In 2021 the International Justice Clinic launched the Treaty Body Litigation Initiative to bring or support individual claims before the key monitoring bodies of the UN system, to seek meaningful redress for victims of digital rights violations, and advocate for
IJC is seeking a Clinical Fellow to support its New Treaty Body Litigation Initiative
The University of California, Irvine, School of Law invites applications for the position of a Fellow in its International Justice Clinic. The successful candidate will work principally on projects defending and promoting human rights online, with a specific focus on
9th Circuit Rejects NSO Group’s Claim to Sovereign Immunity
In a major milestone in WhatsApp’s suit against NSO Group, the 9th Circuit today rejected NSO’s argument that it could benefit from the Foreign Sovereign Immunity Act’s exclusion of foreign states from federal court jurisdiction. The full opinion is available
UCI Law International Justice Clinic Students Present to Facebook/Meta*
Students and faculty of the UCI Law International Justice Clinic recently gave a presentation to a panel of policy experts at Facebook/Meta providing recommendations on how the company can bring its conduct and the Oversight Board into better alignment with international human rights standards. The presentation was led by UCI Law students Jackson Backer, Krystal Campos and Alec Regulski. UCI Law Professor Mary Hansel supervised.
Prof. Hansel Debates the Human Rights Implications of Social Media at Inter-American Dialogue Event
On October 7, 2021, Professor Mary Hansel spoke on a panel hosted by the Inter-American Dialogue entitled Debating the Facebook Oversight Board and Self-Regulation Mechanisms. The event brought together international human rights experts for a conversation on the impacts the Facebook Oversight Board and other regulatory efforts have had on freedom of expression in Latin America.
“Provided by Law”? Applying Article 19’s Legality Requirement to Facebook’s Content Moderation Standards*
In rendering decisions on content moderation actions, the Facebook Oversight Board must scrutinize whether restrictions on speech pass muster under international human rights law. This analysis involves an assessment of Facebook’s policies governing content moderation on the company’s platforms (its “Community Standards”). Indeed, any Board decision affirming the removal of content or an account suspension must necessarily include a finding that the relevant Community Standards comport with the right to freedom of expression as set forth by Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Yet, as this paper explains, the substance and presentation of these Standards raise important questions about their adherence to the legality requirement under Article 19.
Decoding Intent in Two (Seemingly Contradictory) Facebook Oversight Board Decisions on Hate Speech*
Is speaker intent the pivotal element that explains the different outcomes of two hate speech cases decided by the Facebook Oversight Board? Despite the fact that both cases involved offensive speech aimed at marginalized groups, the Board came to different conclusions in each—finding that one user intended to insult and dehumanize while the other intended to raise awareness and engage in societal commentary. The instant working paper reflects on this apparent contradiction and teases out the role of each user’s intent in the Board’s assessment of hate speech under applicable international human rights standards.
The Role of Local Governments in Treaty Body Reporting
The U.S. recently submitted its country report to the U.N. Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD). Notably, the report contains scattered references to county and city governments and their activities—indeed, local governments are often on the front lines of racial justice issues. Yet there is no meaningful assessment of their human rights records, nor any indication that they submitted information or analysis for the current reporting cycle. This absence is not surprising given that local governments in the U.S. have rarely engaged with treaty body reviews. Several international and domestic sources, however, lend support for the idea that local governments should be active participants in these reviews.
Profs. Hansel and Kaye Lead Global Panel Discussions at RightsCon 2021
In connection with the Clinic’s Human Rights and Social Media Initiative (HRSMI), Professors Mary Hansel and David Kaye moderated panels on applying international human rights law to social media platforms at RightsCon 2021. RightsCon, which took place from June 7-11, 2021, is the leading global conference on human rights in digital spaces.
The Facebook Oversight Board’s Missed Opportunity to Promote Gender Inclusivity*
This working paper discusses the Board’s human rights treatment of Case No. 2020-004-IG-UA, generally referred to as the “Breast Cancer Symptoms and Nudity Case.” The Board’s decision in this case centered on freedom of expression, as provided by the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. In doing so, the decision missed opportunities to highlight and delve into other human rights standards, including those calling for Facebook to be more gender responsive and inclusive.