Search

This paper examines how everyday practices of ‘bordering’, as conceived by Yuval- Davis, Wemyss, and Cassidy (2019) as the ongoing proliferation of border sites where migrants are assessed to be fit for inclusion or exclusion, may violate moral respect by subjecting migrants to a wide array of discriminatory treatment, leading to what I call ‘status-harms’. Section II begins by providing an overview of bordering and the various forms it has taken, such as internal immigration checkpoints or even online visa application processes. Section III develops an account of comparative and non-comparative status-harms and why they constitute violations of moral respect. There, I pay special attention to comparative status-harms by proposing three conditions under which a comparative status-harm can be said to have occurred: (a) if an individual or group is singled out for disadvantageous treatment that others are not subjected to on the basis of a socially salient attribute, (b) if the attribute marks them out as inferior relative to those who are not affected thus, and (c) ascriptions of inferior status occur within a morally objectionable social hierarchy where they are targeted by hostile norms and practices centred around that attribute. I then consider how discriminatory practices of bordering routinely imposes status-harms on migrants. Section IV draws a distinction between two types of discrimination that migrants may be subjected to at border sites, which I term policy-based discrimination and procedure-based discrimination, and explores their relationship to the comparative and non-comparative status-harms suffered by migrants. I conclude in Section V.

This paper examines how everyday practices of 'bordering', as conceived by Yuval- Davis, Wemyss, and Cassidy (2019) as the ongoing proliferation of border sites where migrants are assessed to be fit for inclusion or exclusion, may violate moral respect by subjecting migrants to a wide array of discriminatory treatment, leading to what I call 'status-harms'. Section II begins by providing an overview of bordering and the various forms it has taken, such as internal immigration checkpoints or even online visa application processes. Section III develops an account of comparative and non-comparative status-harms and why they constitute violations of moral respect. There, I pay special attention to comparative status-harms by proposing three conditions under which a comparative status-harm can be said to have occurred: (a) if an individual or group is singled out for disadvantageous treatment that others are not subjected to on the basis of a socially salient attribute, (b) if the attribute marks them out as inferior relative to those who are not affected thus, and (c) ascriptions of inferior status occur within a morally objectionable social hierarchy where they are targeted by hostile norms and practices centred around that attribute. I then consider how discriminatory practices of bordering routinely imposes status-harms on migrants. Section IV draws a distinction between two types of discrimination that migrants may be subjected to at border sites, which I term policy-based discrimination and procedure-based discrimination, and explores their relationship to the comparative and non-comparative status-harms suffered by migrants. I conclude in Section V. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This special collection examines how immigration and asylum policies have evolved since Britain left the European Union. The referendum was won on the promise of 'taking back control', yet, since Brexit, immigration has increased to record levels and the nationalities of people coming to the UK have become more diverse. The increase in immigration was driven by a liberalisation of work and study visas and the creation of new humanitarian schemes. Although some aspects of immigration policy have evolved in a liberal direction, others have become increasingly restrictive. The Conservative government has pursued a draconian agenda on asylum, borders and irregular migration, including a scheme to deport asylum seekers to Rwanda, and legislation that effectively abolishes the right to seek asylum in the UK. This introduction argues that recent immigration and asylum policies reflect the ambivalent, unstable and unresolved meanings of Brexit itself. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

How are we to understand and research health law under devolution in the UK? Building on work in law and geography, we argue that the figure of the border is key to the production and implementation of devolved health law and the variety of forms that this takes. The utility of border thinking in this context is shown through a review of thematic areas, including infectious disease control, access to health care, and abortion, each instantiating a distinct bordering process. In each, we consider recent developments in policy and legislation, framed with reference to constitutional change, and the politics of devolution in the UK. Taking Wales as an exemplary site, we argue that health law produces borders in traditional and non-traditional places. It creates and blurs territories. It is equally constituted by pluralistic bordering practices. On the basis of this theoretically informed review, we conclude by proposing a cross-disciplinary legal, ethical, and socio-legal research agenda for future research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Certain states in the Global North have responded to refugees seeking safety on their territories through harmful practices of border violence, detention, encampment and containment that serve to prevent and deter refugee arrivals. These practices are ostensibly justified through an appeal to a right to control borders. This paper therefore assesses whether these harmful practices can indeed be morally justified by a state's right to control borders. It analyses whether Christopher Heath Wellman's account of a state's right to freedom of association, which represents the most restrictive account of a state's right to control borders available in the literature, can extend to justify current harmful practices against refugees. If not, then no available justification will be able to do so, and thus contemporary harmful practices used against refugees cannot be justified by a state's right to control borders. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The border is a dangerous and ambiguous concept to deal with. Following an historical-juridical analysis of the evolution of the concept of border, the author explains what in his judgment is a proper connection that the concept of border must establish: (1) to overcome barriers, in respect of both the actors of changing traditions and customs, and in order to encourage integration and growth in the society as a whole; (2) to cleanse the concept of border from nationalist and supremacist ideas, so as to achieve a multi-ethnic and multi-religious society; (3) the right to immigration as a fully recognised universal human right.

