Paige Murphy
As immigration raids have been ravaging our nation, alarm bells are going off regarding the 2028 Summer Olympics in Los Angeles.[1] Is the risk of bringing thousands of international athletes and global observers into a hotbed of curated immigration crisis worth the reward of the ego boost and apparent reputational benefit for the United States? Right now, that answer is complicated to determine.
For background, every four years, or two for alternating summer/winter events, weeks-long Olympic events sweep the world entertainment stage.[2] Importantly, the Olympics do not take place in a vacuum; underlying international political tensions always seem to bubble to the surface, and for the upcoming 2028 Olympics, the current tension is whether the United States should be allowed to host the Games.[3] The Olympics have been technically described as “the world’s only truly global, multi-sport, celebratory athletics competition[, w]ith more than 200 countries participating in over 400 events across the Summer and Winter Games…”[4] And yet, the importance of the Olympics is not solely concerning sports; “[a]s the largest regularly held gathering of citizens from different parts of the world, the Olympics are an attractive target for political expression and activity.”[5]
While not every athlete or audience member may be a fan of the Olympics being used as a global stage to present and discuss current political issues, this does not detract from the fact that the Olympic Games are one of the most practical global outreach methods.[6] And more often than not, the political issues that become pronounced and analyzed during the Olympics are not insignificant.[7] For example, “[o]ver the course of its history, apartheid, racism, World Wars, invasions, colonialism, and numerous other political and social issues have swirled around the games,” and all of those aforementioned issues are critically important.[8] That being said, the current political climate in the United States appears to be adding fuel to the fire of the political outreach and positional stances that take place during the Olympics. Should we have international athletes making statements about global human rights violations at the Olympics, an event which will take place in a nation where human rights abuses are occurring every day?
In the United States, recent months have seen a devastating uptick in the mass detention and deportation of migrants, asylum seekers, and U.S. citizens, who, in turn, have to fear for their safety and life, as their basic human rights are being violated by the U.S. government.[9] Yet, the hypocrisy of the International Olympic Committee (IOC) is stark, given that they have repeatedly affirmed their commitment to respecting human rights in accordance with the United Nations human rights framework; however, the 2028 Los Angeles Olympics have been greenlit, and there is seemingly no turning back.[10] Technically, Los Angeles can no longer legally back out of hosting the Olympic Games, as they have signed a binding contract; the IOC ultimately has the discretion to move the games to a new venue.[11] Specifically, the IOC can change the Games’ host city if the host country is in a state of “civil disorder, boycott, embargo decreed by the international community or in a situation officially recognized as one of belligerence” or if the IOC is worried that “the health or safety of participants in the Games would be seriously threatened or jeopardized for any reason.”[12] And while the United States may currently meet a few of these conditions, the IOC is unwilling to consider a change of host city.
Ultimately, as the Olympic Games remain among the premier global events, it is crucial to view them as an avenue for exploring and critiquing global geopolitics.[13] A nation’s ability to host the Games should not be assumed, especially given that one of the IOC’s admitted goals is to promote human rights.[14] The IOC has the responsibility to accept or refuse a country’s offer to host the Olympics. Furthermore, as the international political environment is in a heightened state, it is crucial to highlight the importance of the international community holding itself accountable to human rights norms, “soft law”, and agreed-upon practices. No event, including the Olympics, should be able to side-step human rights standards, but the Olympics are especially significant because they are one of the most unifying events for the global community.[15]
[1] Thuc Nhi Nguyen, It’s Too Late for Buyer’s Remorse. Why L.A. Can’t Back Out of Hosting 2028 Olympics, Los Angeles Times, (Aug. 18, 2025, at 3:00 PT), https://www.latimes.com/sports/olympics/story/2025-08-18/why-la-cant-back-out-of-2028-olympics.
[2] The Modern Olympic Games, The Olympic Museum, https://stillmed.olympic.org/media/Document%20Library/OlympicOrg/Documents/Document-Set-Teachers-The-Main-Olympic-Topics/The-Modern-Olympic-Games.pdf.
[3] Nguyen, supra note 1.
[4] Olympic Games, International Olympic Committee, https://www.olympics.com/en/olympic-games.
[5] Scott Rosner & Deborah Low, The Efficacy of Olympic Bans and Boycotts on Effectuating International Political and Economic Change, 11 Tex. Rev. Ent. & Sports L. 27, 28 (2009).
[6] Id. at 29.
[7] Id.
[8] Id.
[9] Amnesty Int’l, Ringing the Alarm Bells Rising Authoritarian Practices and Erosion of Human Rights in the United States 25 (2026), https://www.amnestyusa.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/01/Ringing-the-Alarm-Bells-Rising-Authoritarian-Practices-and-Erosion-of-Human-Rights-in-the-United-States.pdf; G.A. Res. 217 (III) A, Universal Declaration of Human Rights (Dec. 10, 1948).
[10] Respecting Human Rights, International Olympic Committee, https://www.olympics.com/ioc/human-rights; Nguyen, supra note 1.
[11] Nguyen, supra note 1.
[12] Id.
[13] Around 5 Billion People – 84 Per Cent of the Potential Global Audience – Followed the Olympic Games Paris 2024, International Olympic Committee (Dec. 5, 2024), https://www.olympics.com/ioc/news/around-5-billion-people-84-per-cent-of-the-potential-global-audience-followed-the-olympic-games-paris-2024.
[14] Universal Declaration of Human Rights, supra note 9.
[15] Rosner & Low, supra note 5 at 29.