1932

Abstract

A growing body of empirical studies has provided important insights into our understanding of the causes and effects of codified human rights. Yet empirical research has treated human rights treaties and constitutional rights as separate domains, even though the two regimes offer many of the same rights protections and can interact and reinforce each other. In this article, we review these two bodies of literature, focusing on two lines of inquiry: studies that () treat rights commitments as the outcome to be explained and () examine the consequences of these commitments for state behavior. Some broad insights emerge from these literatures. First, the literatures adopt different orientations to explaining why states commit themselves to legal rights. Second, the effect of both human rights treaties and constitutions is usually small and contingent on certain legal and political environments. This review concludes by synthesizing debates over the most effective methods for measuring rights performance and for gauging causal effects.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-101317-031123
2019-10-13
2024-05-28
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/lawsocsci/15/1/annurev-lawsocsci-101317-031123.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-101317-031123&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

Literature Cited

  1. Abouharb MR, Cingranelli D. 2017. The human rights effects of participation in program lending versus the CESCR. Accountability, Transparency and Democracy in the Functioning of Bretton Woods Institutions E Sciso 205–38 Cham, Switz.: Springer Int. Publ.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Abouharb MR, Cingranelli D, Fillipov M 2015. Do non-human rights regimes undermine the achievement of economic and social rights?. Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights: Emerging Possibilities for Social Transformation LD Haglund, R Stryker 29–47 Berkeley: Univ. Calif. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Beck CJ, Drori GS, Meyer JW 2012. World influences on human rights language in constitutions: a cross-national study. Int. Sociol. 27:4483–501
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Ben-Bassat A, Dahan M. 2008. Social rights in the constitution and in practice. J. Comp. Econ. 36:1103–19
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Boli-Bennett J. 1976. The expansion of national states, 1870–1970 PhD diss. Stanford Univ. Stanford, CA: (on file with the Stanford Auxiliary Library)
  6. Boyd DR. 2011. The Environmental Rights Revolution: A Global Study of Constitutions, Human Rights, and the Environment Vancouver: UBC Press
  7. Boyle EH, Kim M. 2009. International human rights law, global economic reforms, and child survival and development outcomes. Law Soc. Rev. 43:3455–90
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Camp Keith L. 1999. The United Nations International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights: Does it make a difference in human rights behavior. J. Peace Res. 36:195–118
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Camp Keith L. 2002. Constitutional provisions for individual human rights (1977–1996): Are they more than mere “window dressing?”. Political Res. Q. 55:1111–43
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Camp Keith L. 2011. Political Repression: Courts and the Law Philadelphia: Univ. Pa. Press
  11. Camp Keith L, Tate CN, Poe SC 2009. Is the law a mere parchment barrier to human rights abuse. J. Politics 71:2644–60
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Chapman TL, Chaudoin S. 2013. Ratification patterns and the International Criminal Court. Int. Stud. Q. 57:2400–9
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Chaudoin S. 2014. Promises or policies? An experimental analysis of international agreements and audience reactions. Int. Organ. 68:1235–56
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Chilton AS. 2014. The influence of international human rights agreements on public opinion: an experimental study. Chicago J. Int. Law 15:1110–37
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Chilton AS. 2015. The laws of war and public opinion: an experimental study. J. Inst. Theor. Econ. 171:1181–201
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Chilton AS. 2017. Experimentally testing the effectiveness of human rights treaties. Chicago J. Int. Law 18:1164–85
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Chilton AS, Versteeg M. 2015. The failure of constitutional torture prohibitions. J. Leg. Stud. 44:2417–52