Copyright of Latino Studies is the property of Palgrave Macmillan Ltd. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The essay introduces a special issue on Brexit. Instead of merely focusing on its legal implications, this issue undertakes an examination of the UK leaving the EU from a law-and-humanities perspective. The legal analysis is therefore complemented by a broader assessment of the social and cultural features of Brexit, also extending over the complexity of the present and the incertitude posed by its future. Brexit is also a matter of reimagination; constitutional and literary issues thus coalesce towards a transdisciplinary dialogue. To this extent, the collected essays engage with Brexlit, i.e. novels and essays, political pamphlets, and other writings prompted by Brexit. The aim is to explore the doubts, fears, and threats that still haunt the UK after leaving the EU, paying particular attention to the development of new narrative strategies and forms capable of reflecting and giving expression to the new Brexit identities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Sleep Dealer (2008), a science-fiction feature directed by Alex Rivera, offers a dystopian view of U.S.-Mexico relations: with the border fully closed, labor is extracted from economically desperate Mexicans through "nodes" and technologically delivered to the United States. Over the past decade, the film has emerged as a cult success, screening at festivals and in classrooms, garnering favorable critical reception, and generating scholarship in film studies, cultural studies, border studies, Latinx studies, and science fiction studies. This article complements existing perspectives by offering six different, but interrelated, approaches to reading the film, followed by a brief interview with the director. The interventions read Rivera's speculative vision of a near future not that different from our current reality through the lens of recent events. Rivera's film appears even more prescient and insightful in light of the rise of remote work as a tool to mitigate the virus that protected certain bodies via technology while leaving "essential" ones vulnerable; the proliferation of drones and other modes of surveillance; the digital mediation of our personal lives and memories; and the emergence of a technologized border that extends geographically and virtually beyond the physical borderlands. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Intra-urban borders are a pervasive feature in today's global cities. They are not only the result of urban planning but they are also reproduced in everyday movements and interactions. Based on interviews and participant observation in French banlieues of Greater Paris, Mulhouse and Strasbourg, I analyse how inhabitants narrate movements in urban space that lead them to cross the boundaries of their neighbourhood. I build upon Lefebvre's notion of spatial practice and insights from border studies to understand how these movements relate to the social production of urban marginality. The findings show how experiences and representations of intra-urban border-crossing among banlieue residents are shaped by and reproduce geographies of exclusion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the fall semester of 2021, we organized and curated the participatory art project Hostile Terrain '94 at the University of Alabama. The project, conceived and developed by the Undocumented Migration Project, consists of ∼3,200 toe-tags carrying information of deceased migrants found on the US side of the US-Mexico border in the Sonoran Desert. They produce a map of tremendous death. The project allowed participating institutions to make their own decisions regarding how to coordinate the creation of the material and staging and curation of the final exhibition. Apart from its importance as a way of engaging a public with the often-unseen consequences of US border policy and policing, it is also an experiment in collaborative art making. What kind of experience did we want to structure for those taking part in creating the materials? How were we going to stage the encounter with the finished materials? We discuss organizing the creation of materials, setting up the installation, and the period when the project was open to the public to highlight two elements that were of special importance in the process: the subject position engaged by the project, and the meditative practice proposed by the installation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Visas play a crucial role in facilitating international travel and immigration in contemporary times, particularly in enabling global mobility for citizens from the Global South. However, visa law and policy, from the time of their inception, have contributed to systemic human rights violations and loss of applicants' dignity. Although the right to freedom of movement and human dignity are celebrated in multiple international covenants, material practices of visa law and policy impinge on these very rights and dignities; from the 1930s when visas were primarily used to limit the mobility of Jews, to contemporary times when the objects of visa law are primarily citizens from the Global South. This paper highlights the problem of the fossilization of such discriminatory practices embedded in visa law and policy by putting in conversation policy and legal research with close readings of two literary texts from Germany and