Kyle Rapp
Biographic Data
| ID | 3876818 |
|---|---|
| NAME | Kyle Rapp |
| GIVEN NAMES | Kyle |
| FAMILY NAME | Rapp |
| SIGNATURE | RAPP K |
| AFFILIATIONS | University of Southern California |
| ORCID | 0000-0002-6610-8298 |
| VERIFIED | Yes |
| TOTAL WORKS | 8 |
| TOTAL CITATIONS | 7 |
| AUTHOR COUNT | 8 |
| EDITOR COUNT | 0 |
| FIRST PUBLICATION YEAR | 2020 |
| LATEST PUBLICATION YEAR | 2025 |
| H-INDEX | 2 |
The Argumentative Power of International Law
What makes a human rights argument effective? When challenging a state's human rights practices, actors can draw on a range of discursive options and frames. Current research on human rights argumentation highlights the strategic use of different rhetorical frames by actors to create political outcomes on a case-by-case basis. This analysis, however, is the first to measure the determinants of effective argumentation, the role of legal rhetoric, …
Partisanship, Military Constituencies, and District Competitiveness
In May 2020, bipartisan groups of US representatives and senators joined public letters criticizing the International Criminal Court (ICC) after it opened an investigation in Afghanistan and moved toward opening an investigation in Palestine. Why did some members of Congress join these letters, while others did not? This paper develops and tests a theory focusing on two factors to address this question: partisanship and the interaction between el…
Who Stands Up for the ICC? Explaining Variation in State Party Responses to US Sanctions
On September 2, 2020, the United States sanctioned two International Criminal Court (ICC) officials, under an executive order issued 3 months previously. In response, over two-thirds of ICC States Parties issued or joined public statements supporting the Court. Why did some ICC members condemn the sanctions or otherwise express support for the Court, while others did not? We begin by documenting variation in the type and timing of statements befo…
Criminalizing Atrocity
Justifying force
What is the role of international law in foreign-policy decision-making? In particular, why do leaders justify policy decisions with appeals to international law and why do these appeals make the references that they do? This paper combines scholarship on the role of justifications and the permissive power of international law, theorizing that decisionmakers will seek out international legal justifications over justifications that reference non-l…
Social media and genocide
Who bears responsibility when social media platforms are used to incite genocide? Although courts and scholarship have recognized the role of mass media in past mass atrocities, social media poses a unique challenge. Its transnational nature, with companies and infrastructure often located in different jurisdictions from where the crimes are committed, makes determining responsibility challenging. This article argues that the prohibition of genoc…
Social Pressure, History, and the Expansion of International Humanitarian Law
How, despite opposition from major states, did international humanitarian law (IHL) expand from its original focus on international conflicts to apply to internal conflicts too? And what can this process tell us about international law more broadly? In Lawmaking under Pressure, Mantilla deftly combines international relations theory with legal and diplomatic history to explain the processes of social pressure through which a collection of states …
Law and contestation in international negotiations
What is the role of rhetoric and argumentation in international relations? Some argue that it is little more than ‘cheap talk’, while others say that it may play a role in persuasion or coordination. However, why states deploy certain arguments, and why these arguments succeed or fail, is less well understood. I argue that, in international negotiations, certain types of legal frames are particularly useful for creating winning arguments. When a …
Law and contestation in international negotiations
What is the role of rhetoric and argumentation in international relations? Some argue that it is little more than ‘cheap talk’, while others say that it may play a role in persuasion or coordination. However, why states deploy certain arguments, and why these arguments succeed or fail, is less well understood. I argue that, in international negotiations, certain types of legal frames are particularly useful for creating winning arguments. When a …
The Argumentative Power of International Law
What makes a human rights argument effective? When challenging a state's human rights practices, actors can draw on a range of discursive options and frames. Current research on human rights argumentation highlights the strategic use of different rhetorical frames by actors to create political outcomes on a case-by-case basis. This analysis, however, is the first to measure the determinants of effective argumentation, the role of legal rhetoric, …
Who Stands Up for the ICC? Explaining Variation in State Party Responses to US Sanctions
On September 2, 2020, the United States sanctioned two International Criminal Court (ICC) officials, under an executive order issued 3 months previously. In response, over two-thirds of ICC States Parties issued or joined public statements supporting the Court. Why did some ICC members condemn the sanctions or otherwise express support for the Court, while others did not? We begin by documenting variation in the type and timing of statements befo…
Social media and genocide
Who bears responsibility when social media platforms are used to incite genocide? Although courts and scholarship have recognized the role of mass media in past mass atrocities, social media poses a unique challenge. Its transnational nature, with companies and infrastructure often located in different jurisdictions from where the crimes are committed, makes determining responsibility challenging. This article argues that the prohibition of genoc…
Law and contestation in international negotiations
What is the role of rhetoric and argumentation in international relations? Some argue that it is little more than ‘cheap talk’, while others say that it may play a role in persuasion or coordination. However, why states deploy certain arguments, and why these arguments succeed or fail, is less well understood. I argue that, in international negotiations, certain types of legal frames are particularly useful for creating winning arguments. When a …
Social media and genocide
Who bears responsibility when social media platforms are used to incite genocide? Although courts and scholarship have recognized the role of mass media in past mass atrocities, social media poses a unique challenge. Its transnational nature, with companies and infrastructure often located in different jurisdictions from where the crimes are committed, makes determining responsibility challenging. This article argues that the prohibition of genoc…
Social Pressure, History, and the Expansion of International Humanitarian Law
How, despite opposition from major states, did international humanitarian law (IHL) expand from its original focus on international conflicts to apply to internal conflicts too? And what can this process tell us about international law more broadly? In Lawmaking under Pressure, Mantilla deftly combines international relations theory with legal and diplomatic history to explain the processes of social pressure through which a collection of states …
Who Stands Up for the ICC? Explaining Variation in State Party Responses to US Sanctions
On September 2, 2020, the United States sanctioned two International Criminal Court (ICC) officials, under an executive order issued 3 months previously. In response, over two-thirds of ICC States Parties issued or joined public statements supporting the Court. Why did some ICC members condemn the sanctions or otherwise express support for the Court, while others did not? We begin by documenting variation in the type and timing of statements befo…
Criminalizing Atrocity
Justifying force
What is the role of international law in foreign-policy decision-making? In particular, why do leaders justify policy decisions with appeals to international law and why do these appeals make the references that they do? This paper combines scholarship on the role of justifications and the permissive power of international law, theorizing that decisionmakers will seek out international legal justifications over justifications that reference non-l…
Partisanship, Military Constituencies, and District Competitiveness
In May 2020, bipartisan groups of US representatives and senators joined public letters criticizing the International Criminal Court (ICC) after it opened an investigation in Afghanistan and moved toward opening an investigation in Palestine. Why did some members of Congress join these letters, while others did not? This paper develops and tests a theory focusing on two factors to address this question: partisanship and the interaction between el…
The Argumentative Power of International Law
What makes a human rights argument effective? When challenging a state's human rights practices, actors can draw on a range of discursive options and frames. Current research on human rights argumentation highlights the strategic use of different rhetorical frames by actors to create political outcomes on a case-by-case basis. This analysis, however, is the first to measure the determinants of effective argumentation, the role of legal rhetoric, …
Political science (8 works) · Law (7 works) · Sociology (7 works) · International Law and Human Rights (6 works) · Global Peace and Security Dynamics (5 works) · International law (5 works) · Law (5 works) · Law and economics (4 works) · Politics (4 works) · Criminology (3 works)