Is There a Human Right to Immigrate?

Abstract

Abstract The chapter critically examines three strategies used to defend a human right to immigrate, understood as a universal right to cross and remain within state borders. The direct strategy looks for essential interests that could ground such a right, but the interests requiring migration are specific to particular persons rather than generic. Instrumental arguments try unsuccessfully to present the right to migrate as necessary to safeguard other human rights. The cantilever strategy holds that it is inconsistent to recognize a domestic right of free movement while denying the corresponding international right. But an extensive domestic right of free movement is necessary to protect citizens from specific threats posed by the state, which are not replicated at international level. Finally three reasons why states and their citizens may have a legitimate interest in controlling immigration are advanced: population size, cultural integrity, and the composition of the citizen body itself.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 89 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.