Harvard ILJ Harvard ILJ Harvard International Law Journal
  • Subscribe to RSS
  • About
    • Live Blog
    • Masthead
    • History
    • Board of Advisors
    • Information For 1Ls
    • Contact
  • Print Edition
    • Print Archives
  • Features & Commentary
    • Article Series
    • Print Responses
    • Profiles
    • Student Commentaries
    • Symposium Forum
    • Online Archives
  • Symposium
    • Symposium Archives
  • Submissions
    • Print Submissions
    • Online Submissions
    • Student Submissions
  • Subscriptions
    • Print Edition
    • Newsletter
    • RSS Feeds
Posted on 10:02 am | Posted in Print Articles

The Reality of Social Rights Enforcement

By David Landau
David Landau is an Assistant Professor of Law, Florida State University College of Law.
Download Article
Share Article:
Delicious Digg Facebook Google Buzz MySpace reddit StumbleUpon Technorati Tumblr Twitter Yahoo! Buzz Email

Despite the lack of socio-economic rights in the U.S. Constitution and the absence of political will to enforce them, the vast majority of constitutions around the world now include these rights, and courts are enforcing them in increasingly aggressive and creative ways. Scholars have produced a large and theoretically rich literature on the topic. Virtually all of this literature assumes that social rights enforcement is about the advancement of impoverished, marginalized groups. Moreover, the consensus recommendation of that literature, according to scholars like Cass Sunstein and Mark Tushnet, is that courts can enforce socio-economic rights but should do so in a weak-form or dialogical manner, whereby they point out violations of rights but leave the remedies to the political branches. These scholars argue that by behaving this way, courts can avoid severe strains on their democratic legitimacy and capacity. Based on an indepth case study of Colombia, which draws on my extensive fieldwork within that country, and on evidence from other countries including Brazil, Argentina, Hungary, South Africa, and India, I argue that both the assumption and the consensus recommendation are wrong. In fact, most social rights enforcement has benefitted middle- or upper-class groups, rather than the poor. Courts are far more likely to protect pension rights for civil servants or housing subsidies for the middle class than they are to transform the lives of marginalized groups. Moreover, the choice of remedy used by the court has a huge effect on whether impoverished groups feel any impact from the intervention. Super-strong remedies like structural injunctions are the most likely ways to transform bureaucratic practice and to positively impact the lives of poorer citizens. The solution to the socio-economic rights problem is to make remedies stronger, not weaker.

* This excerpt does not include citations. To read the entire article, including supporting notes, please download the PDF. This PDF is a PROOF of the article and is not appropriate for citation as the page numbers will change. A final version of the article will be uploaded shortly.

Read Article (PDF Format) --- [Get Adobe Reader]
Article also available at (subscription required): HeinOnline | LexisNexis | Westlaw
Photo from the National Archives Records Administration.

Tags: featured, Human Rights

Other articles in Issue 53(1):
  • Kevin Jon Heller: A Sentence-Based Theory of Complementarity
  • David L. Sloss: Executing Foster v. Neilson: The Two-Step Approach to Analyzing Self-Executing Treaties
  • Joshua L. Boehm: Private Securities Fraud Litigation after Morrison v. National Australia Bank: Reconsidering a Reliance-Based Approach to Extraterritoriality

The Journal:

The Harvard International Law Journal is the oldest and most-cited student-edited journal of international and comparative law.
 
DOWN
  • Latest in Print
  • Latest Online
  • Antidumping in Asia’s Emerging Giants Antidumping in Asia’s Emerging Giants Mark Wu, Volume 53(1)
  • A Sentence-Based Theory of Complementarity A Sentence-Based Theory of Complementarity Kevin Jon Heller, Volume 53(1)
  • Executing <em>Foster v. Neilson</em> Executing Foster v. Neilson David L. Sloss, Volume 53(1)
  • The Reality of Social Rights Enforcement The Reality of Social Rights Enforcement David Landau, Volume 53(1)
  • Private Securities Fraud Litigation after <em>Morrison v. National Australia Bank</em> Private Securities Fraud Litigation after Morrison v. National Australia Bank Joshua L. Boehm, Volume 53(1)
  • Making Intellectual Property Work for Global Health Forum ~ Making Intellectual Property Work for Global Health Anthony D. So and Rachel Sachs
  • Drafting a Joint Proposal for a U.N. Security Council Resolution on Israel-Palestine with Alan Dershowitz Feature ~ Drafting a Joint Proposal for a U.N. Security Council Resolution on Israel-Palestine with Alan Dershowitz Chibli Mallat
  • The Failure to Negotiate Effective International Measures Against Transnational Bribery Commentary ~ The Failure to Negotiate Effective International Measures Against Transnational Bribery Alan Cliff
  • Three Ways of Thought About Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights Forum ~ Three Ways of Thought About Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights Stanford K. McCoy
  • The Economics of Access to Medicines Forum ~ The Economics of Access to Medicines Kristina M. Lybecker

Newsletter

Sign up for the Harvard ILJ Newsletter and never miss an article!

 
DOWN
  • Home
  • Contact
  • Archive
  • RSS Feeds
  • Members

© 2012 The President and Fellows of Harvard College.

February 23, 2012