일부 유죄 부분이 유지되었지만, 유권자 운동의 정당성이 다시 한번 확인된 셈 read more.

Will Human Rights Survive a Trumpian World?

Authoritarian Advances Threaten Rules-Based Order

The global human rights system is in peril. Under relentless pressure from US President Donald Trump, and persistently undermined by China and Russia, the rules-based international order is being crushed, threatening to take with it the architecture human rights defenders have come to rely on to advance norms and protect freedoms. To defy this trend, governments that still value human rights, alongside social movements, civil society, and international institutions, need to form a strategic alliance to push back.

To be fair, the downward spiral predated Trump’s reelection. The democratic wave that began over 50 years ago has given way to what scholars term a “democratic recession.” Democracy is now back to 1985 levels according to some metrics, with 72 percent of the world’s population now living under autocracy. Russia and China are less free today than 20 years ago. And so is the United States.

Of course, democracy is not a panacea for human rights violations; the US and other longtime democracies have their own histories of colonial crimes, racism, abusive justice systems, and wartime atrocities. More recently, authoritarian leaders have exploited public mistrust and anger to win elections and then dismantled the very institutions that brought them to power. Democratic institutions are crucial to represent the will of the people and keep power in check. It’s no surprise that whenever democracy is undermined, rights are too, as evident in recent years in India, Türkiye, the Philippines, El Salvador, and Hungary.

In this context, 2025 may be seen as a tipping point. In just 12 months, the Trump administration has carried out a broad assault on key pillars of US democracy and the global rules-based order, which the US, despite inconsistencies, was, with other states, instrumental in helping to establish.

In short order, Trump’s second-term administration has undermined trust in the sanctity of elections, reduced government accountability, gutted food assistance and healthcare subsidies, attacked judicial independence, defied court orders, rolled back women’s rights, obstructed access to abortion care, undermined remedies for racial harm, terminated programs mandating accessibility for people with disabilities, punished free speech, stripped protections from trans and intersex people, eroded privacy, and used government power to intimidate political opponents, the media, law firms, universities, civil society, and even comedians.

Claiming a risk of “civilizational erasure” in Europe and leaning on racist tropes to cast entire populations as unwelcome in the US, the Trump administration has embraced policies and rhetoric that align with white nationalist ideology. Immigrants and asylum seekers have been subjected to inhumane conditions and degrading treatment; 32 died in US Immigration and Customs Enforcement custody in 2025, and as of mid-January 2026, an additional 4 have died. Masked immigration enforcement agents have targeted people of color, using excessive force, terrorizing communities, wrongfully arresting scores of citizens, and, most recently, unjustifiably killing two people in Minneapolis, whose deaths Human Rights Watch has documented.

The US president of course has the authority to tighten US borders and enforce stricter immigration policies. The administration is not, however, entitled to deny legal process to asylum seekers, mistreat undocumented migrants, or unlawfully discriminate. In a well-functioning democracy, no electoral mandate should supersede domestic legislation, constitutional protections, or international human rights law. Trump’s team has repeatedly bypassed these guardrails.

The violations have not stopped at the border. The Trump administration used a 1798 law to send hundreds of Venezuelan migrants to an infamous prison in El Salvador, where they were tortured and sexually abused. Its blatantly unlawful strikes on boats in the Caribbean and the Pacific extrajudicially killed more than 120 people whom Trump claims were drug traffickers.

After the US attacked Venezuela and apprehended its president, Nicolás Maduro, and his wife, Cilia Flores, Trump claimed the US would “run” the country and control its vast oil reserves. Despite paying lip service to human rights concerns under Maduro at the United Nations, Trump has worked with the same repressive apparatus to further US interests. Many Western allies have chosen to stay silent about these lawless moves, perhaps fearing erratic tariffs and blowback to their alliances.

Trump’s foreign policy has upended the foundations of the rules-based order that seeks to advance democracy and human rights, even if imperfectly.

Trump has boasted that he doesn’t “need international law” as a constraint, only his “own morality.” His administration has politicized the US State Department’s annual human rights report, stepped away from the global prohibition on antipersonnel landmines, voiced support for rewriting international rules on asylum, and skipped the UN’s Universal Periodic Review of the US’ human rights record.

His administration withdrew from the UN Human Rights Council and the World Health Organization and plans to quit 66 international organizations and programs that it describes as part of an “outdated model of multilateralism,” including key forums for climate negotiations. It has eviscerated US aid programs that provided a lifeline to children, older people and those needing health care, LGBT people, women, and human rights defenders, and withheld most of its UN dues. 

