THE RISK OF STATELESSNESS 78 YALE HUMAN RIGHTS & DEVELOPMENT L.J. 2017 [Vol. 19 she does not have a right to any other nationality. When understood in these terms, the decision of the Inter-American Court in Expelled Dominicans and Haitians expands statelessness protection through a mandatory grant of nationality in the place of birth to persons who face a “risk of statelessness.” Indeed, the Inter-American Court did not find that the Jeans were stateless, but rather that under a possible interpretation of Haitian law, they faced a risk of statelessness. By requiring the Dominican Republic to extend Dominican nationality whenever it had not adequately addressed such a risk, the Court effectively extended statelessness protection to persons that had not been declared stateless. The decision of the Inter-American Court to expand the right to nationality in the place of birth under the American Convention to persons who face a risk of statelessness is a notable normative development. The next section provides a critique of this rule, arguing that it unnecessarily extended a well-established rule of protection, and that policy implications of this extension may cause the Court’s well-intentioned progressive development of norms to backfire. III. CONSIDERING RISK WITHIN THE STATELESSNESS DETERMINATION PROCESS When the Inter-American Court extended protection under the international law of statelessness to persons who face a risk of statelessness, it expanded the scope of a well-established rule limited to the protection of stateless persons.220 Gerald L. Neuman has criticized the Inter-American Court for “undervalu[ing] the consent of the relevant community of states as a factor in the interpretation of a human rights treaty” when it utilizes international human rights norms to interpret the American Convention.221 Neuman has suggested that this “neglect” both distorts human rights norms and potentially undermines the effectiveness of the regional human rights system.222 Neuman’s critique can be applied to the Inter-American Court’s interpretation of international obligations under the law of statelessness in Expelled Dominicans and Haitians. Arguably, the InterAmerican Court’s decision distorts norms of statelessness protection, and potentially undermines the effectiveness of the Inter-American system in its effort to combat statelessness. These deleterious consequences can be avoided by the Inter-American Court and other international authorities if they remain anchored to the well-established rule of protection for stateless persons, while incorporating a risk assessment into the determination of statelessness. The first sub-section below describes the exact nature of the normative distortion in Expelled Dominicans and Haitians, and provides the reasoned solution of including a risk assessment as part of a statelessness 220. See supra Section II.C. 221. Gerald L. Neuman, Import, Export, and Regional Consent in the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, 19 EUR. J. INT’L L. 101, 102 (2008). 222. Id. Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3111529