Bolivia; Transit by Anna Seghers (1944) and American Visa by Juan de Recacoechea (1994). Although experiences of discrimination, violation, disrespect, and denial of rights are consistently and repeatedly experienced by visa applicants across time and space, as evident from the literary and non-literary examples discussed in this paper, only limited research exists on how visa law and policy impinge on human rights and dignity. This paper presents a critique of discriminatory practices that have become bureaucratized and normalized through visa law from the 1930s onwards. It identifies and problematizes ethical violations rising out of the practice of visa law and policy as they apply to citizens from the Global South. This work engages the evocative, empathetic, and representational capacity of literary texts to highlight existing issues related to the material practices of visa law and policy, which are categorized under four main types of violations: 1. pre-submission indignities 2. consular interactions and intimidations 3. indignities rising from the arbitrary collection of personal data and 4. the bureaucracy of documentation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Discretionary practices have often been put forward to explain the racially disproportionate patterns we see in policing. The focus on discretion rather than racism neatly shifts attention away from race and instead towards discretionary practices, which are notoriously amorphous and inscrutable. The attention towards discretion (rather than race) further allows race to operate without being explicitly named and, therefore, to operate as an absent present. In this article, I discuss how race and discretion work together when ordinary police officers are tasked with migration control duties to identify foreign national offenders. Drawing on empirical research conducted in England, I propose the concept of racialised discretion and argue that it holds merit because it recognises that certain discretionary practices and decisions are animated because of race, through race and with the effect (intentional or not) of racially disproportionate outcomes. The article argues for the need for racialised discretion to be seen as distinct from other forms of discretion both in policing and the criminal justice process more widely.

The current debate in the academic sphere regarding the role of extreme right-wing parties during the coronavirus pandemic extends to its communicative aspect. While some authors argue that these parties have focused their messages on the perspectives of fear, the threat represented by immigrants, or conspiracies in an unsuccessful way, even considering them to be the "losers of the crisis," others emphasize their ability to build a sense of community through resilience. The present research aims to take up these discussions and delve deeper into the study of the communicative frames of European political parties, with a particular focus on the far right, to draw more nuanced conclusions. For this purpose, a double methodology has been implemented through the coding of the frames used in a total of 2,757 Twitter posts during the month of March 2020 from the major government and extreme right-wing parties in Germany, France, Spain, and Poland. The results show that the parties studied present differences in their communicative frames, not according to their position on the ideological spectrum, as might be expected, but rather to their role as the executive power in the government or as part of the opposition of their respective legislative chambers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Ilha do Desterro: A Journal of English Language, Literatures in English & Cultural Studies is the property of Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, CCE Departamento de Pos-Graduacao em Lingua Englesa and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

This article aims to articulate a set of general principles of a Christian ethic of mass immigration. Toward this end, it considers: biblical and theological grounds for cosmopolitanism (and 'open borders'); biblical and theological caveats against cosmopolitanism; elements of a Christian ethic of the treatment of near and distant neighbours; what Francisco de Vitoria's 'On the American Indians' has to contribute; what lessons should be learned from the history of European colonialism; and the nature of mass immigration into twenty-first-century Europe and the problems it entails. The article concludes with six principles: relevant empirical data should be mastered before developing a judgement; concerns about mass immigration should not be dismissed out of hand as 'racist'; care of the alien may take a variety of forms, not only that of granting asylum; illegal economic immigrants should normally be returned home; compassion should look in several directions—not only at the migrant, but also at the working-class competitor for jobs and services, and at members of government burdened with the responsibility of making hard decisions; and the Christian is obliged to exercise, not only compassion, but justice and prudence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Discretionary practices have often been put forward to explain the racially disproportionate patterns we see in policing. The focus on discretion rather than racism neatly shifts attention away from race and instead towards discretionary practices, which are notoriously