Rights, Resilience, and Responsibility

Abstract

This article will appear in an Emory Law Journal special issue honoring Michael Perry. I discuss Michael’s most recent work on human rights, ultimately contrasting it with an approach based on vulnerability theory.

An important part of any theoretical inquiry lies in the initial framing of the foundational questions to be addressed. The answers to such questions often determine the logic of any subsequent inquiries. I began this essay by focusing on descriptive morality as the conceptual boundary for Michael’s new manuscript -- Interrogating the Morality of Human Rights -- because it clarifies how my vulnerability approach differs from a human rights paradigm. Michael and I are both interested in developing a robust conception of social justice and exploring the ways in which the law can assist in realizing it. However, the focus of our inquiries is different, as is our reliance on and faith in the concept of rights to broaden the understanding of state responsibility. I am critical of the overreliance by progressive scholars on a human rights framework for criticism. The concern is not with the values, objectives, or conclusions that such an analysis might reach. Rather, it is with the questions that are left unanswered—or even unasked. It is not only the conclusion that matters—process and procedure are also worthy of principled critical consideration.

Keywords: human rights, vulnerability, state responsibility, resilience