Skip to main content
Just out in Law & Society Review.  On the heels of the warmest January on record, a new paper on indigenous groups' human rights claims in the face of climate change...



Is protection from climate change a human right? In 2005, Inuk activist Sheila Watt-Cloutier, on behalf Inuit based in the Canadian arctic and Alaska and with the support of two American environmental NGOs, submitted a petition against the United States before the Inter-American Commission of Human Rights alleging that the United States was responsible for how climate change had undermined their human rights, culture, property, traditional land, health, life, integrity, and security, subsistence, and housing – an argument that could referred to as asserting the right to be cold.

The petition supported an influential transnational effort to build linkages between human rights and climate change. Over time, this advocacy has resulted in the integration of human rights language in multilateral climate negotiations, the adoption of decisions on climate change in the United Nations human rights system, and the initiation of rights-based climate litigation around the world. At the same time, the petition had little impact on policy-makers in the United States or Canada or among Inuit communities themselves. Despite its shortcoming as a vehicle for empowering Inuit communities, the petition may be seen as a form of Inuit storytelling, warning the world of the dangers of a rapidly changing climate. Tragically, it is a story that most governments have not yet accepted, with dire consequences for Inuit and the planet as a whole.


Authors:
Sébastien Jodoin is an Assistant Professor in the McGill Faculty of Law, where he holds the Canada Research Chair in Human Rights and the Environment and is a member of the Centre for Human Rights & Legal Pluralism.

Shannon Snow holds a BCL/LLB from McGill University and is a member of the southern Inuit community of NunatuKavut, in Labrador. Her research and professional interests involve organizational law and Indigenous legal revitalization.

Arielle Corobow holds a BCL/LLB from McGill University and is currently developing a diverse civil litigation practice in Montreal, with a particular interest in human rights, administrative, constitutional matters.

Popular posts from this blog

What Courts do with Executive Privilege Claims

By Gbemende Johnson, Hamilton College

“Because Congress requires this material in order to perform our constitutionally-mandated responsibilities, I will issue a subpoena for the full report and the underlying materials.” This was the response of House Judiciary Chairman Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) after receiving the redacted 448-page Report on the Investigation Into Russian Interference in the 2016 Presidential Election.The battle over the Mueller Report is just one example of conflicts between Congress and the executive branch over executive privilege, where agency officials claim they can withhold documents. Many disputes land in federal court. The Obama Administration Department of Justice spent years in court defending its claim of executive privilege over documents related to the ATF’s “Fast and Furious” gunwalking operation. Federal courts have proven less likely to let cabinet level agencies like the Department of Justice withhold documents than they are with independent agencies li…

Switching Up the Metaphor: from Baseball to Knitting

Susan M. Sterett, University of Maryland, Baltimore County



Metaphors guide what we see. In studying law and courts, metaphors for the law have come from baseball: Justice Roberts famously said in his confirmation hearing that judges call balls and strikes. Justice Kavanaugh followed his lead. Although umpires argued the analogy misunderstands the creativity the job requires, it remains a common metaphor for judging. The valuable website Oyez asks on each Supreme Court justice’s biography which baseball player is most like the justice’s contribution to the law. It’s an incomprehensible question for those who don’t follow men’s professional baseball closely. It also points to justices, and individual achievement, as the key players in law. Others are spectators.

What would show up if instead an activity often dismissed as trivial, mechanistic and feminine—knitting (and I want to include crochet; for brevity I’ll sum up both with knitting)—were the metaphor for the law instead? 
Bas…

How do text messages complicate contemporary sexual assault adjudication?

By Heather Hlavka and Sameena Mulla 
Department of Social and Cultural Sciences, Marquette University


“There’s no video, no injury. It’s purely one hundred percent ‘he said, she said.’ They had a terrible relationship. They were nasty to each other and they don’t get along well, probably never will. But there is no evidence to support the state’s case, other than their words.” Our article, “’That’s How She Talks’: Animating Text Message Evidence in the Sexual Assault Trial,” begins with these familiar words offered by a defense attorney during a sexual assault trial in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. The oft-invoked trope of “he said, she said” in cases of sexual violence suggests that without third-party eye witness testimony or material evidence, sexual assault allegations rest on conflicting reports provided by victims, the accused, and other witnesses. But how do trial attorneys reinvent this trope when the words of the witnesses are preserved as text messages?

Text messages are recorded co…