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Chilton AS, Versteeg M. 2016a. Do constitutional rights make a difference. Am. J. Political Sci. 60:3575–89
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Chilton AS, Versteeg M. 2016b. International law, constitutional law, and public support for torture. Res. Politics 3:11–9
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Chilton AS, Versteeg M. 2017. Rights without resources: the impact of constitutional social rights on social spending. J. Law Econ. 60:4713–48
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Chilton AS, Versteeg M. 2018. Courts’ limited ability to protect constitutional rights. Univ. Chicago Law Rev. 85:2293–336
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Chilton AS, Versteeg M. 2020. When Constitutional Rights Matter Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press
  23. Cingranelli DL, Filippov M. 2018. Are human rights practices improving. Am. Political Sci. Rev. 112:41–7
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Cingranelli DL, Richards DL. 2010. The Cingranelli and Richards (CIRI) human rights data project. Hum. Rights Q. 32:2401–24
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Clark AM, Sikkink K. 2013. Information effects and human rights data: Is the good news about increased human rights information bad news for human rights measures. Hum. Rights Q. 35:3539–68
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Cobb CW, Rixford C. 1998. Lessons Learned from the History of Social Indicators 1 San Francisco: Redefining Progress
  27. Cole WM. 2005. Sovereignty relinquished? Explaining commitment to the international human rights covenants, 1966–1999. Am. Sociol. Rev. 70:472–95
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Cole WM. 2009. Hard and soft commitments to human rights treaties, 1966–2000. Sociol. Forum 24:563–88
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Cole WM. 2012a. Human rights as myth and ceremony? Reevaluating the effectiveness of human rights treaties, 1981–2007. Am. J. Sociol. 117:41131–71
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Cole WM. 2012b. Institutionalizing shame: the effect of Human Rights Committee rulings on abuse, 1981–2007. Soc. Sci. Res. 41:3539–54
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Cole WM. 2013. Strong walk and cheap talk: the effect of the international covenant of economic, social, and cultural rights on policies and practices. Soc. Forces 92:1165–94
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Cole WM. 2015. Mind the gap: state capacity and the implementation of human rights. Int. Organ. 69:2405–41
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Conrad CR. 2014. Divergent incentives for dictators: domestic institutions and (international promises not to) torture. J. Confl. Resolut. 58:134–67
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Conrad CR, Hill DW, Moore WH 2018. Torture and the limits of democratic institutions. J. Peace Res. 55:13–17
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Conrad CR, Ritter E. 2013. Treaties, tenure, and torture: the conflicting domestic effects of international law. J. Politics 75:2397–409
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Cope KL. 2013. The intermestic constitution: lessons from the world's newest nation. Va. J. Int. Law 53:3667–724
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Cope KL, Crabtree C. 2018. A nationalist backlash to international refugee law: evidence from a survey experiment in Turkey SSRN https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3181367
  38. Cope KL, Crabtree C, Fariss CJ 2019. Patterns of disagreement in indicators of state repression. Political Sci. Res. Meth. In press
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Cope KL, Crabtree C, Lupu Y 2018. Beyond physical integrity. Law Contemp. Probl. 81:4185–95
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Cope KL, Creamer CD. 2016. Disaggregating the human rights treaty regime. Va. J. Int. Law 56:2459–80
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Coppedge M, Gerring J, Altman D, Bernhard M, Fish S et al. 2011. Conceptualizing and measuring democracy: a new approach. Perspect. Politics 9:2247–67
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Coppedge M, Gerring J, Knutsen CH, Lindberg SI, Skaaning SE et al. 2018. V-Dem Methodology v8 Gothenburg, Switz.: V-Dem Inst., Univ. Gothenburg
  43. Crabtree C, Nelson MJ. 2017. New evidence for a positive relationship between de facto judicial independence and state respect for empowerment rights. Int. Stud. Q. 61:1210–24
