top of page

Human Rights Barometer for G20 Members - Part 6



3.4.19   United States' Human Rights Barometer Analysis

 

3.4.19.1   Freedom of Assembly and Association

 

Freedom of assembly and association in the United States (US) is protected by the First Amendment, which guarantees the right to peaceful assembly and the formation of groups, including unions and political organisations. These rights are fundamental to democratic participation, allowing citizens to protest, advocate for causes, and organise collectively. The National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) further protects the right to form unions and engage in collective bargaining.

 

While these rights are strongly upheld, there are limitations. Governments may impose time, place, and manner restrictions to maintain public order, but these must not target the content of the assembly. Recent protests, such as the Black Lives Matter demonstrations, have exposed concerns about police handling of peaceful assemblies, with law enforcement criticised for excessive force. Similarly, challenges to unionisation, particularly in states with "right-to-work" laws, highlight ongoing obstacles to fully exercising freedom of association.

 

According to Freedom House, the US maintains a high degree of freedom for assembly and association, but the increasing use of aggressive tactics by police at protests and restrictions on union activities present notable challenges to fully exercising these rights.

 

Score: 4/5 – “Legal protections exist, but with some restrictions (e.g., permits required for large gatherings). Civil society organisations operate mostly freely, though there may be occasional government scrutiny.”

 

References:

 

  

3.4.19.2   Right to a Fair Trial and Due Process

 

The right to a fair trial and due process in the United States is protected by the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments of the US Constitution, which guarantee that no individual shall be "deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law". The Sixth Amendment further guarantees specific trial rights, including the right to a speedy and public trial, the right to legal representation, and the right to confront witnesses.

 

The US judicial system is built on principles of fairness and impartiality, and trials are overseen by independent courts. However, concerns exist around racial and economic disparities within the system. Marginalised groups, including Black and Latino individuals, are more likely to face harsher sentencing and experience systemic bias throughout the trial process. The high cost of legal representation also means that low-income individuals often rely on public defenders, who may be overworked and underfunded, raising concerns about the quality of defence in some cases.

 

Although the right to a fair trial is firmly established, issues such as prolonged pretrial detention, unequal access to legal resources, and racial disparities continue to affect the justice system. Additionally, concerns about due process have arisen in cases related to national security, where the rights of detainees at facilities like Guantanamo Bay have been questioned.

 

In summary, while the US legal system provides significant protections for fair trials and due process, ongoing challenges remain related to racial inequality and legal representation.

 

Score: 4/5 – “Judicial independence is largely upheld, but there may be occasional political influence in sensitive cases. Legal representation is accessible, though certain marginalised groups may face hurdles.”

 

References:

 

  

3.4.19.3   Political Participation and Democratic Governance

 

The US holds regular, free, and fair elections, with a robust system that allows political opposition.

 

Citizens have the right to vote, form political parties, and run for office, with elections overseen by independent electoral bodies. Political participation is further strengthened by robust civil society and advocacy groups that influence public policy and hold government accountable.

 

However, voter suppression, gerrymandering, and barriers to political participation for certain groups, including racial minorities and low-income individuals, persist. Human Rights Watch has raised concerns about these issues, particularly during the 2020 elections.

 

While the US prides itself on its democratic values, there are challenges related to voter access and participation. Laws like the Voting Rights Act of 1965 were designed to eliminate racial discrimination in voting, but recent restrictions on voting, including stringent voter ID laws and reductions in early voting periods, have raised concerns about disenfranchisement. These measures have disproportionately affected minority groups, leading to debates over voter suppression. Additionally, low voter turnout in certain elections, particularly midterms and local elections, has been a recurring concern.

 

In summary, while the US maintains a strong democratic framework with widespread political participation, challenges related to voter access, political polarisation, and the influence of money in politics continue to affect its democratic processes.

 

Score: 4/5 – “Elections are generally free and fair, though there may be some political interference. Political opposition is allowed, but it faces certain challenges or limitations.”


