The DOI matches its Crossref record.
How Authoritarians Use International Law
Abstract
Two great trends of our time are legalization and autocratization. Both these trends are now extending to the level of international governance. As authoritarian regimes wield more power on the international plane, they are turning to international law as a means of shielding themselves from criticism and actively promoting their own illiberal projects. Their strategies include repurposing multilateral institutions, creating new norms, and seeking to assert jurisdiction over their critics abroad. The development of authoritarian international law requires a creative response from democracies that has not yet been forthcoming.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Authoritarian states learn to exploit contextual changes in technology, the international legal environment, and foreign relations to pursue their objectives and mitigate challenges and vulnerabilities introduced by globalization (Frantz, Kendall-Taylor, and Wright 2020a; Ginsburg 2020).”
From The Long Arm and the Iron Fist: Authoritarian Crackdowns and Transnational Repression (2024) · cites this paper as Ginsburg 2020
Citations
Cited by
The Long Arm and the Iron Fist: Authoritarian Crackdowns and Transnational Repression
Dukalskis, A., Furstenberg, S., Hellmeier, S., & Scales, R. (2024) · Journal of Conflict Resolution · doi:10.1177/00220027231188896 · Cited by 31
“Authoritarian states learn to exploit contextual changes in technology, the international legal environment, and foreign relations to pursue their objectives and mitigate challenges and vulnerabilities introduced by globalization (Frantz, Kendall-Taylor, and Wright 2020a; Ginsburg 2020).”
Background
Metadata
- Authors
- Ginsburg, T.
- Corresponding author
- Ginsburg, Tom
- ORCID
- Ginsburg, Tom
- Venue
- Journal of Democracy
- Publisher
- Project MUSE
- Published
- 2020
- Volume
- 31
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 44-58
- ISSN
- 1045-5736 (ISSN-L)
- 1086-3214
- OpenAlex
- W3091923823
- Cited by
- 39
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 6 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 4
- FWCI
- 9.49
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of democracy (publishedVersion)
- eYLS (Yale Law School) (submittedVersion)
- Project Muse (Johns Hopkins University) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › International Law and Human Rights
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › International Relations and Foreign Policy
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Political Conflict and Governance
- Keywords
- authoritarianism, international law, autocratization, legalization, illiberalism, multilateral institutions, international norms, extraterritorial jurisdiction, democracy, international governance
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
