Participation by the United States in the international human rights treaty system has presented a number of difficult issues, both for itself and for the wider world. Taken separately, these issues are, perhaps, not unique; taken together and in the context of the United States' role on the international stage, they raise important questions. Because of its international role, and in particular the role played by the promotion of treaty–based human rights in United States foreign policy, it was perhaps natural to expect the United States to be equally engaged in ratifying and applying the human rights instruments at home. This has not been so, and the process – where it has taken place – has been slow and contradictory, and has excluded any discussion of social and economic rights.

In its foreign affairs, the United States remains the friend and champion of the human rights treaty system, and within the United Nations it has played a leading part in the creation of the two ad hoc tribunals to prosecute genocide and other international crimes. At home, however, the issue of treaty implementation and enforcement has been complicated by a number of factors: the breadth and character of the reservations made by the United States Senate on ratification; the complexity of the United States federal system; and the unique historical tradition of rights protection under the United States Constitution, which produces a reluctance to accept that international treaty obligations can be complementary and not threatening to US civil rights.