By Meg Foley Yoder
Marking Human Rights Day 2025, the Carr-Ryan Center for Human Rights convened four former U.S. officials on Monday for a discussion about the relationship between international human rights principles and the daily lives of people in the United States and abroad. The event, moderated by Harvard Law School lecturer Aminta Ossom, featured the Center’s four Senior Human Rights and Foreign Policy Fellows, all of whom previously held top human rights roles in the U.S. government during previous administrations.
Ossom opened by asking how Americans have shaped international human rights norms and how those norms have, in turn, shaped the United States. Kelly Fay Rodríguez, who served as the U.S. Special Representative for International Labor Affairs, said “there’s a real, blatant tension historically and today when you think about the U.S. and the global human rights system.” The United States helped build human rights institutions, she noted, yet “the U.S. government, corporations, and actors have also played a role either as perpetrator or enabler of some of the worst human rights atrocities.” The normalization of certain practices, including abuses in the immigration system, she said, contributes to “the kind of moments we’re experiencing now.”
There’s a real, blatant tension historically and today when you think about the U.S. and the global human rights system. –Kelly Fay Rodríguez
Maggie Dougherty, formerly a senior director for international organizations at the National Security Council, emphasized the extent of U.S. involvement in the United Nations system. Americans, she said, continue to hold influential positions in Geneva because of a long history of academic and diplomatic engagement, even in periods like the present when the U.S. government reduces participation. She also noted that the United States has historically been the largest financial contributor to U.N. human rights bodies.
Jessica Stern, who served as the U.S. Special Envoy for LGBTQI+ rights, described how that influence shapes global norms. She said the country’s political and financial contributions have given it significant weight at the United Nations and warned that with the rise of authoritarianism and decline of multilateralism, “the U.N. is in crisis, and international human rights norms are more needed than ever.”
We were still in the thick of Jim Crow, yet we had the U.S. leading the creation of a document saying every human being has universal rights and dignity,” –Desirée Cormier Smith
Desirée Cormier Smith, the former U.S. Special Representative for Racial Equity and Justice, drew attention to historical contradictions reaching all the way back to the creation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). “We were still in the thick of Jim Crow, yet we had the U.S. leading the creation of a document saying every human being has universal rights and dignity,” she said. She recalled that the NAACP submitted a petition to the United Nations in 1947 detailing racial terror in the United States and that, according to many historical accounts, government officials resisted the petition because it would “embarrass the United States” as it promoted the adoption of the UDHR and sought to position itself as a counterpoint to Soviet opression.
When Ossom asked how international standards affect people’s daily lives, Dougherty offered the example of the U.N. Human Rights Council investigation into abuses in North Korea. The inquiry relied on interviews with refugees outside the country and produced documentation that informed international legislation and sanctions. For Dougherty, it demonstrated how global mechanisms can illuminate conditions in places where direct access is blocked.
Cormier Smith pointed to the limits of such mechanisms when governments place reservations on human rights treaties. The United States has often included provisions stating that treaties are “non-self-executing” or otherwise non-binding, which she argued has weakened their actual impact. Fay Rodríguez added that multilateral bodies often serve as the only safe platform for workers and activists facing repression, citing Burmese workers who use the International Labour Organization to raise concerns about forced labor.
“The U.N. is in crisis, and international human rights norms are more needed than ever.” –Jessica Stern
In response to Ossom’s question about progress, panelists listed recent developments connected to international norms. Fay Rodríguez pointed to labor union activism promoting global human rights for marginalized groups outside their own countries. Cormier Smith highlighted Peru’s constitutional recognition of Afro-Peruvians, adopted in 2024, and noted that international mechanisms helped bring visibility to longstanding advocacy efforts. Stern cited India’s decision to strike down colonial-era sodomy laws, a ruling that referenced U.N. interpretations of privacy and equality, and pointed to the Human Rights Council’s first resolution on the rights of intersex people, which condemned unnecessary surgeries.
The conversation also offered critiques of the international system. Cormier Smith described civil society frustrations, including limited speaking time, inadequate translation services, and the high cost of attending U.N. sessions in Geneva during the first meeting of the U.N. Permanent Forum on People of African Descent. Dougherty criticized the Human Rights Council’s election structure, noting that “China sits on the Human Rights Council. It’s insane, but that’s how it is,” referring to the closed regional slates that allow governments with abusive records to win uncontested seats and thereby weaken the Council’s credibility. Fay Rodríguez and Stern said some governments challenge established human rights norms, and multilateralism itself, to avoid accountability, including on issues such as the right to strike or abuses against minority groups.
“China sits on the Human Rights Council. It’s insane, but that’s how it is.” –Maggie Dougherty
Audience questions turned to the future of human rights under another Trump administration. Stern described steep staffing reductions within the State Department’s human rights bureau and warned of a shift toward a “natural rights” framework that, she said, redefines key protections as political preferences rather than legal obligations. She argued that advocates must focus on defending existing standards.
Cormier Smith urged civil society and academia to remain active internationally so that partners abroad do not feel abandoned, while Fay Rodríguez and Dougherty emphasized documentation and local organizing as essential tools, regardless of political conditions.
In closing the event, Ossom drew together several themes raised by the panelists. She noted that past movements show how progress often meets backlash and that earlier generations used moments of repression to build civic institutions that strengthened rights over the long term. She encouraged listeners to see the current period in that historical frame and emphasized that the work ahead requires persistence and collective effort. The panelists echoed that perspective, pointing to the resilience of past movements as evidence that human rights protections can be rebuilt and expanded even in difficult times.