References:

 

  

3.4.19.4   Freedom from Discrimination

 

Freedom from discrimination in the United States is protected by a combination of constitutional amendments, civil rights legislation, and court rulings.

 

Despite these legal protections, discrimination persists in various forms. Racial discrimination remains a significant issue, especially for Black and Latino communities. Disparities in policing, sentencing, and access to education and healthcare are well-documented.

 

Gender-based discrimination is another key challenge. While progress has been made through laws like the Equal Pay Act, women—particularly women of colour—continue to face wage gaps, workplace discrimination, and barriers to reproductive rights.

 

LGBTQ+ individuals have also seen legal victories, such as the 2015 Supreme Court ruling legalising same-sex marriage (Obergefell v. Hodges), but they still face discrimination in areas like employment, healthcare, and housing. Protections vary widely by state, with some states offering more comprehensive safeguards than others.

 

In conclusion, while the US has strong anti-discrimination laws in place, enforcement and equality of outcomes remain inconsistent, particularly for racial minorities, women, and LGBTQ+ individuals.

 

Score: 3/5 – “Anti-discrimination laws exist but are weakly enforced or selectively applied. Significant disparities exist for certain minority groups, though the state does take some action to address these issues.”

 

References:

 

  

3.4.19.5   Freedom from Torture and Inhuman Treatment

 

Freedom from torture and inhuman treatment in the United States is protected under both domestic law and international treaties to which the US is a party. The Eighth Amendment of the US Constitution prohibits "cruel and unusual punishment", and this forms the basis for protection against torture in the criminal justice system. Additionally, the US is a signatory to the United Nations Convention Against Torture (UNCAT).

 

Despite these legal protections, the US has faced criticism for violations, particularly in the context of law enforcement, prison conditions, and national security. The use of torture in counterterrorism operations after 9/11, including practices such as waterboarding, has drawn international condemnation. The release of the Senate Intelligence Committee’s report on CIA torture practices further revealed the extent of inhuman treatment used during interrogations. Although the US government has since banned such practices, concerns about accountability for these actions persist.

 

In the domestic context, reports of inhuman treatment within the US prison system are common. Overcrowded facilities, solitary confinement, and abusive conditions have been criticised by human rights organisations. The use of excessive force by law enforcement, particularly against racial minorities, has also been highlighted as a serious issue, with incidents of police brutality raising concerns about state-sanctioned violence.

 

In summary, while US law prohibits torture and inhuman treatment, significant concerns remain, particularly in relation to past actions in the context of counterterrorism, as well as ongoing issues in the criminal justice system.

 

Score: 3/5 – “Torture and inhuman treatment are prohibited by law but reports of abuse by law enforcement or security forces are not uncommon. Accountability for violators is inconsistent.”

 

References:

 

  

3.4.19.6   Protection of Human Rights Defenders

 

In the United States, human rights defenders operate within a legal framework that supports robust civic participation, protected by the First Amendment, which guarantees freedoms of speech, assembly, and association. These protections enable human rights defenders to advocate for social justice, challenge government policies, and hold corporations accountable. Civil society organisations, advocacy groups, and journalists play key roles in these efforts.

 

However, human rights defenders, particularly those working on issues like racial justice, police accountability, and environmental protection, face significant challenges. Harassment, surveillance, and arrests, especially during movements like Black Lives Matter, have raised concerns about law enforcement's treatment of activists. Environmental and Indigenous rights defenders opposing infrastructure projects also face legal threats and violent opposition, often from corporate interests, with tactics like Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPPs) used to silence them.

 

While the US legal system and civil society offer recourse for these defenders, ongoing issues such as police violence, state surveillance, and corporate influence continue to pose risks.

 

Score: 4/5 – “Human rights defenders generally operate freely, but there may be occasional instances of harassment or government pressure. Legal protections exist, though they may not always be fully enforced.”