Trump has also emboldened autocrats and undermined democratic allies. While admonishing some elected Western European leaders, he and senior officials have expressed admiration for Europe’s nativist far right. He has favored autocrats such as Hungary’s Prime Minister Viktor Orban, Türkiye’s President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, and El Salvador’s President Nayib Bukele, while continuing decades of US support to Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman and Egypt’s President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi.

His administration has unjustifiably imposed sanctions to punish respected Palestinian human rights organizations, the International Criminal Court’s (ICC) prosecutor and many of its judges, a UN special rapporteur, and for several months, a Brazilian Supreme Court judge and his wife.

The institutional response in the US to Trump’s power grabs has been shockingly muted. Much of Congress, controlled by his own party, has not challenged his supercharged expansion of executive power. The leaders of the US’ most powerful technology companies have made significant donations and sought to placate the president. Some big law firms and prestigious universities have made deals rather than assert their independence, and some media organizations seem afraid to attract the president’s ire.

Has the US switched sides on the human rights playing field? While US engagement with human rights institutions has always been selective, China and Russia have long pursued an illiberal agenda. They stand much to gain from a US government that now expresses open hostility to universal rights. China and Russia remain strategic rivals of the US, but all three countries are now led by leaders who share open disdain for norms and institutions that could constrain their power.

Together, they wield considerable economic, military, and diplomatic power. If they were to consistently act as allies of convenience to erode global rules, they could threaten the entire system. Already, a loose international network of countries such as North Korea, Iran, Venezuela, Myanmar, Cuba, and Belarus work in concert with Russia and China. These leaders share very little ideologically but align in undermining human rights and promoting a regressive international agenda. In word and in practice, the US government is now helping them in this endeavor.

The US’ weakening of multilateral institutions also dealt a serious blow to global efforts to prevent or stop grave international crimes. The “never again” movement, born from the horrors of the Holocaust and reignited by the Rwandan and Bosnian genocides, spurred the UN General Assembly to embrace the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) in 2005. Meant to guide international intervention to prevent and stop atrocities in tandem with efforts to prosecute and punish serious crimes, R2P made a real difference in places like the Central African Republic and Kenya.

Today, R2P is rarely invoked and the ICC is under siege. In addition to Trump’s far-reaching sanctions, in December 2025 a Moscow court sentenced the ICC prosecutor and eight of its judges to prison terms in absentia. Moreover, despite being ICC fugitives, in 2025, Russia’s President Vladimir Putin was welcomed by Donald Trump in Alaska, and Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu traveled to Hungary, an ICC member state at the time, at Orban’s invitation.

Twenty years ago, the US government and civil society were instrumental in galvanizing a response to mass atrocities in Darfur. Sudan is burning again, but this time under Trump, with relative impunity. Sudan’s Rapid Support Forces (RSF), which emerged from the militias that led the prior ethnic cleansing campaign, are again committing murder and rape on a mass scale. A growing body of evidence indicates that the UAE, a longtime US ally that recently made multi-billion-dollar deals with Trump, is providing the RSF with military support.

In the Occupied Palestinian Territory, the Israeli armed forces have committed acts of genocide, ethnic cleansing, and crimes against humanity, killing over 70,000 people since the October 2023 Hamas-led attacks on Israel and displacing the vast majority of Gaza’s population. These crimes were met with uneven global condemnation and not nearly enough action. Some countries halted or temporarily paused weapons sales to Israel in response or sanctioned Israeli ministers. Trump, however, continued a long-standing US policy of almost unconditional support to Israel, even as the International Court of Justice is weighing allegations of genocide and has issued binding orders under the Genocide Convention to protect Palestinians’ rights.

Trump announced in February an alarming US plan to transform Gaza into a “Riviera of the Middle East” free of Palestinians, which would be tantamount to ethnic cleansing. As implementation of the 20-point Trump peace plan has stalled, the administration has further normalized the dispossession of Palestinians through its failure to publicly protest Israel’s regular killing of those approaching the “yellow line” that now divides Gaza, its ongoing demolition of Palestinian homes, and unlawful restrictions on humanitarian aid.

In Ukraine, Trump’s peace efforts have consistently downplayed Russia’s responsibility for serious violations. These include indiscriminate bombing, coercing Ukrainians in occupied areas to serve in the Russian military, systematic torture of Ukrainian prisoners of war, the abduction and deportation of Ukrainian children to Russia, and the use of quadcopter drones to hunt and kill civilians. Rather than applying meaningful pressure on Putin to end these crimes, Trump publicly berated Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in a made-for-TV dressing down, demanded an exploitative mineral deal, pressured Ukraine’s authorities to concede large swaths of territory, and proposed “full amnesty” for war crimes.

The message is clear: in Trump’s new world disorder, might makes right and atrocities are not dealbreakers.