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Creamer CD, Simmons BA. 2018. The dynamic impact of periodic review on women's rights. Law Contemp. Probl. 81:4101–42
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Creamer CD, Simmons BA. 2019. Do self-reporting regimes matter? Evidence from the convention against torture. Int. Stud. Q. In press
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Cross FB. 1999. The relevance of law in human rights protection. Int. Rev. Law Econ. 19:187–98
    [Google Scholar]
  47. Cross FB. 2015. Constitutions and Religious Freedom Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
  48. Dai X. 2014. The conditional effects of international human rights institutions. Hum. Rights Q. 36:3569–89
    [Google Scholar]
  49. Davenport CA. 1996. “Constitutional promises” and repressive reality: a cross-national time-series investigation of why political and civil liberties are suppressed. J. Politics 58:3627–54
    [Google Scholar]
  50. Davenport CA. 2007. State repression and political order. Annu. Rev. Political Sci. 10:1–23
    [Google Scholar]
  51. Davenport CA, Armstrong DA. 2004. Democracy and the violation of human rights: a statistical analysis from 1976 to 1996. Am. J. Political Sci. 48:3538–54
    [Google Scholar]
  52. DeMeritt JHR. 2012. International organizations and government killing: Does naming and shaming save lives. Int. Interact. 38:5597–621
    [Google Scholar]
  53. DiMaggio PJ, Powell WW. 1983. The iron cage revisited: institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. Am. Sociol. Rev. 48:2147–60
    [Google Scholar]
  54. Edwards S, Marin AG. 2015. Constitutional rights and education: an international comparative study. J. Comp. Econ. 43:4938–55
    [Google Scholar]
  55. Elkins Z, Ginsburg T, Melton J 2008. Baghdad, Tokyo, Kabul…: constitution making in occupied states. William Mary Law Rev. 49:41139–78
    [Google Scholar]
  56. Elkins Z, Ginsburg T, Melton J 2009. The Endurance of National Constitutions Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
  57. Elkins Z, Ginsburg T, Melton J 2014. The content of authoritarian constitutions. Constitutions in Authoritarian Regimes T Ginsburg, A Simpser 141–64 Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  58. Elkins Z, Ginsburg T, Simmons BA 2013. Getting to rights: treaty ratification, constitutional convergence, and human rights practice. Harvard Int. Law J. 54:161–96
    [Google Scholar]
  59. Fariss CJ. 2014. Respect for human rights has improved over time: modeling the changing standard of accountability. Am. Political Sci. Rev. 108:2297–318
    [Google Scholar]
  60. Fariss CJ. 2018. The changing standard of accountability and the positive relationship between human rights treaty ratification and compliance. Br. J. Political Sci. 48:1239–72
    [Google Scholar]
  61. Fariss CJ. 2019. Yes, human rights practices are improving over time. Am. Political Sci. Rev. 113:3868–81
    [Google Scholar]
  62. Finnemore M, Sikkink K. 1998. International norm dynamics and political change. Int. Organ. 52:4887–917
    [Google Scholar]
  63. Fox J, Flores D. 2009. Religions, constitutions, and the state: a cross-national study. J. Politics 71:41499–513
    [Google Scholar]
  64. Ginsburg T. 2010. Constitutional specificity, unwritten understandings and constitutional agreement Work. Pap. No. 330 Public Law & Legal Theory, Univ Chicago:
  65. Ginsburg T, Elkins Z, Blount J 2009. Does the process of constitution-making matter. Annu. Rev. Law Soc. Sci. 5:201–23
    [Google Scholar]
  66. Ginsburg T, Lansberg-Rodriguez D, Versteeg M 2013. When to overthrow your government: the right to resist in the world's constitutions. UCLA Law Rev 60:51184–261
    [Google Scholar]
  67. Ginsburg T, Versteeg M. 2013. Why do countries adopt constitutional review. J. Law Econ. Org. 30:3587–622
    [Google Scholar]
  68. Go J. 2003. A globalizing constitutionalism? Views from the postcolony, 1945–2000. Int. Sociol. 18:171–95
    [Google Scholar]
  69. Goderis B, Versteeg M. 2014. The diffusion of constitutional rights. Int. Rev. Law Econ. 39:1–19
    [Google Scholar]
  70. Goldsmith J, Levinson D. 2008. Law for states: international law, constitutional law, public law. Harvard Law Rev 122:71791–868
    [Google Scholar]
  71. Goodliffe J, Hawkins DG. 2006. Explaining commitment: states and the convention against torture. J. Politics 68:2358–71
    [Google Scholar]
  72. Goodman R, Jinks D. 2003. Measuring the effects of human rights treaties. Eur. J. Int. Law 14:1171–83
    [Google Scholar]