 

References:

 

  

3.4.19.7   Freedom of Expression

 

Freedom of Expression in the United States is strongly protected under the First Amendment of the US Constitution, which guarantees individuals the right to free speech, including the freedom to express opinions, protest, and engage in political discourse.

 

However, certain limitations to free expression exist, including restrictions on speech that incites violence, threats, and defamation. Laws related to hate speech, while controversial, also come into play, though the US has historically upheld a broad interpretation of what constitutes protected speech, often allowing even highly offensive speech under the banner of free expression.

 

Recent challenges to Freedom of Expression include concerns about the role of social media platforms, where the debate around misinformation, disinformation, and content moderation has intensified. The private ownership of these platforms means that they have significant control over what content is allowed, leading to debates over whether restrictions on social media violate free speech principles.

 

Overall, while the US continues to offer some of the strongest protections for free expression in the world, the rise of digital platforms, political polarisation, and the spread of hate speech and misinformation present ongoing challenges.

 

Score: 4/5 – “Freedom of Expression is generally protected, though some restrictions apply, particularly on sensitive topics (e.g., national security). The press operates freely, but there may be occasional government pressure.”

 

References:

 

  

3.4.19.8   Freedom of Religion or Belief

 

Freedom of religion or belief in the United States is strongly protected under the First Amendment of the US Constitution, which guarantees the right to freely practice any religion or no religion at all.

 

In practice, the US has a diverse religious landscape, with protections extending to people of all faiths, including Christianity, Islamism, Judaism, Hinduism, Buddhism, and other religions, as well as atheists. Religious freedom cases often arise in contexts such as education, healthcare, and employment.

 

Recent concerns about religious freedom have emerged, particularly surrounding issues like the travel ban targeting Muslim-majority countries and debates over religious exemptions in laws related to healthcare and civil rights protections. Religious minorities, particularly Muslims and Sikhs, have reported instances of discrimination and hate crimes, raising concerns about the protection of their rights in practice.

 

In summary, while the US provides robust legal protections for freedom of religion or belief, challenges remain, particularly for religious minorities facing discrimination or exclusion.

 

Score: 4/5 – “Freedom of religion or belief is largely protected, though there may be some legal or social restrictions (e.g., certain public expressions of faith). Minority religious communities may face occasional challenges.”

 

References:

 

 

3.4.19.9   Right to Privacy

 

The US has privacy protections in place, particularly with regard to personal data and digital privacy. However, concerns remain about state surveillance, especially following the revelations from Edward Snowden on the National Security Agency’s mass surveillance programmes. The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) and Human Rights Watch have raised issues about the extent of data collection and government surveillance without adequate oversight.

 

In recent years, concerns about digital privacy have grown. Laws such as the Patriot Act have expanded government surveillance capabilities, allowing the collection of personal data in the name of national security. The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) and the widespread use of technologies like facial recognition and data mining have raised concerns about government overreach and the erosion of individual privacy. The Edward Snowden revelations in 2013 brought attention to the scale of government surveillance, sparking debates on privacy versus security.

 

In summary, privacy in the US is protected through various legal mechanisms, though the rapid evolution of technology and surveillance capabilities presents ongoing challenges to fully safeguarding this right.

 

Score: 3/5 – “Privacy rights are legally recognised, but government surveillance is more common, and protections for personal data are inconsistent. Individuals have limited recourse for violations.”

 

References:

 

  

3.4.19.10   Right to Life and Security of Person

 

The right to life and security of person in the United States is protected under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments of the US Constitution, which guarantee that no one shall be "deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law".

 

However, significant challenges remain in fully realising these protections, particularly with respect to police violence, gun violence, and systemic inequality. Police brutality, especially against Black and Latino individuals, has been a longstanding issue, leading to nationwide protests, particularly after high-profile cases such as the killing of George Floyd in 2020. Excessive use of force by law enforcement has raised questions about state accountability and the need for reform in policing practices.