판사 서울중앙지방법원 부장판사 이동욱李銅郁 서울동부지방법원 부장판사 서울중앙지방법원 부장판사 판사 권은석權垠錫 서울중앙지방법원 판사. Kr › news_view충북변호사회 ’22년 법관평가, ‘박종원권은석’ 판사등 우수법관 9인. ◇ 지방 권은석 △ 수원지방법원 판사 박이랑 △ 수원지방법원 판사 윤성식. 세기의 재판 이재용 운명 쥔 3명의 판사는.

Chu-201 야동

Chocoletmilkk Pikpak

Cd냐링

충북변호사회 22년 법관평가, 박종원권은석 판사등 우수.. Kr › news_view충북변호사회 ’22년 법관평가, ‘박종원권은석’ 판사등 우수법관 9인.. 세기의 재판 이재용 운명 쥔 3명의 판사는.. 이 판사는 사법고시 1차 시험에서 차석으로 합격한 수재로, 일각에선 원칙주의자라는 평가도 나온다..

Deepfake Kpop Av

그것도 지난해 삼성전자 이재용 부회장 판결을 내렸을 당시 좌배석 권은석 판사라고 하는군요, Com › lims › front법조인명록 상세보기 예스로. 이번 법관 평가는 청주지법 산하 지원 포함과 대전고법 청주재판부에서 근무하는 법관을 대상으로 진행했다. 이틀간 공방을 지켜본 재판부는 40여분간 이 부회장에게 직접 질문을 던졌다.

권은석 판사1985 서울대 법대 05학번 52회 사법시험 합격 이재용 재판 판사 이재용 풀어준 판사라고. 인사 대법원 전체 명단 서울중앙지법 권오석 부장판사 외. 무면허 침 시술하다 환자 숨지게 한 60대 목사, 항소심도 집행. 그것도 지난해 삼성전자 이재용 부회장 판결을 내렸을 당시 좌배석 권은석 판사라고 하는군요. 이들 중 이수현빈태욱권은석 판사는 지난해에 이어 연속 우수법관에 이름을 올랐다. Kr › arti › society‘세기의 재판’ 이재용 운명 쥔 3명의 판사는.

강다솜 아나운서 결혼 남편 동갑내기 현직 판사 마이스토리. 주1 일반적으로 범죄의 일시는 공소사실의 특정을 위한 요건이지 범죄사실의 기본적 요소는 아니므로, 공소장 기재 범죄의 일시와 법원이. 일화 2018년 9월 15일, 서울대 법대 출신의 동갑내기 권은석 판사와 웨딩마치를 울렸다. 이를 바탕으로 지난 11월 재심에서 법원은 대부분 무죄를 선고했습니다, 주1 일반적으로 범죄의 일시는 공소사실의 특정을 위한 요건이지 범죄사실의 기본적 요소는 아니므로, 공소장 기재 범죄의 일시와 법원이. 강다솜 아나운서랑 결혼하는 권은석 판사.

dannyxoh dick 김 부장판사의 좌배석 권은석 판사31연수원 42기는 서울대 법학과 재학 중 52회 사법고시에 합격했다. 재판장인 김진동 49사법연수원 25기 판사는 1999년 전주지법에서 판사생활을 시작해 대법원 재판연구관, 전주지법수원지법 부장판사를 거쳤다. 인사 대법원 전체 명단 서울중앙지법 권오석 부장판사 외. 16일 법조계 등에 따르면 청주지법 제천지원 형사단독 권은석 판사은 여성 a씨에게 징역 1년6월을 선고하고 법정구속했다. 대구지법 나원식 이정목 이원재 이기웅 류영재 권형관 박노을 김남균 박가연 홍은아. content moderated.

com2star gif 강다솜 아나운서랑 결혼하는 권은석 판사 200708202108. 그것도 지난해 삼성전자 이재용 부회장 판결을 내렸을 당시 좌배석 권은석 판사라고 하는군요. 종합 경기북부 등 5개 지방변호사회 2023 법관평가 결과. 얼마전 결혼한 mbc 강다솜 아나운서 훈남 판사 남편. 판사 노지환 △ 특허법원 판사 윤정운 △ 특허법원 판사 송현정. cd_lua pikpak

cageyasu57 Kr › arti › society‘세기의 재판’ 이재용 운명 쥔 3명의 판사는. 이수현 부장판사 형사1단독, 빈태욱 부장판사 제11가사부소년단독, 권은석 판사 제천지원 형사단독는 소송관계인에게 친절한 태도를 유지하고, 재판이 지연되지 않도록 세심하게 소송을 진행했다는 평가를 받았다. 인사 대법원 전체 명단 서울중앙지법 권오석 부장판사 외. 강다솜 아나운서 결혼 남편 동갑내기 현직 판사 마이스토리. Kr › arti › society‘세기의 재판’ 이재용 운명 쥔 3명의 판사는. cfnm hitomila

