In Another Reversal of Bush Administration, U.S. Signs UN Declaration on Homosexual Rights

Earlier this week, the U.S. became the 66th UN member state to sign on to the Statement of Human Rights, Sexual Orientation, and Gender Identity. This is another departure from the Bush-era human rights policy, albeit a symbolic one.  And, as Dianne Amann’s post at IntlawGrrls implies, it’s pretty amazing symbolism.   The Statement is the first UN declaration to address the issue of gay rights. (IntlawGrrls has the full text of the Statement here.)

The declaration is not a binding legal instrument, but even that was too far for the Bush State Department which used federalism — invoking the rights of individual U.S. states to make laws regarding gay rights — as an excuse to demur on the declaration when it was presented last December.   Setting aside the old chestnut of whether the federal government can accomplish through treaty what it cannot accomplish through federal statute, this struck me as a pretty weak case in which to raise a federalism concern.  It’s not a treaty and it’s not binding.  No law is created by the U.S. signing onto these principles.  Of course, federalism can be a handy cover to avoid taking a position on an issue that upset parts of the President’s political constituency, or to mask actual opposition to gay rights.  The AP quoted a current  administration official explaining the new approach:

the United States was concerned about “violence and human rights abuses against gay, lesbian, transsexual and bisexual individuals” and was also “troubled by the criminalization of sexual orientation in many countries.”

“In the words of the United States Supreme Court, the right to be free from criminalization on the basis of sexual orientation ‘has been accepted as an integral part of human freedom’,” the official said.

Despite the significance of the U.S. signature, the battle over GLBT rights is far from won a the UN:

But 70 U.N. members outlaw homosexuality — and in several, homosexual acts can be punished by execution. More than 50 nations, including members of the Organization of the Islamic Conference, opposed the declaration.

Some Islamic countries said at the time that protecting sexual orientation could lead to “the social normalization and possibly the legalization of deplorable acts” such as pedophilia and incest. The declaration was also opposed by the Vatican.

In light of that significant international opposition, the Administration deserves credit for taking this important step in endorsing gay rights as human rights.