Authors
Matthew Lindauer
Brooklyn College (CUNY)
Abstract
According to the traditional state sovereignty view in the ethics of immigration literature, societies have a great deal of latitude in determining and implementing their immigration policies. This view is typically defended by appealing to the rights of members of societies, for instance to political self-determination. Opponents of the view have often criticized its partiality to members, arguing that nonmembers can also make stringent demands on societies to be admitted and given the same treatment in matters of immigration policy as other nonmembers. In this paper, I take a different approach to responding to the state sovereignty view. I argue that even if we grant the premise that the rights of members generally trump the rights of nonmembers in matters of immigration policy, societies are greatly constrained in setting their immigration policies by considerations of domestic justice. The considerations that I focus on involve relationships between members and nonmembers that hold due to a shared quality or set of qualities on the basis of which members identify with nonmembers. The argument appeals to premises and principles that defenders of the state sovereignty view are committed to but concludes that this view cannot serve as a satisfactory framework for the normative assessment of immigration policies.
Keywords identification  immigration  liberalism  external relationships  respect  state sovereignty
Categories (categorize this paper)
Reprint years 2017
DOI 10.26556/jesp.v12i3.248
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 65,657
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

What is the Point of Equality.Elizabeth Anderson - 1999 - Ethics 109 (2):287-337.
Two Kinds of Respect.Stephen Darwall - 1977 - Ethics 88 (1):36-49.
Democratic Theory and Border Coercion.Arash Abizadeh - 2008 - Political Theory 36 (1):37-65.
Freedom of Association is Not the Answer.Sarah Fine - 2013 - In Mark Timmons (ed.), Disputed Moral Issues: A Reader 3rd Edition. Oxford University Press. pp. 338-356.

View all 17 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Righting Domestic Wrongs with Refugee Policy.Matthew Lindauer - forthcoming - Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy:1-18.

View all 8 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Immigration Justice.Peter Higgins - 2013 - Edinburgh University Press.
Democratic Theory and Border Coercion.Arash Abizadeh - 2008 - Political Theory 36 (1):37-65.
What is the Right to Exclude Immigrants?Sune Lægaard - 2010 - Res Publica 16 (3):245-262.
Justice in Immigration.Warren F. Schwartz (ed.) - 1995 - Cambridge University Press.
Open Borders and the Right to Immigration.Peter Higgins - 2008 - Human Rights Review 9 (4):525-535.
Immigration: The Case for Limits.David Miller - 2005 - In Andrew I. Cohen & Christopher Heath Wellman (eds.), Contemporary Debates in Applied Ethics. Wiley-Blackwell. pp. 193-206.
Mobility (Migration).Alex Sager - 2012 - In Ruth Chadwick (ed.), Encyclopedia of Applied Ethics. pp. 128-36.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2017-10-26

Total views
100 ( #111,009 of 2,462,368 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #449,313 of 2,462,368 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes