In Spring 2025, the Global Human Rights Clinic launched the inaugural Global Human Rights Practice Writing Competition to recognize outstanding student scholarship on the practice of international human rights law. Open to J.D., LL.M., and J.S.D. students, the competition invited submissions that addressed pressing global human rights challenges and reflected strong analytical and practical engagement with the field.

Submissions were reviewed anonymously by a panel of faculty and legal practitioners. Awards were announced during Commencement weekend, and winning papers were selected for their originality, clarity, and contribution to the advancement of rights-based legal discourse.

The Clinic is proud to announce the three winners, who are outstanding women scholars affiliated with the Law School’s J.S.D. program. The winning entries demonstrate the depth and innovation of human rights research produced by Notre Dame students.

The abstracts of the prize-winning papers are included below as a record and recognition of this year’s remarkable scholarship:

First Place – Pavithra Rajendran

J.S.D. Candidate, Notre Dame Law School

Title: Asylum or Abuse? A Rights-Based Approach to Protect Asylum-Seeking Women and Girls from Violence in Host Countries

Under review for publication in Law Journal

Abstract:
The heightened vulnerability of women and girls to abuse becomes even more pronounced in the context of seeking asylum. The asylum process, often defined by legal uncertainty and institutional shortcomings, frequently fails to protect their safety, dignity, and fundamental rights. Core international instruments including the 1951 Refugee Convention, the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), and the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), lack explicit provisions addressing the unique risks faced by women and girls in host countries. For instance, while Article 22 of the CRC provides for refugee children, it centres on family reunification and does not account for gender-specific vulnerabilities. Similarly, the Geneva Conventions and instruments on disaster response overlook the specific needs of displaced women and girls. Despite these gaps, various international and regional mechanisms- such as the UNHCR, the monitoring committees of CEDAW and CRC, the Human Rights Committee, regional courts, and national legal systems have taken steps toward recognizing these protection deficits. Yet, efforts remain fragmented and inconsistent.

This paper explores how asylum-seeking women and girls, marginalized by both their gender and migration status, experience violence in host states. Through a doctrinal analysis of international legal standards, it advocates for a more responsive and coordinated legal framework. In conclusion, the paper emphasizes that strengthening protective obligations and improving enforcement practices are essential to ensuring these individuals are treated not merely as claimants but as rights-holders entitled to safety, justice, and dignity.

Second Place – Perla Khattar

J.S.D. Candidate, Notre Dame Law School

Title: Biometric Surveillance and the Erosion of Rights: A Human Rights Analysis of Facial Recognition Technology in the United States

Under review for publication in Law Journal

Abstract:
This article examines the growing deployment of facial recognition technology (FRT) in the United States and its implications for core human rights, including privacy, freedom of expression, and freedom from discrimination. As both government agencies and private companies increasingly use FRT to track individuals, identify faces in public spaces, and profile consumers, the potential for abuse grows exponentially. Drawing on international human rights law, U.S. constitutional principles, and recent case studies, the article argues that unregulated facial recognition threatens to normalize mass biometric surveillance and disproportionately burdens marginalized communities through algorithmic bias and chilling effects on dissent. The current U.S. legal framework—lacking a comprehensive federal privacy law—fails to provide sufficient protections, leaving much of the regulatory burden to a patchwork of state and local measures like Illinois’ BIPA and city-level bans.

In response, the article proposes a rights-based approach to facial recognition governance. It recommends enacting a federal (biometric) privacy statute modeled on BIPA, requiring consent, transparency, and algorithmic fairness. It further advocates warrant requirements and strict limits on law enforcement use, bans on persistent public surveillance, and corporate accountability grounded in human rights due diligence. The article concludes that preserving civil liberties in the age of facial recognition will require deliberate legal reforms that center individual autonomy and dignity over surveillance convenience and commercial interest.

Third Place – Ewa Rejman '25 J.S.D.

Title: Limitations of Socioeconomic Rights During Armed Conflicts: The “Maximalist” Perspective

Under review for publication in Law Journal

Abstract:
The Article challenges the prevailing assumption that armed conflicts justify lowering states’ obligations under international human rights law, particularly with respect to socioeconomic rights. It proposes a “maximalist,” vulnerability-based approach that recognizes how armed conflict intensifies individual and collective vulnerabilities, thus increasing—rather than decreasing—state obligations. Drawing on the framework of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the Article analyzes the limitations on socioeconomic rights and outlines three legal limits to those limitations: the duration of the emergency, the core content of rights, and the nature of the rights themselves. It argues that heightened vulnerability during armed conflict demands stronger protections, and that any failure to fulfill rights must be assessed in light of the state’s control and available resources. The Article also examines the role of international assistance and posits that under certain conditions, cooperation is not merely moral but legally required. Anticipating objections, it defends the realism of this perspective by grounding it in empirical data, evolving interpretations of international law, and the increasing recognition of vulnerability in global jurisprudence.

For more information about the submissions, please contact the featured scholars.

Originally published by Notre Dame Law School at ndlsglobalhumanrights.nd.edu on June 04, 2025.