society organizations held early this year in preparation for the UPR.
 

“We’re very proud of our human rights record. We think it’s second to none around the world,” he said. “But the universal periodic review, we believe, can be a model to demonstrate to other countries – even other countries on the Human Rights Council – this is how you engage civil society.”
 
During the consultation period, meetings were held in a number of centers between January and April.
 
Immigration came up at several of these sessions – although not at one in Arizona last March, which dealt with Native American issues.

 
Civil society groups raised criticisms of U.S. immigration policies in Washington DC in February, with concerns aired about “state and local law enforcement of immigration laws [and] the lack of internal checks on immigration programs for racial profiling,” according to a State Department summary of the meeting.
 
Immigration also came up in New York City in February (“racial profiling, mandatory detention of immigrants who are subject to immigration hearings”), and was a major focus of a session in El Paso, Texas in March.
 
At another session in March, in San Francisco, a participating organization called for “the decriminalization of immigration, the demilitarization of immigration and border control, the disassociation of community services and immigration status, and development for immigrant communities.”

 
State Department summaries of the UPR consultations do not mention the Arizona law specifically.
 
‘Farce’
 
Brett Schaefer, fellow in international regulatory affairs at the Heritage Foundation, argued in a blog posting Monday that the contents of the report submitted to the U.N. was secondary to the issue of “why we are participating in this farce in the first place.”
 
He wrote that President Obama’s decision to engage the Human Rights Council “made it inevitable that the U.S. would participate in the dog-and-pony UPR show that it has proven to be – a process little more than a ‘mutual praise society’ for repressive regimes.”

 
The UPR was hailed early on as one of the more effective reforms built into the new council, but many human rights advocates were disappointed when the mechanism swung into action.
 
When Iran underwent its UPR this year, for example, it painted its human rights situation in glowing terms, while its allies rebuked Western governments for criticizing Tehran.
 
Similarly, during the UPR of China last year, countries like Sudan, Cuba, Iran, Burma and Zimbabwe praised Beijing.



TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Extended News
KEYWORDS: arizona; immigration; impeachhisass; impeachtheguy
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021 next last

1 posted on 09/01/2010 1:05:32 AM PDT by RogerFGay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: RogerFGay
Why this post is repeated: I searched for the full title before posting and got no hits. It turned out to be too long for the system to allow, so I deleted the second part of the long title after a comma. After getting it to post successfully, I searched again, using the reduced title, and discovered it had already been posted.

I don't think it's all bad though. This report is on a critical problem with the Obama admin. and his demented push to change the relationship between the US and the rest of the world ... putting it on par with Iran, for example. The more people who are aware of this story the better.

I'm just saying; I didn't re-post intentionally.
2 posted on 09/01/2010 1:11:19 AM PDT by RogerFGay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RogerFGay

Where, exactly, is the outrage from the patriotic Left? I know, patriotic Left is an oxymoron.


3 posted on 09/01/2010 1:13:47 AM PDT by TheThinker (Communists: taking over the world one kooky doomsday scenario at a time.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RogerFGay
I'm just saying; I didn't re-post intentionally.

If you feel something is important, I don't think it's improper to post as many times as it takes to draw attention to it. So what if some other FReeper gets worked up because they've already posted it or saw it earlier. You'd have to scroll through page after page sometimes to find an interesting or provocative story at times.

4 posted on 09/01/2010 1:16:46 AM PDT by TheThinker (Communists: taking over the world one kooky doomsday scenario at a time.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: RogerFGay

5 posted on 09/01/2010 1:33:45 AM PDT by Bon mots ("Anything you say, can and will be construed as racist...")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RogerFGay
Sometimes it's better to not search on the whole title. Two or three words will usually get it done.

Check this.

6 posted on 09/01/2010 2:00:05 AM PDT by upchuck (The Mosque at Ground Zero (sorry AP) is about SUBMISSION, not tolerance.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: RogerFGay
I searched for the full title

Don't do that. Just pick a couple important words like 'obama' and 'arizona' and search by title. Bingo.

7 posted on 09/01/2010 2:32:38 AM PDT by Right Wing Assault (The Obama magic is <strike>fading</strike>gone.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: RogerFGay

“Mommy! Arizona won’t play nice! Make them stop it!”


8 posted on 09/01/2010 2:34:58 AM PDT by Right Wing Assault (The Obama magic is <strike>fading</strike>gone.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TheThinker; RogerFGay
So at what point will the White House correspondents and the media in general will start asking this unpopular President the question : "Do you think you have made any mistakes and what are they?"

After the 2010 November elections?

9 posted on 09/01/2010 3:25:07 AM PDT by CutePuppy (If you don't ask the right questions you may not get the right answers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: RogerFGay

the UN has no say in Arizona.


10 posted on 09/01/2010 3:44:57 AM PDT by The Wizard (Madam President is my President now and in the future)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RogerFGay

Arizona has just as much jurisdiction over the UN as the UN has over Arizona.

Let’s have Arizona start judging the UN in a very public way.

That’d be fun!


11 posted on 09/01/2010 3:56:33 AM PDT by paulycy (Demand Constitutionality: Islamo-Marxism is Evil.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RogerFGay

More evidence that Obama is not an American.


12 posted on 09/01/2010 4:29:10 AM PDT by devere
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RogerFGay

OBAMA AND HIS MINIONS ARE THE MOST INCOMPETENT People IN American Government ever.
They are also Non Americans.


13 posted on 09/01/2010 4:34:24 AM PDT by chatham
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RogerFGay

Hang him or put him in front of a firing squad; I don’t care which.


14 posted on 09/01/2010 4:58:51 AM PDT by RoadTest (Religion is a substitute for the relationship God wants with you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RogerFGay
the AZ law mimics the federal law... yes???
15 posted on 09/01/2010 5:04:33 AM PDT by Chode (American Hedonist *DTOM* -ww- NO Pity for the LAZY)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RogerFGay

16 posted on 09/01/2010 11:47:55 AM PDT by Howie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: paulycy

I would love to hear someone with the political visibility as Jan Brewer give the UN a severe tongue-lashing. The UN has had it comming for a long, long time. Our “leaders” don’t stand up to the UN because they are either Democrats of wimpy,wimpy, wimpy RINOS.


17 posted on 09/01/2010 7:05:57 PM PDT by cradle of freedom (Long live the Republic !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Bon mots

do they offer that on a bumper sticker?


18 posted on 09/02/2010 12:25:00 PM PDT by WOBBLY BOB (drain the swamp! ( then napalm it and pave it over ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: RogerFGay

That was just his brief senate stint
Indecisive is one of his many names.


19 posted on 09/02/2010 12:30:07 PM PDT by Lady Jag (Double your income... Fire the government)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CutePuppy
"Do you think you have made any mistakes and what are they?"

I didn't understand your post until now. No way the press will ever treat Obama with the derision they showed GWB.

20 posted on 09/16/2010 1:19:25 AM PDT by TheThinker (Communists: taking over the world one kooky doomsday scenario at a time.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson