This is a rich and stimulating piece, which—characteristically of Joseph Carens's work—challenges us to rethink certain suppositions about appropriate responses to migration. Of particular interest is Carens’s suggestion for a so-called firewall protecting irregular migrants' basic rights. This suggestion, which I would like to term the "dualist" position, requires the state to guarantee certain rights of unauthorized migrants while at the same time retaining its prerogative to deny such migrants legal residency. While I find this prima facie a compelling idea, I will suggest that it creates serious problems of coherence and feasibility for the legal and political systems of host countries. I shall also question whether it is ethically tenable on liberal universalist grounds. The key problem for the dualist position, I shall argue, is the basic contradiction between guaranteeing access to rights while denying a right to be present to access such rights.
To read or purchase the full text of this article, click here.
More in this issue
Summer 2008 (22.2) • Essay
Irregular Migrants: An Alternative Perspective
While accepting Carens's view that irregular migrants can rightfully claim from the state protection of human rights, Miller disagrees that such migrants can claim rights ...
Summer 2008 (22.2) • Review
The One and the Many: Reading Isaiah Berlin edited by George Crowder and Henry Hardy
This is a collection of 13 essays, all but two of which are newly commissioned, covering Berlin's multifaceted oeuvre as much as a single book can. ...
Summer 2008 (22.2) • Essay
Migrants and Work-related Rights
Carens's discussion of the work-related rights of irregular migrants fails to consider the differentiated employment rights of legal temporary migrants, permanent residents, and citizens.