Document Type
Article
Journal Title
Maryland Journal of International Law
Volume
35
First Page
104
Publication Date
2021
Abstract
Since Donald Trump was elected President of the United States, and the United Kingdom chose to “brexit,” many international lawyers and scholars have spiraled into somewhat of an existential crisis. What of the rule of international law or universal human rights when, as Candidate Trump declared upon accepting the Republican Party’s nomination, “Americanism, not globalism, will be our credo”? His populist “America First” refrain, combined with subsequent policy decisions withdrawing the United States from treaties and suspending participation in international bodies, led to doubts and questions about the relevance and resilience of the post- WWII global order, characterized by a commitment to human rights, multilateralism, and international institutions.
Despite frequent informal discussion and occasional international law scholarship on populism, its contours are often vague or conceptualized in such a way as to support a particular author’s arguments. Also, populism’s impact or potential impact on specific categories of international institutions or stakeholders is infrequently the subject of inquiry. Few scholars have evaluated how populism interacts with state behavior in relation to international courts and tribunals, or quasi-adjudicative bodies. Further, it appears no scholarship thus far focuses on the impact of populism on the international legal rights of a particular group as mediated through these bodies. Such analysis may deepen our understanding of the extent to which populism can undermine these international institutions, as well as populism’s potential impact on specific subnational or transnational stakeholders’ international legal rights.
Recommended Citation
Grossman, Nienke, "Populism, International Courts, and Women’s Human Rights" (2021). Articles. 56.
https://scholarworks.law.ubalt.edu/fac_articles/56