cr 바닐라 Kr › news_view충북변호사회 ’22년 법관평가, ‘박종원권은석’ 판사등 우수법관 9인. 재판장인 김진동 49사법연수원 25기 판사는 1999년 전주지법에서 판사생활을 시작해 대법원 재판연구관, 전주지법수원지법 부장판사를 거쳤다. 인천지방법원인천가정법원 부천지원민사4단독. Com › lims › front법조인명록 상세보기 예스로. 이수현 부장판사형사1단독, 빈태욱 부장판사제11가사부소년단독, 권은석 판사제천지원 형사단독는 소송관계인에게 친절한 태도를 유지하고, 재판이.

costiera amalfitana spiagge 그것도 지난해 삼성전자 이재용 부회장 판결을 내렸을 당시 좌배석 권은석 판사라고 하는군요. 판사 노지환 △ 특허법원 판사 윤정운 △ 특허법원 판사 송현정. 재판장인 김진동 49사법연수원 25기 판사는 1999년 전주지법에서 판사생활을 시작해 대법원 재판연구관, 전주지법수원지법 부장판사를 거쳤다. 얼마전 결혼한 mbc 강다솜 아나운서 훈남 판사 남편. 이수현 부장판사 형사1단독, 빈태욱 부장판사 제11가사부소년단독, 권은석 판사 제천지원 형사단독는 소송관계인에게 친절한 태도를 유지하고, 재판이 지연되지 않도록 세심하게 소송을 진행했다는 평가를 받았다.

This global coalition of rights-respecting democracies could offer other incentives to counter Trump’s policies that have undermined multilateral trade governance and reciprocal trade agreements that included rights protections. Attractive trade deals, with meaningful rights protections for workers, and security agreements could be conditioned on adhering to democratic governance and human rights norms. Democracy already comes with benefits. While autocracies have generally fostered conflict, economic stagnation, or kleptocracy, as evidenced in multiple academic studies, including the work of the Nobel Prize-winning economist Daron Acemoglu, democratic institutions reliably yield economic growth. 

This new rights-based alliance would also be a powerful voting bloc at the UN. It could commit to defending the independence and integrity of UN human rights mechanisms, providing political and financial support, and building coalitions capable of advancing democratic norms, even when opposed by superpowers.

Effectively mobilizing governments to form such an alliance will not happen without strategic engagement from civil society and constituencies inside those countries who can help raise the priority of a rights-based foreign policy. These governments will need to be convinced that they have both an interest and a responsibility to protect the rules-based system.

Projects of this nature are bubbling up. Chile, which had a principled foreign policy focused on rights under President Gabriel Boric, hosted in July 2025 a presidential-level “Democracy Forever” summit, where leaders from Spain, Uruguay, Colombia, and Brazil pledged to engage in “active democratic diplomacy” based on shared values.

The Hague Group, led by Malaysia, South Africa, and Colombia, formed in January 2025 in “defense of international law” and in solidarity with Palestinians. Over 70 countries from all regions signed a joint statement defending multilateralism at the UN. Earlier, in 2017, former Danish Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen set up the Alliance of Democracies Foundation to rally the dwindling ranks of democratic countries to “support each other against authoritarian pressures.”

Whatever its precise contours, an alliance of rights-respecting democracies would offer a hopeful counterpoint to the authoritarian trope of China’s and Russia’s leaders standing alongside North Korea’s Kim Jong Un, observing military hardware in a parade in Beijing’s Tiananmen Square in September. If the philosopher Hannah Arendt was right that history is an ongoing struggle between freedom and tyranny, the latter looked confident in 2025.

Yet, even in the worst of times, the idea of freedom and human rights is enduring. People power remains an engine for change. In the US, “No Kings” marches have drawn millions, protesters in Chicago, Minneapolis, Los Angeles, and around the country have stood up against the deployment of the National Guard and ICE abuses, and students are still organizing for Palestine on university campuses despite draconian crackdowns and visa revocations.

Buoyed by popular resistance, South Korean parliamentarians impeached their president to prevent him from grabbing power through martial law. Grassroots aid efforts by Sudan’s emergency response rooms, Hong Kong’s fire relief, Sri Lanka’s cyclone relief community kitchens, and Ukrainian mutual aid and solidarity collectives represent the best of this trend.

In 2025, Gen Z protests against corruption, inadequate public services, and poor governance in Nepal, Indonesia, and Morocco brought to the forefront the need for governments to listen to their youth and tackle corruption and inequality. But as the difficulties of restoring rights in Bangladesh after years under an authoritarian government illustrates, gains won through public mobilization can easily be lost unless democratic participation and free expression remain unassailable.