46622 research outputs found
Sort by
“Aspirations”: The United States and Indigenous Peoples’ Human Rights
Get PDFThe United States has long positioned itself as a leader in global human rights. Yet, the United States lags curiously behind when it comes to the human rights of Indigenous Peoples. This recalcitrance is particularly apparent in diplomacy regarding the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in 2007, the Declaration affirms the rights of Indigenous Peoples to self-determination and equality, as well as religion, culture, land, health, family, and other aspects of human dignity necessary for individual life and collective survival. This instrument was advanced over several decades by Indigenous Peoples themselves as a means to remedy the harms of conquest and colonization, along with legacies of dispossession and discrimination persisting to this day. The United States first voted against the Declaration in 2007, and now, having reversed that position, is still stuck behind international organizations and governments that are working to implement it. The examples are myriad. From a new infrastructure at the UN to legislation in Canada, Mexico City, and the Muscogee (Creek) Nation, the world community is dedicating itself to realizing the aims of the Declaration. Not so the United States. In international meetings, U.S. representatives diminish the Declaration’s legal status when they could be embracing it as a vehicle for human rights advocacy; sharing best practices to and encouraging others to follow suit. At home, federal lawmakers are ignoring the calls of tribal governments to start implementing the Declaration in domestic law and policy. Increasingly, these positions of the United States are difficult to reconcile with respect for the dignity of Indigenous Peoples, much less global human rights leadership. Thus, it is time for the United States to abandon the notion that Indigenous Peoples’ human rights are “aspirational” and instead embrace the legal, political, and moral imperative to advance the Declaration both at home and abroad
Amicus (Fall 2023)
Get PDFIssue at a glance: Reflects on the 44-year career of Professor Mark Loewenstein Highlights the latest books by Colorado Law faculty Introduces new Colorado Law faculty Korey Wise Innocence Project Clients Wins Freedom Shares stories of philanthropy Recognizes milestones and successes of Colorado Law alumnihttps://scholar.law.colorado.edu/amicus/1033/thumbnail.jp
Cumulative House Journal
Get PDFhttps://scholar.law.colorado.edu/colorado-house-and-senate-journals/1598/thumbnail.jp
The Legal Stranger: Colorado\u27s Two-Legal-Parent Limit Leaves Nontraditional Families Behind
Get PDF
Cherokee Identity, National Responsibility, and Global Solidarity: A Tribal Leadership View of the International Decade of Indigenous Languages
Get PDF
Computational Linguistics, Language Technologies and the International Decade of Indigenous Languages: Academic and Community Interactions
Get PDFUnleashing Carbon Removal Technologies
Get PDFMounting climate change concerns are driving unprecedented interest in carbon dioxide removal technologies. Unlike carbon capture strategies, which trap carbon dioxide at specific emission points such as power plant smokestacks, carbon removal technologies directly remove carbon dioxide from the ambient atmosphere. Fossil fuel industry stakeholders have championed carbon capture for years as a means of reducing carbon emissions while continuing the nation\u27s heavy reliance on carbon-intensive energy sources. This focus on promoting carbon capture has delayed the development of policies specifically aimed at promoting carbon removal. As a result, humankind has yet to effectively leverage carbon removal technologies in the race against climate change. Most existing carbon dioxide sequestration policies in the United States conflate carbon removal and carbon capture in ways that ignore the unique benefits that removal technologies can provide. Deliberately distinguishing between carbon capture and carbon removal and designing policies and programs that specifically promote removal technologies could finally enable carbon removal projects and markets to assume meaningful roles in the transition to a carbon-free energy system