  73. Goodman R, Jinks D. 2004. How to influence states: socialization and international human rights law. Duke Law J 54:3621–703
    [Google Scholar]
  74. Gray MM, Caul Kittilson M, Sandholtz W 2006. Women and globalization: a study of 180 countries, 1975–2000. Int. Organ. 60:2293–333
    [Google Scholar]
  75. Hafner-Burton EM. 2008. Sticks and stones: naming and shaming the human rights enforcement problem. Int. Organ. 62:4689–716
    [Google Scholar]
  76. Hafner-Burton EM. 2012. International regimes for human rights. Annu. Rev. Political Sci. 15:265–86
    [Google Scholar]
  77. Hafner-Burton EM, Mansfield ED, Pevehouse JCW 2015. Human rights institutions, sovereignty costs and democratization. Br. J. Political Sci. 45:11–27
    [Google Scholar]
  78. Hafner-Burton EM, Tsutsui K. 2005. Human rights in a globalizing world: the paradox of empty promises. Am. J. Sociol. 110:51373–411
    [Google Scholar]
  79. Hafner-Burton EM, Tsutsui K. 2007. Justice lost! The failure of international human rights law to matter where needed most. J. Peace Res. 44:4407–25
    [Google Scholar]
  80. Hathaway OA. 2002. Do treaties make a difference? Human rights treaties and the problem of compliance. Yale Law J 111:81932–2042
    [Google Scholar]
  81. Hathaway OA. 2007. Why do countries commit to human rights treaties. J. Confl. Resolut. 51:4588–621
    [Google Scholar]
  82. Hawkins D, Jacoby W. 2010. Partial compliance: a comparison of the European and Inter-American Courts of Human Rights. J. Int. Law Int. Relat. 6:135–85
    [Google Scholar]
  83. Helfer LR, Voeten E. 2014. International courts as agents of legal change: evidence from LGBT rights in Europe. Int. Organ. 68:177–110
    [Google Scholar]
  84. Hendrix CS, Wong WH. 2013. When is the pen truly mighty? Regime type and the efficacy of naming and shaming in curbing human rights abuses. Br. J. Political Sci. 43:3651–72
    [Google Scholar]
  85. Henkin L. 1990. The Age of Rights New York: Columbia Univ. Press
  86. Hill DW. 2010. Estimating the effects of human rights treaties on state behavior. J. Politics 72:41161–74
    [Google Scholar]
  87. Hill DW. 2016. Avoiding obligation: reservations to human rights treaties. J. Confl. Resolut. 60:61129–58
    [Google Scholar]
  88. Hill DW, Jones ZM. 2014. An empirical evaluation of explanations for state repression. Am. Political Sci. Rev. 108:3661–87
    [Google Scholar]
  89. Hillebrecht C. 2014. Domestic Politics and Human Rights Tribunals: The Problem of Compliance Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
  90. Hollyer JR, Rosendorff BP. 2011. Why do authoritarian regimes sign the convention against torture? Signaling, domestic politics and non-compliance. Q. J. Political Sci. 6:3–4275–327
    [Google Scholar]
  91. Holzinger K, Haer R, Bayer A, Behr DM, Neupert-Wentz C 2018. The constitutionalization of indigenous group rights, traditional political institutions, and customary law. Comp. Political Stud. In press
    [Google Scholar]
  92. Htun M, Weldon SL. 2012. The civic origins of progressive policy change: combating violence against women in global perspective, 1975–2005. Am. Political Sci. Rev. 106:3548–69
    [Google Scholar]
  93. Iacus SM, King G, Porro G 2012. Causal inference without balance checking: coarsened exact matching. Political Anal 20:11–24
    [Google Scholar]
  94. Imhof S, Gutmann J, Voigt S 2016. The economics of green constitutions. Asian J. Law Econ. 7:3305–22
    [Google Scholar]
  95. Jabine TB, Claude RB 1992. Human Rights and Statistics: Getting the Record Straight Philadelphia: Univ. Pa. Press
  96. Jensen SLB. 2016. The Making of International Human Rights: The 1960s, Decolonization, and the Reconstruction of Global Values Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
  97. Keck ME, Sikkink K. 1999. Transnational advocacy networks in international and regional politics. Int. Soc. Sci. J. 51:15989–101
    [Google Scholar]
  98. Kelley J. 2007. Who keeps international commitments and why? The International Criminal Court and bilateral nonsurrender agreements. Am. Political Sci. Rev. 101:3573–89
    [Google Scholar]
  99. Kowalczyk L, Versteeg M. 2017. The political economy of the constitutional right to asylum. Cornell Law Rev 102:51219–318
    [Google Scholar]
  100. Krain M. 2012. J'accuse! Does naming and shaming perpetrators reduce the severity of genocides or politicides. Int. Stud. Q. 56:3574–89
    [Google Scholar]
  101. Kreps SE, Wallace GPR. 2016. International law, military effectiveness, and public support for drone strikes. J. Peace Res. 53:6830–44
    [Google Scholar]
  102. La Porta R, López-de-Silanes F, Pop-Eleches C, Shleifer A 2004. Judicial checks and balances. J. Political Econ. 112:2445–70
    [Google Scholar]
  103. Landman T. 2005. Protecting Human Rights: A Comparative Study Washington, DC: Georgetown Univ. Press
  104. Law DS, Versteeg M. 2011. The evolution and ideology of global constitutionalism. Calif. Law Rev. 99:51163–258
    [Google Scholar]
  105. Law DS, Versteeg M. 2012. The declining influence of the United States Constitution. N. Y. Univ. Law Rev. 87:3762–858
    [Google Scholar]
  106. Law DS, Versteeg M. 2013. Sham constitutions. Calif. Law Rev. 101:4863–952
    [Google Scholar]
  107. Law DS, Versteeg M. 2014. Constitutional variation among strains of authoritarianism. Constitutions in Authoritarian Regimes T Ginsburg, A Simpser 165–98 Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  108. Lupu Y. 2013a. The informative power of treaty commitment: using the spatial model to address selection effects. Am. J. Political Sci. 57:4912–25
    [Google Scholar]
  109. Lupu Y. 2013b. Best evidence: the role of information in domestic judicial enforcement of international human rights agreements. Int. Organ. 67:3469–503
    [Google Scholar]
  110. Lupu Y. 2015. Legislative veto players and the effects of international human rights agreements. Am. J. Political Sci. 59:3578–94
    [Google Scholar]
  111. Lupu Y, Verdier P, Versteeg M 2018. The strength of weak review: national courts, interpretive canons, and human rights treaties. Int. Stud. Q In press
    [Google Scholar]
  112. Lupu Y, Wallace GPR. 2019. Violence, non-violence, and the effects of international human rights law. Am. J. Political Sci. 63:2411–26
    [Google Scholar]
  113. Matsuura H. 2013. The effect of a constitutional right to health on population health in 157 countries, 1970–2007: the role of democratic governance Work. Pap., Program Glob. Demogr. Aging, Harvard Univ. Cambridge, MA:
  114. McKibben H, Western S. 2018. ‘Reserved ratification’: an analysis of states’ entry of reservations upon ratification of human rights treaties. Br. J. Political Sci In press. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007123417000631
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  115. Meyer JW, Boli J, Thomas GM, Ramirez FO 1997. World society and the nation-state. Am. J. Sociol. 103:1144–81
    [Google Scholar]
  116. Minkler L, Prakash N. 2017. The role of constitutions on poverty: a cross-national investigation. J. Comp. Econ. 45:3563–81
    [Google Scholar]
  117. Moravcsik A. 2000. The origins of human rights regimes: democratic delegation in postwar Europe. Int. Organ. 54:2217–52
    [Google Scholar]
  118. Morris MD. 1979. Measuring the Condition of the World's Poor: The Physical Quality of Life Index New York: Pergamon
  119. Mosley L, Uno S. 2007. Racing to the bottom or climbing to the top? Economic globalization and collective labor rights. Comp. Political Stud. 40:8923–48
    [Google Scholar]
  120. Moyn S. 2012. The Last Utopia: Human Rights in History Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press
  121. Murdie AM, Davis DR. 2012. Shaming and blaming: using events data to assess the impact of human rights INGOs. Int. Stud. Q. 56:11–16
    [Google Scholar]
  122. Neumayer E. 2005. Do international human rights treaties improve respect for human rights. J. Confl. Resolut. 49:6925–53
    [Google Scholar]
  123. Neumayer E. 2007. Qualified ratification: explaining reservations to international human rights treaties. J. Leg. Stud. 36:2397–430
    [Google Scholar]
  124. Neumayer E. 2008. Death penalty abolition and the ratification of the Second Optional Protocol. Int. J. Hum. Rights 12:13–21
    [Google Scholar]
  125. Off. UN High Comm. Human Rights (OHCHR) 2008. Report on Indicators for Promoting and Monitoring the Implementation of Human Rights June 6. 15 U.N. Doc. HRI/MC/2008/3, at 11. https://www2.ohchr.org/english/issues/indicators/docs/HRI.MC.2008.3_en.pdf
  126. Parkinson C. 2007. Bills of Rights and Decolonization: The Emergence of Domestic Human Rights Instruments in Britain's Overseas Territories Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press
  127. Peksen D, Blanton RG. 2017. The impact of ILO conventions on worker rights: Are empty promises worse than no promises. Rev. Int. Organ. 12:175–94
    [Google Scholar]
  128. Poe SC, Vazquez T, Carey S 2001. How are these pictures different: assessing the biases in the US State Department's Country Reports on Human Rights Practices. Hum. Rights Q. 23:3650–77
    [Google Scholar]
  129. Posner E. 2012. Some skeptical comments on Beth Simmons's Mobilizing for Human Rights. NYU J. Int. Law Politics 44:819–31
