	Introduction

The Senate may consider providing its advice and consent to U.S. ratification of the United Nations (U.N.) Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD, or the Convention) during the 114 th Congress. To date, 151 countries have ratified or acceded to the Convention. He transmitted it to the Senate for advice and consent to ratification in May 2012, where it was received and referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations (SFRC). CRPD was automatically returned to SFRC at the end of the 113 th Congress. For example, some policy makers have expressed concern regarding the Convention's possible impact on existing U.S. laws and policies, particularly the role and authority of CRPD's monitoring body, the Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. The overall purpose of CRPD is to promote, protect, and ensure the full and equal enjoyment of all human rights and fundamental freedoms by all persons with disabilities. Obama Administration Actions

On July 30, 2009, President Obama signed the Convention. The Administration proposed three reservations, five understandings, and one declaration to accompany the treaty:
a federalism reservation , which states that U.S. obligations under CRPD are limited to those measures appropriate to the federal system, such as the enforcement of the Americans with Disabilities Act; a private conduct reservation , which states that the United States does not accept CRPD provisions that address private conduct, except as mandated by U.S. law; a torture or cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment reservation , which states that persons with disabilities are protected against torture and other degrading treatment consistent with U.S. obligations under the U.N. Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights; a first amendment understanding , which says that the United States understands that CRPD does not authorize or require actions restricting speech, expression, or association that are protected by the Constitution; an economic, social, and cultural rights understanding , which says the United States understands that CRPD prevents disability discrimination with respect to economic, social and cultural rights, insofar as such rights are recognized and implemented under U.S. law; an equal employment opportunity understanding , which states that the United States understands that U.S. law protects disabled persons against unequal pay, and that CRPD does not require the adoption of a comparable framework for persons with disabilities; a uniformed military employee hiring understanding , which states that the United States does not recognize rights in the Convention that exceed those under U.S. law in regards to military hiring, promotion, and other employment-related issues; a definition of disability understanding , which states that CRPD does not define "disability" or "persons with disabilities," and that the United States understands the definitions of these terms to be consistent with U.S. law; and a non-self executing declaration , which states that no new laws would be required as a result of U.S. ratification of CRPD. Senate Actions

		2012-2013

On July 31, 2012, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee (SFRC) reported CRPD favorably to the full Senate by a vote of 13 in favor and 6 against. To address the concerns of some opponents, the committee agreed to the following understandings and declarations (in addition to or modifying the aforementioned RUDs proposed by President Obama):
On December 4, 2012, the Senate voted against providing advice and consent to ratification of CRPD by a vote of 61 to 38. During hearings and debates leading up to the votes in SFRC and the full Senate, Senators focused on the Convention's possible impact on U.S. sovereignty, particularly the impact of the recommendations of the Disabilities Committee on domestic laws and policies, as well as the potential effect U.S. ratification might have on existing U.S. abortion laws. 2014-2015

On July 22, 2014, SFRC reported the treaty favorably by a vote of 12 in favor and 6 against, subject to three reservations, nine understandings, and two declarations. The full Senate did not consider providing its advice and consent to ratification. The treaty was automatically returned to SFRC at the end of the 113 th Congress. Indeed, the United States historically has recognized the rights of individuals with disabilities through various constitutional and statutory protections, including the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA). In fact, some CRPD requirements appear to be modeled after these U.S. disability laws. Opponents of the Convention argue that treaties are the "supreme Law of the Land" under the Constitution, and that U.S. ratification of CRPD could supersede federal, state, and local laws. Supporters of ratification emphasize that CRPD is a non-discrimination treaty that does not create new obligations. CRPD as an Instrument of U.S. Foreign Policy

