North Dakota Century Code Chapter 12.1-36.1 (the “Health Care Ban” or “Ban”) categorically prohibits adolescents from receiving medically necessary treatment when their gender identity does not align with their sex assigned at birth, while permitting the same interventions for other minors and for other medical purposes. The Health Care Ban impermissibly intrudes on multiple rights protected by the North Dakota Constitution: its guarantees of individuals’ bodily autonomy and access to life‑preserving medical care; its protections for family integrity safeguarding parents’ right to make individualized medical decisions in their children’s best interests; and its equal‑protection provisions prohibiting laws that discriminate on the basis of sex or otherwise restrict important substantive rights for a subset of people without compelling reason. Each of these constitutional guarantees is supported by international and regional human rights law and by the laws and practices of many other nations. Together, these domestic, regional, and international authorities demonstrate that North Dakota’s ban is both unconstitutional and inconsistent with established human rights norms. This Court should therefore reverse the lower court’s decision.

Liberia’s support for key recommendations received during its fourth UPR cycle is a significant and welcome step toward at last delivering justice for serious international crimes during the country’s civil wars. These include recommendations aimed at the establishment and effective functioning of a war and economic crimes court and full implementation of the country’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s recommendations.

In March 2026, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (the Court) issued a landmark judgment in Ramos Durand et al. v. Peru, holding Peru responsible for the forced sterilization and death of Celia Edith Ramos Durand. The case was brought by the Center for Reproductive Rights, DEMUS–Study for the Defense of Women’s Rights, and the Center for Justice and International Law (CEJIL). Global Justice Center submitted an amicus curiae brief in the case, with Debevoise & Plimpton acting as pro bono counsel, articulating the importance of specifically recognizing reproductive violence.

We are writing on behalf of the Global South Coalition for SRHR and Development Justice and a group of civil society organizations allied in support of sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR). As you know, SRHR has long been recognized by the UN and its member states as an essential prerequisite to achieving gender equality and development. As the UN80 reform process explores potential structural improvements—including a possible merger between UNFPA and UN Women—we are writing to urge you to safeguard the integrity of the UN’s SRHR mandate.

While U.S. constitutional law provides a clear basis to reject Tennessee’s attempt to silence individuals providing information about safe and lawful healthcare access, affirming the district court’s holding would also align with international human rights law. Several international treaties, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (“ICCPR”) and the International Convention on the Rights of the Child (“CRC”), support the position that the Recruitment Provision violates longstanding international legal principles protecting free speech.

The Global Justice Center and the Leitner Center welcome the opportunity to submit comments to the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Myanmar relating to the forthcoming conference room paper on pathways to accountability for grave human rights violations in Myanmar.

We, the undersigned organizations and individuals, represent civil society organizations, nongovernmental organizations, victim/survivor associations, and academic institutions from around the world. We have technical expertise on the prevention and punishment of crimes against humanity, including their adjudication before national and international courts and tribunals. Many of us have also directly experienced or witnessed the commission of crimes against humanity. We welcome the opening of the Preparatory Committee for the Conference of Plenipotentiaries on the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Crimes against Humanity, a vital step towards closing a long-standing accountability gap in international law.

The Draft Addendum makes welcome contributions to recognizing a fuller scope of conflict-related sexual and gender-based violence (GBV), acknowledging that “conflict-related gender violence is no longer confined to acts purely sexual in nature” and includes many forms, including physical, moral, psychological and transgenerational forms of violence.