amorphous and inscrutable. The attention towards discretion (rather than race) further allows race to operate without being explicitly named and, therefore, to operate as an absent present. In this article, I discuss how race and discretion work together when ordinary police officers are tasked with migration control duties to identify foreign national offenders. Drawing on empirical research conducted in England, I propose the concept of racialised discretion and argue that it holds merit because it recognises that certain discretionary practices and decisions are animated because of race, through race and with the effect (intentional or not) of racially disproportionate outcomes. The article argues for the need for racialised discretion to be seen as distinct from other forms of discretion both in policing and the criminal justice process more widely. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In recent years British welfare policy and immigration policy have intertwined in new ways, with widespread cuts alongside increasing conditionality, rationing, and differentiation of rights. This article explores perspectives among activists attempting to resist these developments, with a focus on those that go beyond narrow reactions and engage in systemic critiques. It draws on in-depth qualitative interviews with activists from a variety of campaigns in England. The article presents a conceptual framework, synthesising these activists' ideas and comprising three elements: racialised profit-seeking as a driver of policy; 'situated universalism' as a counter-hegemonic basis for unity; and a theory of change through grassroots campaigns. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The increasing numbers of migrants and asylum seekers reaching the U.S.–Mexico border since 2014 has strained local nonprofit organizations helping them. Lack of material and human resources along with uncertain policy implementation by the government generates frustration and burnout among caregivers working in local nonprofits. Nonetheless, turnover as a result of burnout is surprisingly low. To answer why so few caregivers make efforts to help migrants and asylum seekers on the border, I analyze how caregivers respond to burnout in this resource-scarce context. I find that caregivers practice what I call detached attachment, the process of physically and emotionally distancing oneself from care work, while maintaining a cognitive attachment to it. Caregivers seek space to process their negative emotions and manage their relationships with care recipients to reduce intensity, while also reflecting on their normative attachments to the work. Paradoxically, then, the negative experience of burnout ends up renewing caregivers' commitment to the immigrant rights movement. This article highlights the significance of everyday practices of care in sustaining social movement participation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Deep neural network algorithms are becoming intimately involved in the politics of the border, and are themselves bordering devices in that they classify, divide and demarcate boundaries in data. Deep learning involves much more than the deployment of technologies at the border, and is reordering what the border means, how the boundaries of political community can be imagined. Where the biometric border rendered the border mobile through its inscription in the body, the deep border generates the racialized body in novel forms that extend the reach of state violence. The deep border is written through the machine learning models that make the world in their own image – as clusters of attributes and feature spaces from which data examples can be drawn. The 'depth' that becomes imaginable in computer science models of the indefinite multiplication of layers in a neural network begins to resonate with state desires for a reach into the attributes of population. The border is spatially reimagined as a set of always possible functions, features, and clusters – as a 'line of best fit' where the fraught politics of the border can be condensed and resolved. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The refugee crisis has shaped a new perception of the migration reality in Europe. The ramifications of its impact on European integration are visible and enduring. The EU’s response has included a certain strategic perspective, albeit weighed down by an excess of eurocentrism and a security perception that does not take third countries’ interests into balanced account. The major economic effort being made supports a far-reaching strategy, only now beginning to be outlined, to promote economic development in the countries of origin and transit of migrants. Additionally, issues such as the monitoring of respect for migrants’ human rights have not yet been suitably globally defined in this strategy. Although the behaviour and response capacity of the EU and its Member States can be assessed in different ways, the truth is that the migration debate has decisively swayed a block of countries that are openly reluctant to engage in intra-European solidarity and accept the new realities and responsibilities entailed by the refugees already present and yet to come to Europe. This position is very negative in the medium and long term, since, as noted, the crisis has also underscored the permanence of migration trends and flows and the consolidation of the routes or gates of entry to Europe. This