Supporters of CRPD contend that U.S. ratification would enhance the United States' credibility as it advocates the rights of persons with disabilities globally. First, proponents contend that U.S. ratification, as well as the United States' overall support for the treaty, may improve the lives of U.S. citizens with disabilities living, working, or traveling abroad—including students, retirees, veterans, and members of the U.S. Armed Forces. Second, some CRPD supporters maintain that U.S. ratification would help U.S. companies that already comply with higher disability standards. The extent to which U.S. ratification of CRPD may positively affect U.S. businesses or disabled U.S. citizens living or traveling abroad is not entirely clear. Critics believe that this provision may give governments, and not U.S. parents, the right to make educational and treatment-related decisions for their disabled children. They are concerned that the term "sexual and reproductive health" could be interpreted to be a euphemism for abortion. CRPD advocates note that the word "abortion" is never mentioned in the treaty and contend that no U.S laws related to abortion would be created as a result of U.S. ratification.
During the 114th Congress, the Senate might consider providing its advice and consent to ratification of the U.N. Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD, or the Convention). CRPD, which has been ratified or acceded to by 151 countries, is a multilateral agreement that addresses the rights of disabled persons. Its purpose is to promote, protect, and ensure the full and equal enjoyment of all human rights and fundamental freedoms by persons with disabilities.
Administration and Senate Actions
Many U.S. policy makers, including President Obama and some Members of Congress, agree that existing U.S. laws and policies are compatible with CRPD. In fact, some CRPD provisions appear to be modeled after U.S. disability laws. The United States has historically recognized the rights of individuals with disabilities through various laws and policies, including the Americans with Disabilities Act.
In July 2009, President Obama signed CRPD. The Administration transmitted it to the Senate for advice and consent to ratification in May 2012. Since then, Members of the Senate have taken several actions related to CRPD:
The Senate Committee on Foreign Relations (SFRC) held a hearing on the Convention in July 2012 and later that month reported the treaty favorably to the full Senate by a vote of 13 in favor and 6 against, subject to certain conditions. In December 2012, the Senate voted against providing advice and consent to ratification of CRPD by a vote of 61 to 38. The treaty was automatically returned to SFRC at the end of the 112th Congress. In July 2014, SFRC reported the treaty favorably by a vote of 12 in favor and 6 against, subject to certain conditions. The full Senate did not consider providing its advice and consent to ratification. The treaty was automatically returned to SFRC at the end of the 113th Congress.
Key Issues in the Ratification Debate
In debates regarding U.S. ratification of CRPD, the treaty's possible impact on U.S. sovereignty has been a key area of concern. Critics of the Convention maintain that treaties are the "supreme Law of the Land" under the Constitution, and that U.S. ratification of CRPD could supersede federal, state, and local laws. Supporters assert that CRPD is a non-discrimination treaty that does not create new obligations. They contend that U.S. laws meet, and in some cases exceed, CRPD requirements. Debate may also center on the following issues:
Role of the CPRD committee. Critics are concerned that recommendations of the Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, the Convention's monitoring body, could deem U.S. laws to be in violation of CRPD and presume authority over the private lives of U.S. citizens. Supporters, including the Obama Administration, emphasize that committee decisions are non-binding under international and domestic law. Possible impact on U.S. citizens and businesses abroad. Some CRPD proponents contend that U.S. ratification may (1) improve the lives of U.S. citizens with disabilities living, working, or traveling abroad, and (2) "level the playing field" for U.S. companies that, unlike many of their foreign counterparts, already comply with higher disability standards. The extent to which U.S. ratification of CRPD may positively affect U.S. businesses or disabled U.S. citizens living or traveling abroad remains unclear. Role in U.S. foreign policy. Supporters contend that U.S. ratification may enhance U.S. credibility as it advocates the rights of persons with disabilities globally. Opponents argue that existing U.S. laws and policies are robust enough examples of U.S. commitment to the issue. Abortion. Some critics worry that the term "sexual and reproductive health" in CRPD could be a euphemism for abortion. Supporters note that the word "abortion" is never mentioned in the Convention and contend that no U.S laws related to abortion would be created as a result of U.S. ratification. Parental rights. Some are concerned that the U.S. ratification may give governments, and not U.S. parents, the right to make educational and treatment-related decisions for their disabled children. Others, including the Obama Administration, hold that existing federal, state, and local laws protect parental rights.
Other issues that Senators may wish to consider include challenges to evaluating CRPD's effectiveness, obstacles to CRPD implementation, and the role and participation of civil society in CRPD mechanisms.
For information on U.S. efforts to address the rights of persons with disabilities domestically, see CRS Report 98-921, The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA): Statutory Language and Recent Issues, by [author name scrubbed]. An overview of treaty process is available in CRS Report 98-384, Senate Consideration of Treaties, by [author name scrubbed].
This report will be updated as events warrant.