Since launching its full-scale invasion of Ukraine, Russia has deployed nuclear intimidation to deter foreign intervention. From implicit orders to put Russia’s nuclear forces on alert to ominous threats that anyone in Russia’s way would face “consequences such as you have never seen in your entire history,” Putin has recklessly raised the nuclear stakes. [1] Russia’s aggressive behavior not only sets back decades of work on nuclear disarmament, but also poses new challenges for recent milestones such as the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW). First established in January 2021, the TPNW became the first international legal instrument that subjected nuclear weapons to a comprehensive ban. In addition to prohibiting nations from “producing, testing, acquiring, possessing or stockpiling nuclear weapons,” it “bans any transfer or use of nuclear weapons… and the threat to use such weapons.” [2]
Read MoreIn a unanimous ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court held in Sanchez v. Mayorkas (2021) that all immigrants who entered the country illegally cannot obtain green cards, regardless of having already held temporary protected status. This decision highlights the vague way that U.S. court systems define “legal entry” into the United States— an issue which is a major concern among immigration attorneys and migrants alike, as its definition and application has lasting effects on present and future migrant populations. It is important to inspect the potential human rights implications of the Sanchez decision on migrants. Although the Supreme Court’s decision in Sanchez v. Mayorkas does not directly contradict existing international immigration law, the dangerous legal precedent set in Sanchez highlights the United States’s critical need to take further steps towards compliance with existing human rights law as it pertains to migrants.
Read More