contribution considers the vulnerability of the European borders designed and in operation in the Schengen Area. The internal borders were the most affected at the start of the migration crisis and are likely to be marked by current regulatory changes, which tend to allow exceptionality as a relatively common occurrence in the European ‘federal’ area of free movement. Nevertheless, the resilience of this system of the absence of internal border controls in the ‘federal’ area of free movement is undeniable. The impact on the EU’s external borders has been even greater, as it has shown once and for all that, more than fragile or vulnerable, some border controls, such as the sea border ones, are not practicable, especially those on Europe’s southern sea borders. It is precisely this infeasibility of border control in marine areas that leads to the accentuation of certain trends on Europe’s external borders, such as the externalization of migration controls. New regulatory and strategic planning developments confirm this trend, as well as the current concern for deploying an integrated external border management system. With regard to the phenomenon known as the ‘externalization’ of migration controls, the literature considers it to refer to EU actions aimed at reducing, sorting and controlling migration flows with the consent of third states in relations that are, by definition, asymmetrical. This article has addressed the different situations that arise, highlighting the advisability of differentiating between externalizing migration policy, on the one hand, and extraterritorial action concerning migration control, on the other. In search of greater conceptual accuracy, the term ‘deterritoriality’ has been used, as it is more neutral than the other terms mentioned insofar as it evokes the idea of positioning outside the territory certain border control and migration policy functions, to be carried out by other states or by the state itself. Since these are situations and actions linked to migration and border control, they should be conceptually situated outside the territory; the deterritoriality option hypothetically makes it possible to encompass both the externalization and the extraterritoriality of border control functions concerning migration. To this end, this article has focused on the various notions and activities that might be discussed in relation to the ‘externalization’ and the ‘extraterritoriality’ of migration controls and border functions, terms that, in sum, refer to migration control and management activities outside the territory, carried out by public officials of the EU states or by third states. On the one hand, externalization is considered to refer to the management and control of migration flows, the activities of adopting agreements, programmes, action plans and measures to encourage third states to monitor their own borders and migration flows in order to control, restrict or impede physical access to the territory of the EU states, accepting the placement in their territory, or the rejection, of refugees and migrants from other states. It does not involve the presence of or direct exercise of control activities by public officials of the EU Member States. In fact, outside European territory it is highly debatable that states are strictly performing border control functions, as it is an area that may more accurately fall within the more generic field of migration flow control linked to migration policy and European external action. On the other hand, extraterritorialization is understood to entail the performance of border control functions by states themselves outside their own territory. This case should involve the presence of or exercise by Member State public officials of some (effective) border control activities or functions in areas without state jurisdiction or in the territory of third states, with their consent. We are witnessing a change in the very concept of border in this post-globalization era, in which certain functions are offshored and systematically placed outside a state’s territory and checkpoints. However, territorial and extraterritorial actions must be differentiated from those occurring as part of external actions in or with third states for the purposes of migration policy and the control of migration flows. The reality is that a new border space south and east of the Mediterranean has been configured for migratory flows, which needs a new policy of external borders for these areas. Therefore, we must reflect on new frontier spaces, with new concepts and approaches to the border that provide other parameters of action towards migratory flows and external controls. Today, the Union needs new instruments and concepts for these new realities, especially so as not to lose sight of the fact that, when it comes to tackling crises such as those related to migration and the rights of foreigners approaching or entering its territory and jurisdiction, Europe is a rational construct entailing a project for civilizational progress. As such, it must permanently incorporate its values and respect for human rights in all its policies, regulatory measures and actions with foreigners and third states, both on its own external borders and beyond them. This is essential for the identity and objectives of the European integration, and for the projection of the EU security, solidarity and values in accordance with the International and European Human Rights Law.

