Search

In recent years, citizenship revocation has become synonymous with terrorism, regarded as a practice reserved for the most dangerous of citizens. Yet in the UK revocation has a much longer history, spanning over 100 years, with a narrative that extends beyond the nation-state and into Empire. This paper asks what may be learned from a historical account of citizenship revocation? Exploring its emergence as part of the British Nationality and Status of Aliens Act 1914, this account suggests that revocation should not be analyzed in isolation but as a practice embedded in polices of immigration, naturalization, and emigration. This paper illustrates the ways in which these policies code subjects based on race, class and gender in order to govern their mobility. From this study, it argues that citizenship revocation cannot be explained solely through security claims and suggests that the 2018 cases should be considered in the context of revocation's history. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper argues that purportedly outdated racial categories continue to resonate in contemporary forms of racialization. I examine the use of metaphors of rootedness and shadows by a contemporary UK migrant advocacy organization and its allies to justify migrant regularization and manage illicit circulation. I argue that the distinction between rooted and rootless peoples draws on the colonial and racial distinctions between wandering and settled peoples. Contemporary notions of citizenship continue to draw upon and activate racial forms of differentiation. Citizenship is thus part of a form of racial governance that operates not only along biological but also social and cultural lines, infusing race into the structures, practices, and techniques of governance. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]