Craig Ellis Caitlyn McBride

Every nation, in every region, now has a decision to make. Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists. From this day forward, any nation that continues to harbor or support terrorism will be regarded by the United States as a hostile regime. President George W. Bush

Professor Parekh Inquiry into Human Rights

The open defianceand gratuitous floutingof international law and human rights by the United States has without doubt weakened the international norm-setting processes and undermined efforts at the enforcement of human rights. Makau Mutua

Since September 11, 2001, the United States has been charged with violating the UDHR, ICCPR, Geneva Conventions, Convention Against Torture, and ICERD

The United States allegedly has engaged in the acts of unwarranted surveillance, racial profiling, extraordinary rendition and torture, the suspension of due process, extrajudicial killings, and unjust immigration detention.

[Human Rights are] universal moral rights that increasingly inform our moral evaluations and proposed reforms of existing legal orders and political relations, both international and domestic. David Reidy

Make no mistake, the United States will hunt down and punish those responsible for these cowardly acts. President George W. Bush

Any effort by Congress to regulate the interrogation of battlefield combatants would violate the Constitutions sole vesting of the Commander-in-Chief authority in the President. . . . [Also unconstitutional] are laws that seek to prevent the President from gaining the intelligence he believes necessary to prevent attacks upon the United States. Justice Department Memorandum on Torture

The US passed over 40 pieces of legislation between 2001 and 2008 that were used to circumvent previous regulations and laws. These new pieces of legislation not only violate domestic and international laws, but also the Constitution of the United States The judicial process and majority opinion were put aside in the name of security through the Geneva and Torture Memorandums. These legal opinions validated executive autonomy and released the US from international treaty obligations.
President Obama called for the end of extraordinary rendition and the closing of CIA Black Sites, though he did not stop the process of rendition completely, allowing for fair trial processes to still be ignored. He also affirmed that the US would not try anyone who was thought to be involved in the rendition or torture process, perpetuating impunity and holding government officials above the law. This will not protect accused officials from foreign prosecution. One of the worst violations during this period was the violation of immigrants rights. Hundreds of Arab and Muslim immigrants were detained for long periods of time, often for simple offenses. Due process was suspended for many of these individuals and due to government secrecy and refusal to release documents under the Freedom of Information Act, the public was unaware of the widespread violations that were occurring.

The Geneva and Torture Memorandums may have successfully exploited legal loopholes, but still represent grave ethical violations.

The Bush administration leveraged citizens' fears in order to pass invasive legislation that placed national security concerns at the forefront of the national agenda.

Human Rights are rooted in human dignity, making any violation of their fundamental tenets intolerable under any circumstances. Human Rights are more than treaty-based obligations. They serve as moral guides for domestic and international affairs, acting as a standard for countries to follow. The government's obligation is to protect the Human Rights of its citizens. It can only do so by pursuing those responsible for the attacks. Collective security is more important in times of public emergency and war.

Current processes of Human Rights enforcement are politicized and often ineffective, some countries agree to participate knowing that they will not be held accountable. The US has enough political clout to take advantage of this asymmetrical Human Rights enforcement system, allowing it to escape consequences and deny accountability. The US can be seen as hypocritical in its role as global leader for the advancement of Human Rights by refusing to initiate domestic change in the defense of "American Values."

Due to the widespread and high-level nature of violations within the US government, several NGO's maintain that accountability can only come through independent and impartial court investigations. A strong political move for the US is to stand by its principles and rights. Allowing the War on Terror to shift the United States domestic moral standards effectively lets terrorism prevail and perpetuates the countrys international image of hypocrisy.

The US's goal during the War on Terror was to protect its citizens. In doing so it violated countless people's Human Rights. While the government admits violations took place, the lack of accountability indicates that there is not a clear consensus on whether security and human rights can coexist. Since there has been a historical pattern of security overpowering the need for rights, it is unclear whether a balance can ever truly be reached.

The failure of an intrinsic feature of constitutional governments, the checks and balances system, in a time of emergency highlights the greatest political implication of the War on Terror. The administration successfully leveraged the legal system in favor of security, allowing for human rights violations to not only occur, but remain unpunished. Even though the US has made efforts to move away from such contested policies, it is unwilling to accept the consequences of the wartime policies; it has given all government officials impunity, despite the results of in absentia trials occurring in other countries.