 

Gun violence is another major concern. The US has one of the highest rates of gun-related deaths among developed countries, including both homicides and suicides.

 

In terms of state protection of individuals, disparities in access to healthcare and safety services contribute to unequal protection of the right to life, with marginalised communities often being disproportionately affected by violence and neglect.

 

Score: 3/5 – “The right to life is legally recognised, but certain populations face systemic violence or abuse (e.g., due to race, gender, or political views). Law enforcement often operates with impunity.”

 

References:

 

  

3.4.19.11   Overall Score: 3.6/5

 

While the US has strong legal protections for fundamental rights such as Freedom of Expression, political participation, and fair trials, persistent issues remain. These include racial and economic disparities, police violence, and concerns about privacy and government surveillance. The US continues to face challenges in ensuring equal protection under the law for all citizens, particularly for marginalised communities.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

4 TABULATED SCORES


Table 11: Freedom of Assembly and Association by Country 

 

Table 12: Right to a Fair Trial and Due Process 


 Table 13: Political Participation and Democratic Governance


 Table 14: Freedom from Discrimination

 

Table 15: Freedom from Torture and Inhumane Treatment

 

Table 16: Protection of Human Rights Defenders


Table 17: Freedom of Expression

 

Table 18: Freedom of Religion or Belief

 

Table 19: Right to Privacy

 

Table 20: Right to Life and Security of Person

 

Table 21: Overall Score


 

5 CONCLUSION

 

The Human Rights Barometer for G20 nations reveals a complex landscape of progress and challenges in the protection of fundamental human rights across the world’s major economies. While many G20 nations have enshrined legal frameworks that protect rights such as Freedom of Expression, assembly, and the right to a fair trial, significant gaps remain in the enforcement and realisation of these rights. Key issues include widespread gender-based violence, police brutality, corruption, and restrictions on civil liberties. Vulnerable groups, including migrants, minorities, and human rights defenders, are often disproportionately affected by these challenges.

 

Many countries in the G20 continue to grapple with systemic discrimination, inequalities in access to justice, and impunity for state actors. The ongoing prevalence of torture, arbitrary detention, and surveillance without adequate oversight raises concerns about the erosion of personal freedoms. In countries with authoritarian tendencies or populist leadership, political participation and freedom of the press face additional threats, with journalists, activists, and opposition figures frequently targeted.

 

However, the Barometer also highlights positive trends. Countries with strong civil societies and independent judiciaries tend to demonstrate better human rights outcomes, providing examples of how robust democratic institutions and respect for rule of law can support human dignity. Many G20 nations have also adopted progressive policies on LGBTQ+ rights, gender equality, and religious freedoms, reflecting a growing global commitment to inclusivity and tolerance.

 

The Barometer highlights the importance of continued vigilance, reform, and international cooperation in addressing human rights violations within the G20. It is clear that while progress has been made, sustained efforts are required to ensure that human rights are fully protected and realised for all.


 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -



This report has been published by the Inclusive Society Institute

The Inclusive Society Institute (ISI) is an autonomous and independent institution that functions independently from any other entity. It is founded for the purpose of supporting and further deepening multi-party democracy. The ISI’s work is motivated by its desire to achieve non-racialism, non-sexism, social justice and cohesion, economic development and equality in South Africa, through a value system that embodies the social and national democratic principles associated with a developmental state. It recognises that a well-functioning democracy requires well-functioning political formations that are suitably equipped and capacitated. It further acknowledges that South Africa is inextricably linked to the ever transforming and interdependent global world, which necessitates international and multilateral cooperation. As such, the ISI also seeks to achieve its ideals at a global level through cooperation with like-minded parties and organs of civil society who share its basic values. In South Africa, ISI’s ideological positioning is aligned with that of the current ruling party and others in broader society with similar ideals.


Phone: +27 (0) 21 201 1589

 
 
 

2件のコメント

bottom of page