    [Google Scholar]
  130. Powell EJ, Staton J. 2009. Domestic judicial institutions and human rights treaty violation. Int. Stud. Q. 53:1149–74
    [Google Scholar]
  131. Pritchard K. 1986. Comparative human rights: an integrative explanation. Politikon 13:224–37
    [Google Scholar]
  132. Putnam TL, Shapiro JN. 2017. International law and voter preferences: the case of foreign human rights violations. Hum. Rights Rev. 18:3243–62
    [Google Scholar]
  133. Raworth K. 2001. Measuring human rights. Ethics Int. Aff. 15:1111–31
    [Google Scholar]
  134. Sandholtz W. 2017. Domestic law and human rights treaty commitments: the Convention against Torture. J. Hum. Rights 16:125–43
    [Google Scholar]
  135. Shaffer G, Ginsburg T. 2012. The empirical turn in international legal scholarship. Am. J. Int. Law 106:11–46
    [Google Scholar]
  136. Simmons BA. 2009. Mobilizing for Human Rights: International Law in Domestic Politics New York: Cambridge Univ. Press
  137. Simmons BA, Danner A. 2010. Credible commitments and the International Criminal Court. Int. Organ. 64:2225–56
    [Google Scholar]
  138. Smith-Cannoy H. 2012. Insincere Commitments: Human Rights Treaties, Abusive States, and Citizen Activism Washington, DC: Georgetown Univ. Press
  139. Suk J. 2018. Gender equality and the protection of motherhood in global constitutionalism. Law Ethics Hum. Rights 12:1151–80
    [Google Scholar]
  140. Tsebelis G, Nardi DJ. 2016. A long constitution is a (positively) bad constitution: evidence from OECD countries. Br. J. Political Sci. 46:2457–78
    [Google Scholar]
  141. Tushnet M. 1999. The possibilities of comparative constitutional law. Yale Law J 108:61225–309
    [Google Scholar]
  142. UN Gen. Assembly 2018. Report of the Secretary-General: Status of the Human Rights Treaty Body System, Supplementary Information Aug. 6. UN Doc. A/73/309 Annexes
  143. UN Gen. Assembly Resolut. 217 A (III) 1948. Universal Declaration of Human Rights Dec. 10. UN Doc. A/810
  144. Verdier P, Versteeg M. 2017. Modes of domestic incorporation of international law. Research Handbook on the Politics of International Law W Sandholtz, C Whytock 149–75 Northhampton, MA: Edward Elgar
    [Google Scholar]
  145. Versteeg M. 2014. Unpopular constitutionalism. Indiana Law J 89:31133–90
    [Google Scholar]
  146. Versteeg M. 2015. Law versus norms: the impact of human-rights treaties on national bills of rights. J. Inst. Theor. Econ. 171:187–111
    [Google Scholar]
  147. Versteeg M, Zackin E. 2016. Constitutions unentrenched: toward an alternative theory of constitutional design. Am. Political Sci. Rev. 110:4657–74
    [Google Scholar]
  148. Voigt S, Gutmann J. 2013. Turning cheap talk into economic growth: on the relationship between property rights and judicial independence. J. Comp. Econ. 41:166–73
    [Google Scholar]
  149. von Stein J. 2005. Do treaties constrain or screen? Selection bias and treaty compliance. Am. Political Sci. Rev. 99:4611–22
    [Google Scholar]
  150. von Stein J. 2016. Making promises, keeping promises: democracy, ratification and compliance in international human rights law. Br. J. Political Sci. 46:3655–79
    [Google Scholar]
  151. von Stein J. 2018. Exploring the universe of UN human rights agreements. J. Confl. Resolut. 62:4871–99
    [Google Scholar]
  152. Vreeland JR. 2008. Political institutions and human rights: why dictatorships enter into the United Nations Convention Against Torture. Int. Organ. 62:165–101
    [Google Scholar]
  153. Wallace GPR. 2013. International law and public attitudes toward torture: an experimental study. Int. Organ. 67:1105–40
    [Google Scholar]
  154. Wallace GPR. 2014. Martial law? Military experience, international law, and support for torture. Int. Stud. Q. 58:3501–14
    [Google Scholar]
  155. Welch RM. 2017. National human rights institutions: domestic implementation of international human rights law. J. Hum. Rights 16:196–116
    [Google Scholar]
  156. Wotipka CM, Ramirez FO. 2008. World society and human rights: an event history analysis of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women. The Global Diffusion of Markets and Democracy BA Simmons, F Dobbin, G Garrett 303–43 Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  157. Young KG. 2019. Waiting for rights: progressive realization and lost time. The Future of Economic and Social Rights KG Young 654–83 Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-101317-031123
Loading
  • Article Type: Review Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error