In this paper, we analyze the current travel restrictions due to the COVID-19 pandemic imposed by the countries from South-East Europe and briefly compare them with those imposed by the Central European countries. By using official data collection of displacement tracking matrices and analyzing the porosity of the borders in this part of Europe, we research the impact of COVID-19 on human mobility and the related economic and social aspects. Discussions are presented regarding this impact on the travelers, the seasonal workers from some of the selected countries, and the immigrants from the Middle-East. A formal analysis is performed relating the current travel restrictions and the travel ban during the iron curtain.

Bordering situates immigrant sex workers at the margins of an already marginalised industry and naturalises the legal conditions of their dispossession and precarity. Drawing on ethnographic fieldwork in Berlin, we offer a situated intersectional analysis of the everyday bordering experiences of Muslim trans*immigrant sex workers from Bulgaria (hereafter TISWs). Focusing on three interactional contexts – minority belonging within EU and German politics, encounters with medicolegal institutions, and the new sex work regulation in Germany – our study demonstrates both that everyday bordering experiences derive not solely from national border enforcement and citizenship regulation but also from intersectional sociocultural barriers imposed by non-state actors, while the internal bordering practices of the German state exacerbate the exclusion and marginalisation of sex/gender transgressive people and sex work. We conclude that despite their physical existence as EU citizens in Berlin, TISWs' everyday bordering experiences require a more nuanced understanding of intersectional systems of oppression which postpones TISWs' arrival in Berlin indefinitely. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper, we analyze the current travel restrictions due to the COVID-19 pandemic imposed by the countries from South-East Europe and briefly compare them with those imposed by the Central European countries. By using official data collection of displacement tracking matrices and analyzing the porosity of the borders in this part of Europe, we research the impact of COVID-19 on human mobility and the related economic and social aspects. Discussions are presented regarding this impact on the travelers, the seasonal workers from some of the selected countries, and the immigrants from the Middle-East. A formal analysis is performed relating the current travel restrictions and the travel ban during the iron curtain. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Every refugee has many stories to tell. The complexity of their stories challenges dominant socio-political narratives, upending prevailing perceptions of people seeking refuge while demonstrating that the lines of responsibility for their circumstances are blurry. The stories of two asylum seekers highlight aspects of refugee phenomenology that are largely absent within the psychoanalytic literature and demonstrate that asylum seeking is productively understood as an active form of resistance and an embodied form of "radical hoping." Radical hoping, we contend, exists in a complementary relationship to the despair and desperation that usually frames refugees' stories in political rhetoric and public discourse. It acts as a bridge between hopeless resignation rooted in past trauma, current despair and uncertainty, and longing for a safer, more dignified future. It also supports the refugee's ability to resist oppression and to act courageously without certainty about the future consequences of his or her actions. The refugee's journey, we conclude, is productively understood as one of extraordinary agency rather than simply a desperate flight from danger to safety. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Unlike many of its neighbouring North European countries, Sweden has historically been reluctant to expand its use of immigration detention. Likewise, and similar to its use of prisons, it is a state that often favours architectural 'softness' in the structure and regime of detention. However, as this article contends, its reputation for hospitality and welfare is in contrast with the very existence of such spaces. Reflecting on interviews with detention custody officers and governors in two such centres, I demonstrate how 'hard' approaches to control are instead supplemented with dualistically 'kind' and coercive measures to obtain their ultimate agenda: the deportation of the unwanted immigrant Other. Considering the harms inherent to imprisonment, I argue that – although preferable to harsher conditions enacted by various other states – the negative impacts of confinement cannot be eradicated by 'soft' approaches, but rather require the eradication of border confinement itself. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper maps some dynamics of eating disorders against those of recent panics about immigration and current calls for greater border and immigration controls. Building on psychoanalytic thinking about extremism and racism, the paper concentrates on particular ways in which the rhetoric and underlying anxieties around immigration have strong links with anorexic ideation. It posits that interchange across boundaries is important for health in both the economy and the individual and that, while rational argument about immigration levels is possible, extreme views in the contemporary US, UK and Europe are fuelled largely by irrational elements which can best be understood using psychoanalytic ideas. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Arash Abizadeh claims that '[a]nyone accepting the democratic theory of political legitimation domestically is thereby committed to rejecting the unilateral domestic right to control state boundaries'. He bases this conclusion on the premise that 'to be democratically legitimate, a state's regime of border control must result from political processes in which those subject to it—including foreigners—have a right of democratic participation'. I shall argue that this premise, even if it were correct, does not support the conclusion since 'democratic legitimacy' (in Abizadeh's sense) is morally irrelevant: that something is 'democratically illegitimate' in no way suggests, let alone implies, that it is also morally impermissible or contravenes a moral right. I shall consider counter-arguments advanced against this objection by Maxime Lepoutre and Abizadeh himself and argue that they fail. Thus there is no valid democratic argument against border coercion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Language & Intercultural Communication is the property of Routledge and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

This study analyses the media coverage of immigration in Melilla, the land frontier between Spain and Morocco and one of the access points where immigrants enter the European Union, and the role that journalists and other agents play in spreading news on immigration. By means of a field study we analyse the type of news professionals and media that are present near the border, the logics followed by institutional press offices when providing information, and the particular conditions in which journalism is practiced in a space of juridical exceptionality. Amongst the results obtained we underscore: the predominance of a media market that, while apparently diverse, is highly dependent on institutional advertising; the relevance of figures like activists or freelance journalists in providing differentiated news on immigration; and the difficulties in working that journalists face due to arbitrariness and obscurantism when accessing images and data. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A series of policy decisions beginning in 1965 produced an exclusionist climate in the United States. Lyndon Johnson sought to eliminate prejudice from the nation's immigration system but inadvertently curtailed opportunities for legal entry from Mexico that created a large undocumented population. In waging the Cold War, Ronald Reagan launched an intervention in Central America that displaced many more thousands who also became undocumented residents. The Wars on Crime and Drugs of Presidents Nixon and Reagan created a prison industrial complex that imprisoned blacks and Hispanics. George Bush's War on Terror unleashed a rising tide of deportations swept Latino migrants into the immigrant detention system. Finally, President Trump transformed a humanitarian problem affecting Central American families and children into a manufactured immigration crisis for the nation as a whole. The result is among the most repressive and exclusionist context of immigrant reception in American history. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Anthropologica is the property of CASCA and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Do territorial rights include the right to exclude? This claim is often assumed to be true in territorial rights theory. And if this claim is justified, a state may have a prima facie right to unilaterally exclude aliens from state territory. But is this claim justifiable? I examine the version of territorial rights that has the most compelling story to support the right to exclude: territorial rights as a kind of property right, where 'territory' refers to the public and common spaces included in the domain of state jurisdiction. I analyse the work of A. J. Simmons, who develops the political theory of John Locke into one of the most well-articulated and defended theories of territorial rights as a kind of property right. My main argument is that Simmons' justification for rights of exclusion, which are derived from individual rights of self-government, does not apply to many kinds of public spaces. An upshot of this analysis is that most Lockean-based theories of territorial rights will have a hard time justifying the right to exclude as a prima facie right held by states against aliens. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper, I argue that the perilous journey undertaken by many Mexicans, Central Americans, and other Latin Americans wishing to enter the United States without legal authorization (to which I refer as 'the migrant journey') plays a key role in what I call socially undocumented or 'illegal' identity formation within the United States. As such, the migrant journey perpetuates certain aspects of anti-Latina/o/x and anti-Native American racisms within US borders. Having established this, I then argue that the United States is required, as a matter of immigration justice, to render the journey to the US of 'unauthorized' Latin American migrants less violent and inhumane. I conclude by arguing that other 'migrant journeys' across the globe may present similar injustices, and I call for more philosophical and normative attention to the human movement that migration processes entail. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]